Ken,
I disagree.
The two groups with most interest in the resources allocated for PhD
supervision are PhD candidates and their supervisors. This list primarily
comprises PhD candidates and supervisors.
Routine decisions occur through formal channels involving those in power.
In contrast, changes involving people outside formal decision pathways must
be done differently, as any designer knows. Beneficial change typically is
grounded in transparency.
You seem to be trying to close down any kind of serious discussion about
whether PhD candidates receive the value of what is paid to universities for
their study.
You seem to be arguing this on the grounds that only those who are making
the decisions about it should discuss it.
Is that your intention?
By the way, I thought you said you were not debating any more!
Mauricio, please accept my apologies for unnecessarily diverting your
thread.
Best regards ,
Terry
---
Dr Terence Love
PhD(UWA), BA(Hons) Engin. PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, MISI
Director,
Love Services Pty Ltd
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks
Western Australia 6030
Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848
Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629
[log in to unmask]
--
Ken wrote:
Snip>
This list is not the best forum for a discussion of national education
policy and university finances. Since this is not the appropriate forum, my
view is that a thread on these issues resembles a pub game.
On Sunday, I wrote you an off-list note to explain why this is the wrong
forum for this conversation. These issues belong in a forum for people who
1) manage university budgets, 2) have the authority to make decisions on
these issues, or 3) hold the political power to set university policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|