Re: Rising Above The Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future


Threeducks wrote:
> Kamal R. Prasad wrote:
> > Threeducks wrote:
> >
> >>Kamal R. Prasad wrote:
> >>
> >>>elephantcelebes@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Kamal R. Prasad wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>If the bar is raised higher, the end result will be either no phds or
> >>>>>phds of good calibre. When industry or govt sees good calibre as
> >>>>>opposed to junk with a phd tag, they will not hesitate to reward them
> >>>>>suitably and the rewards will result in people striving harder for
> >>>>>phds.
> >>>>
> >>>>It depends on how you raise the bar. What criteria do you propose? How
> >>>>would those criteria increase demand for PhD's?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>criteria is to award a phd only on making a siginifacn t breakthrough.
> >>
> >>And who defines what a "significant breakthrough" is? In many cases,
> >>the significance of the research is not fully understood until years
> >>after it was published. How many noble prizes are awarded for work that
> >>was done 20+ years ago?
> >>
> >
> > Emperically speaking -if it can be published in a major journal it
> > would represent significant work.
>
> Then what you said is already being done. No one graduates with a PhD
> without publishing multiple papers in major journals.
>
to quote russel on this thread -90% of it is trash most likely
published for the sake of getting credit.
if the requirement was to ublish genuine stuff, maybe their employment
chances after getting the phd would be better.

> >
> >
> >>>better would be to ask employers who post ads for phds -what would they
> >>>like their prospectover candidates to have achieved in school?
> >>
> >>Most departments (engineering) have an industrial advisory board where
> >>they already ask those kinds of questions.
> >>
> >
> > so they tell the univ wht type of phds they would like to hire -and
> > when they produce that type of phd -the employers lose interest in
> > hiring them?
> >
>
> Employers will tell you what kind of skills they want, what kind of
> people, etc. But that is no guarrantee that they will hire anyone and
> any given time. They want the "best" people to be generated in large
> quantity so they can pick a few of the best ones when it is convenient
> for them.
>
well -fif you ask them to narrow down what it takes for them to recruit
the degree holders , univs can do a better job of guaranteeing jobs
subject to acquiring the requisite skills. If OTOH they collect fees
without landing students the jobs to support those fees, then they will
be labelled as scam artists.

> >
> >>>btw -I don't have a phd so my suggestions are probably not the most
> >>>ideal ones.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>I am betting that I would not pass your criteria, yet I am quite
> >>>>successful in a job that other PhD's have told me is a "dream job."
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>if you have made some breakthrough research -then you would have passed
> >>>my criterion, but innumerable phsds who have achieved nothing in life
> >>>would not. Actually, one of the reasons why people get phds is that
> >>>putting in hard work may not always result in a breakthhrough and the
> >>>univ rewards effort.
> >>
> >>No it isn't. There are large numbers of students who achieved nothing,
> >>including a PhD. Their work was not deemed significant, and they were
> >>shown the door. The attrition rate for PhD students is quite high.
> >>
> >
> > well -if the criterion for getting a phd is known, only serious
> > candidates will apply.
> >
>
> I don't think that many students sign up for a 4-5 year commitment who
> aren't serious about it. The problem is one of expectations, commitment
> and opportunity. Students with a BS degree in engineering already have
> a terminal degree that they can use to get a job. If they find that
> graduate school is not to their liking, they can, with realative ease,
> quit and find a job. This usually happens once they realize the level
> of commitment that needs to be made to succeed in such in an evironment
> and that they do not wish to make that kind of sacrifice. When jobs are
> not readily available, however, you will see these same students hanging
> on doing minimal work for as long as they can get away with it.
>
> With foreign students the story is a bit different. Those that are not
> serious about getting a PhD use graduate school as vehicle to do all the
> other fun stuff. That is, it is a way for them to stay in the US
> legally and make some money at the same time. Research is something
> they do when they had nothing better to do. These are the kind of
> students that eventually get themselves fired.
>
during the clinton yrs -usa was a land of oppurtunities, but with high
unemp[oyment and immigrant backlash -people are less interested in
making it big into the US. Also, things have been improving at the same
time back home. That reflects in dropping enrollment of foreign
students and the trend is likely to continue.

> >>seen foreign students take $30-$40K temp jobs doing web design, or
> >>something similar, when they should be going after a $80-$90K/year job
> >>in their field.
> >>
> > that is worse than what the sweatshops pay. Wy get a phd at all if that
> > is what it pays?
>
> It's a way to stay in the US, so they do it. Many students will
> sacrifice their future career for the instant gratification of staying
> in the US, despite advice not to.
>
may not hold true for long. I know some green card holders who left for
good coz India is booming and US is down.

> >
> >>>>On the other hand, a decade or so ago, a chemist named Rustum Roy made
> >>>>a stir by suggesting that a good selection criterion would be the
> >>>>ability to pay tuition for graduate education.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>sounds familiar -is he from india?
> >>
> >>If you made engineering students pay for graduate school, you wouldn't
> >>find anyone dumb enough to do it. Stipends are required to have any
> >>hope of attracting students to the program.
> >
> >
> > it may be a case of corruption -but education is not that costly in
> > india.
>
> If I can make $55,000/year straight out of school, what is the incentive
> to PAY someone to let me work for them like a slave? None.
>
> At my university it costs me approximately $50,000/year per student.
> That includes tuition (cheap at $15,000/year), the stipend, fringe
> benefits (which includes health insurance) and overhead.

I implied education is mroe affordable in India than in US.

regards
=kamal

.

Relevant Pages
Loading