2006/7/29

    A lot of graduate students are busy wrapping up their two-year studies. Some have already finished their work while some are still working around the clock. Among those already finished their work, some have got their expected results only to find the rationale of the study is not interesting, unconvincing or even illogical. Before their study they were only concerned if they could learn the rope of some advanced techniques. They never thought their studies might end up in vain, neither did they think high-tech methods would not guarantee a reasonable study design or interesting findings. Around June and July, I am usually invited to be a committee member of oral defense of several graduate students. The defending students must report their methods and procedures clearly and in detail. Sometimes I kind of felt it was torturous to listen to a report in which the methods wouldn’t answer the questions, or the questions to be studied didn’t correspond to the material reviewed. How could a graduate student devote two years to a subject which was actually unconvincing or illogical? For certain the student’s supervisor should also be responsible, however, that is just the reason why I felt disturbed. If I kept on querying the illogicality of study design or inappropriate study methods, the atmosphere for the student would become very embarrassing. Then the whole procedure might come to a halt. However, none the supervisors will give up their students at this point. Most of the time, the supervisor of the student would give some hints to the student. After all, the student had worked with the supervisor for more than a year and application for the oral defense must have been granted by the supervisor. Most importantly, a significant part of the idea and methods of the study must have come from the supervisor. Therefore, if the student could not defend well, the supervisor would finally help the student to give further explanations for the study.

However, if there was a real problem with the rationale, any kind of explanation would not resolve the questions of the committee members. This situation did not give me peace of mind. Theoretically, the student should therefore be turned down and kept in the institute for another year to improve or revise his or her study. However, a graduate student’s failure may also indicate a failure of the supervisor. It would be very tough to make a decision of ‘unqualified’ except if (or except that or unless)the supervisor had automatically raised the possibility of turning down the student. If the supervisor really thinks the student unqualified, he or she would rather reject the student’s application for oral defense in advance. So, it is rare or almost impossible to see a graduate student fails in oral defense on the spot.

    For above reason, I usually spend a lot of my time and attention on my student’s study. Compared with my assistants, graduate students devote more of their time and attention to the subjects of my interest, but they also take up more of my time and attention.

Hong CJ