Pensée: E & G Chatter

Viswa, beware of the ishara -
.... zara anjaam soch lo - ishaaron ko agar samjo to mod ko mod rehne do!

 

Congratulations @Rihana ..
Two mods for one forum..wow...who would have thought...E and G would give Rel forum a run for its money!

 

@sokanasanah
About the link .... interesting model but dont u think..its too simplistic a projection. One needs to account for changes in social norms..atleast at the pace its already happening.

 

You are referring to the India paper.
I agree - I posted it for 'coffee-chat' value!
And because the young Ms.Ridhi (Dr.?) is at Oxford - no husband for her!

 

I agree - I posted it for 'coffee-chat' value!
I wanted to pick a fight with u...
cant u humor me for a change and say...its valid model and write a 3rd order PDE to prove it

 

Next time?

 

@sokanasanah,

Your explanation of how one goes about researching a topic was well received. I have also keenly read your response that anyone who is exploring science is a scientist and all the degrees are only an addition. It must be a pleasure for your students to work with someone like you.

One thing I don't understand so far is the process of writing qualifier exam to determine whether someone will continue as a researcher or not by many educational institutions.

After someone reaches that level of knowledge to focus on a specific subjects, is it necessary to test their skills in specific subjects through something like an entrance test? Don't their grades in mandatory classes and papers they publish speak volume about their curiosity to research?

I value your opinion and hence this question.

Viswa

 

Blame the Chinese and the Germans for inventing examinations!
This is just one of those rites of passage ... varies with department and field. In the UK, there are no quals. Harvard physics has only an oral quals, while Berkeley and MIT are simply horrific with brutal written and oral exams. For mathematics, the idea is to test maturity (proof skills), conceptual understanding, relationships, rather than computational fluency, which is mostly all that most routine exams can attest to. In the biomedical sciences, the task is to write a research proposal - in some places it's about your own area, in others it's anything but your own area. So, it varies. Having said that, even if you flunk your quals, you won't be kicked out of the program. You can take it again, usually at least three times. It's sort of a trial by fire, perhaps a sign of the times. Recall that calculus which stymies many students right off the bat, is 400 years old! So a bright high-school student is current up to the mid 1600s!

Speaking about the explosive growth of physics in the 20s and 30s, Dirac is said to have remarked that 'it was very easy in those days for second rate physicists to do first rate work'. They didn't need quals, they just jumped right in. Now this is not so easy .... I am often tempted to complain about this sort of thing, but then I know some truly bright people who defined and solved their chosen problems even before they had made a thesis proposal! That is chastening.

 

Oral qualifier or even writing a research proposal appears to be a decent approach. Defending the proposal, if taken seriously, would serve the purpose of finding the proficiency of the student. But asking a student who got "Grade A" in various mandatory subjects to again go through the lectures and ask homework questions in a Qual exam appears to be senseless.

You appeared to have read my mind. The situation I am discussing here is exactly what you have described. A chosen problem has been solved by the student even before the student made a thesis proposal. In addition, the student has successfully presented a paper in an international conference and has at least 4 papers published in the international journals to the student's credit.

Viswa