when all is said and done... this is all that the ph.d. actually means. It means that the student has done work that a committee of scholars has seen worthy of awarding a ph.d. for said work.
all the other layers, arguments, positions and assumptions are fine and good, but the base point of a ph.d. is that it guarantees no competencies in any manner other than the minimal criteria of passing. there are many people with ph.d.'s that cannot manage a research project, but graduated after writing a excellent dissertation and won't get tenure, similarly there are plenty of ph.d's that are incompetent teachers, problematic managers, etc. etc. there is no magic there, it is just merely passing, and lots of people get lots of help to pass.
I think a ph.d thesis should be as long as it needs to be to meet the committee's standards, and that has been as little as 20 that i've seen or so pages and the longest i've seen was 1600 pages.
the sole point of the thesis to take the minimum position is to pass and earn the degree. every other claim should be met with a high degree of skepticism until clearly demonstrated.
On Dec 6, 2009, at 6:32 AM, David Durling wrote:
> On 6 Dec 2009, at 5:20 am, Sylvia Tzvetanova Yung wrote:
>
>> If somebody has a project as a thesis the award depends on the examiners' opinion and on the candidate's ability to argue their point.
>
> Sylvia's point here is also of interest to us. We should not forget that it is the peer review system that grants the award of the PhD. In one sense, whatever we think here, it is the examiners who are persuaded by the argument of the candidate (irrespective of the number of words, artefacts, exhibitions or anything else) based on THEIR understanding of what constitutes a PhD.
>
> If an examiner believes that a pot and an essay constitutes rigour suitable for the award of PhD, then the degree may be awarded. In an emerging research field we must never forget that some examiners may have gained their PhDs from establishments with robust training and clarity about the nature of the PhD, and some will not have this advantage. Therein may lay at least some of our problems with PhDs which resemble a good masters degree, awarded more for the development of design practice than research practice. The robustness of peer review - whether applied to student or staff research - is vital to us all.
>
> David
>
> .........................................................................
>
> David Durling FDRS PhD http://durling.tel
> .........................................................................
|