Hi Terry,
I apologize. I missed this part.
> Where universities
> give a day a week for research, then after all the other things that chip
> into this time, it means that each paper is likely to take several months.
> This timescale of snippets of time over months suggests it might not be a
> great environment for master/apprentice learning processes.
>
That lack of time under current institutional assumptions contributes to
this problem.
But, I would still argue that the master/apprentice learning process is key.
I would argue that it forms the backbone of the dissertation process, which
is the first step in learning how to produce new knowledge on one's own.
Further, a master/apprentice process is in place when journal editors at
universities employ one or more students to help them with the process of
producing a journal. I would again argue that this interaction, the
master/apprentice interaction prior to publication, but with publication as
the long term goal, should be encouraged.
Perhaps that means the university needs alter its assumptions concerning
numbers of published pieces. That they haven't is a shame seeing that their
claims are for excellence -- for quality before quantity. They want both I
suppose, but can they have their cakes and eat them too? Perhaps this is a
problem that is hard to solve, but it does seem to be important to solve.
Thanks again.
Susan
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Susan M. Hagan Ph.D., MDes
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
|