Dear Alan
There are status issues but these, to me, revolve around the nature of "being a candidate" and not so much around silly notions that one just has to go somewhere else, more important, and, in the case of colonials, overseas. This is not to say that a student shouldn't seek proximity to the latest and best research world.
The issue, for me, is whether the student can form the candidate relationship. Sometimes this is difficult when the student is "known" - the expectations can then be, from a supervisor, that the student is just an older version of their undergraduate self. What is needed is a re-seeing such that the student is introduced into a new world, with new understandings of who they are.
For this new world to exist, the student must present as a candidate. I have had several students who refused to be candidates - mostly (I think) because they thought of me as the friendly (yes, friendly) teacher. My expectations of them were that they were candidates and not former students.
I expect a transformation that is made evident in the work and in the working world. If, for example, I mention Kant, I anticipate the candidate will return with some connection between their work and Kant. This return then forms a mediation that is the ground for our relationship. My knowledge of Kant is not the point - their willingness to take up the suggestion that Kant might be important is the turning point - it establishes a model for how the discourse works.
Once this ground is established, the candidate is an equal (if not superior) in the game. I have to take up their leads.
This can work at a distance.
keith russell
Newcastle OZ
>>> Alan T Litchfield <[log in to unmask]> 08/29/03 09:29 AM >>>
Hi all,
The question has come up, and I thought I might ask a wider audience.
Is a PhD devalued if it is completed in the same institution as the
person's pre-doctoral degrees were achieved?
The purpose for the question is that I have encountered an underlying
perception that this is so, but no one has been able to offer anything
that rationalises that perception. So I figure, given the audience on
this list, maybe there are those who have considered this issue before
and could offer their insights.
I have spoken to a number of people and their attitudes have varied,
with comments like
- 'It makes no difference to me personally, but...',
- 'I can see no reason why it should make any difference, but...',
- 'This institution probably wouldn't differentiate, but it matters to
me',
- 'I have never heard of it making any difference in an employment
negotiation.'
And yet I have spoken to others who have told of how they were strongly
encouraged to get their doctorate in another institution and even in
another country. So there appears to be a general acceptance of the
attitude, and a general reluctance to admit that such an attitude
exists.
The only reason that seems to make any sense is one of institutional
bias, that the person can develop methodologies or ways of thinking
that are skewed if they do all their study under one roof. But is that
necessarily wrong if that is what the person wants?
With more and more institutions offering post graduate qualifications
then the amount of competition for those who wish to do them will
increase. In light of this, how does this attitude fit?
Thank you,
Alan T Litchfield
|