※ 引述《syhsu (as)》之銘言： : ※ 引述《carpfish (學生)》之銘言： : : 國中時...只要是全班第一名就很滿足了,根本不會在意全校的名次 : : 高中時...開始會注意原校的名次,還要注意一下其中高中的升學率 : : 到了大學...雖然唸了國立大學,可是心中總是有著台大 : : 現在在台大唸博士了,但卻知道國外還有MIT等等超強名校... : : 有時候作學問做著做著... : : 常常就會覺得,我這樣就算真做出一點小小的學問 : : 也只是廣大學術翰海之中的微不足道... : : 終究是成不了第一等人 : : 不自覺就洩了氣 : : 大家會有這樣的想法嗎? : 前些日子剛好有聽到一位年輕教授的勉勵。 : 台灣有些實驗室作的研究都是一流的，學 : 生也是一流的，但覺得自己在台灣，就差 : 了點什麼，假如把同樣的人事物搬到史丹佛 : MIT，所得的心態就不一樣。 Basically, the culture and management. For the management: In Taiwan, there is usually more competition but less team work, particularly between lecturers or professors. There are less well-organised research groups. A well-organised group should at least include: one or two experienced professors, two to four lecturers (or so-called vice-professors or whatever), few post-doctorate researchers, few experienced technicians, students. Usually, in Taiwan, several students work in a lab/room. The lab was supervised by a single professor/lecturer. There might be one or two post-doctors, if luckily. Students (mostly master students) work without any supports from experienced technicians. What worst is, a supervisor takes care of many students... Once one or few scholars come back from some good and/or famous research group, if luckily the government pour adequate funding or supports into some of them, the groups around them suddenly looks like superb groups. However, once one of the below happens the funding ceases the young scholar becomes a professor, a department leader, an industry partner or, even worse, a politician... then, the situation could change quite a lot. Conversely, this hardly occurs in a well-organised research group, as the vertical structure consists of different jobs and different roles. Unfortunately, like a child drives a truck. Taiwan is not really a rich country but almost follows the very rich US system. For the cultural difference: European, American or Japanese scholars do more science but less politcs. The professors appology if one of the students correct their mistakes, and this is quite usual. The scholars can argue in a meeting, and disagree evantually, but they are still colleagues and friends. When they go out to face competition from the other groups, they will cover each other and send one to get the goal; the most appropriate one but not must be the oldest one. In Taiwan, if you, a student, dare to speak against a professor, no matter who is correct, no matter in public or privately, you might get something. If the lecturers or professors are struggling for a target (a position, funding or whatever), some of them might try to block their competitors' ways by something not relevant to scientific factors (e.g. opening somebody's secrets). Although fighting like this might make the department sounds badly to the external... So what? they don't care this (the group) but their own interests. Also, what very frequently heard here, students are not allowed to freely change their supervisors or have to stay longer and longer to work for a, probably, very good group. Do you like this? So, yes, if you don't count these differences in, but just look at the funding, equipments and students, the conclusion is there are good groups in Taiwan. --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 82.22.90.37 ※ 編輯: lerudit 來自: 82.22.90.37 (12/28 03:22) ※ 編輯: lerudit 來自: 82.22.90.37 (12/28 03:50)