Mid-term Sampler

"Daniel-San" wrote in message
. ..

"Opus" wrote ...
[...]

Sounds as though the grading at the PhD level is entirely subjective :~^
(


Yup. It's the ultimate apprenticeship -- the craft decides whom will be
admitted, and it is entirely subjective. There are many stories of people
writing dissertations that were approved by all but one member of the diss
committee. Stories abound about internal politics and reputations staked
on the refusal to sign a dissertation. There have been suicides and
murders. Whacked out ****.

Dan

Is there no second chance?

op

"Opus" wrote...

[...]

Is there no second chance?

Well.... for exams, sort of. Typically, a PhD in history requires four
exams. One in your "major" field, and three in minors. In most unis, the
major field exam can be repeated once. The minor field exams are a bit
trickier. Some people try to skate by without the cramming for the minor
exams, 'cuz they're not as "deep" into the literature. Because of this, some
unis are hesitant to give a second chance on minor exams. Sort of a "force
you to study the first time" thing, I guess.

As to the diss., I honestly don't know. I suppose you could change or modify
something to gain acceptance, or perhaps start over, but most folks have
poured the better part of five (or more) years into researching and writing
their diss. I'd imagine that it would be pretty tough to take if it were not
accepted. I don't know how someone would bounce back mentally to write
another.

Dan

"Daniel-San" wrote in
:

As to the diss., I honestly don't know. I suppose you could change or
modify something to gain acceptance, or perhaps start over, but most
folks have poured the better part of five (or more) years into
researching and writing their diss. I'd imagine that it would be
pretty tough to take if it were not accepted. I don't know how someone
would bounce back mentally to write another.


If it's done right, if the student is clearly unworthy of the degree,
things will never go so far as a dissertation defense. Also, if its done
right, there should be no real surprises at the defense. Communication
should be such that all the committee members should know where they all
stand well before D-Day. Some archaic programs still use the "outside
reviewer" who has nothing to do with the committee until the defense, and
that can get real nasty.

Generally, some level of rewriting is asked for, but if it gets up to the
defense, show-stoppers are rare.


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

In article ,
says...
Some archaic programs still use the "outside
reviewer" who has nothing to do with the committee until the defense, and
that can get real nasty.


Most programs that I know of use an outside reviewer. Not being an
expert in the field, they aren't really expected to contribute much
in the way of criticism on the dissertation itself; they are there to
keep everyone honest. They should be watching to make sure that all
the rules are being followed, that an unworthy student isn't getting
a free pass, or that a worthy student doesn't get shafted.

Of course, some guys do like to be a PITA, so a student is well-advised
to ask about a professor's reputation before asking him to be on her
committee.

Kevin,
who has been that guy a few times.
No, not the PITA guy!

Kevin Vang wrote in news:MPG.205003631cc3106e9896a4
@news.individual.net:

Most programs that I know of use an outside reviewer.


Most I know require someone outside of the department, but there are some
that require someone from outside the school


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply