※ 引述《otn (碩呆快畢業)》之銘言： : 考試考試考試 都到了博士了 考試當然有其重要性 : 但是博士的能力不只有用考試來衡量吧 : 有聽過113電物所可以多發一兩篇PAPER就抵掉一科資格考不用考 : (簡單來說就是增加畢業所需PAPER數量) : 這樣感覺意義不大 發PAPER學會的東西 和考過資格考學會的東西是兩回事 : 不知道上位者在想什麼... You will never know if you haven't start to think what a PhD is carefully. Writing examination is just a method to qualify a person's ability on some specific subjects, i.e. there are more some other methods existing. If I ask a question: why writing exam? why not the others such as designing a lab or writing an essay or report? can you answer this question? All I can think. Writing examination is easy to prepare, particularly for one for hundreds of candidates. In addition, it is much quicker than doing one-by- one test. Also, it looks very fair, as every candidate answers/solves the same problems. This is probably why it is so popular. However, if you are preparing an examination for qualifying somebody, the most important thing is, what sort of ability you want to see or the qualified people should have. Then you go back to consider: what ability should a PhD candicate have? Ability to solve some difficult theoretical problems in few hours? or ability to perform/lead a research and communication (inc. publish)? or ability to define a problem, to plot a project and design experiments? I am not saying which one is more important. However, I would use different methods to find out appropriate qualified peoples. In my opinion (you might not agree with me), the writing exam is just the poorest one. Most of the PhD work is the procedures to find answers, to solve problems, to test hypotheses, etc. in an open resource. The more information you can find, the better conclusions you can draw. There are always time constraints, yet not least in few hours with few books, if allowed. Of course passing the writing examination still means something. So what? What is going to happen in the rest of the PhD or the rest of life? Taking more exams? close book or open book? Be honest, do you like that if it is true? Conversely, if a first year student shows acceptable ability to define a problem, to plot a project, to design experiments, to communicate with peers, and even to defend your thought, etc., they have already stood on a very good position towards a PhD; this is why we call them 'PhD candidate'. Can you test these out by the conventional writing exam? I wish it were possible; however, if not, how can they be qualified as PhD candidates? (I would then question: have you used a correct qualifying method?) Anyway, I am sure these abilities are what most of the supervisors would like their students to have (if they are not allowed to pick all but some from the basket.) --

※ 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 (01/04 07:23)