4 ms·

What do you propose as possible alternate models for training scientists (honest question)?

• kriro 12y ago
  I think publishing multiple good articles should be encouraged over a traditional PhD thesis. It's obviously possible to get a PhD from publishing articles these days but at least here (Germany) it's the exception, not the rule. I wouldn't mind removing the PhD thesis all together and relying on articles instead. It's more agile to borrow from software engineering. Article, feedback, improve on your works beats working on a monograph as a general setup in my opinion. It's not as rosy as this though, the journal/conference industry is pretty broken but in an ideal world with excellently peer reviewed open access everywhere breaking your research into smaller chunks than a PhD is better imho. It should also be noted that even if you go the traditional PhD thesis route you'll usually publish articles as well and most good PhD programs will make sure you communicate your PhD work regularly. But I think there's too many cases of scientists basically locking themselves away to write the thesis and only turning in the final product, mostly talking to their advisor.
  • JetSpiegel 12y ago
    The Cathedral and the Bazaar strikes again.
• stared 12y ago
  To ensure a lot of creativity and passion I think the way to go is to add as little structure and hierarchy as possible. So I suggest getting smart people in one place, with only informal ties (including informal mentorship, rather than a God-like status of advisor). And then degree based on publications (whether in one institute, or another). PhD thesis is an outdated thing from times, where people didn't publish much and it was (often) their first publication. We should move one and update workflow not believe blind in old one only because it was there for more than a century.
• deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]