Marcel, hi,

Aaa,,, the balance should be between two entities - the director and the student. Mechanics... (Directors are usually not aware of this.)

Velina

Ph D is a degree where recipient is supposed to understand and carryout a specialized topic (area/subject) further for the knowledge of others. So the results of Ph D study should be published for the benefit of others.

Hello!

I think that to master a research field requires a long time, to learn the significant knowledge accumulated, the interconnections among the observed phenomena in the field and the relations with other fields. I finished my PhD 15 years ago, but I try to improve the quality of my research every working day. I think the process of learning how to do a good science may last my whole research life; another important aspect is how to communicate in an effective way my research finding and inspire students and young researches. The latter is also in my opinion an important aspect of doing good science.

Have a good weekend!

Marcel, "And accepting that a PhD formation is part of an education process, why shoud it result in a publication in a scientific journal?" 

Hm. I can propose as explanation a math approach for the development of rules from chaos... It is based on imposing constraints on the system. Now the porblem is what the constraints are...  But you know this, Marcel, it runs like that in ecosystems. So the question is what do we expect growing up in this scientifico-evolutionary system, knowing that we all obey the constraints. Aaaa I don't know. It has arisen and there should be reasons for this, I imagine simple ones... basic ones - need for food for example. The more the knowledge is public, the more the food.

It seems nice, no? Does not meen it is true, of course.

International journals that publish science mix up work that resulted from an education activity and  work that resulted from an professional scientific actvity?

Yes, I think that published science has a large content from the research of PHD students.  But they are researching with some backing from experts, the supervisors.  We are all learning whether we are in one or the other category, aren't we?  Thanks. 

Yes, Marcel.  The journals will put all the works together, whether it's from a student or from a great scientist.  In a single paper, perhaps the student's name comes first and the supervisor's name comes later.  My supervisors had no reason to disagree to this.  When students publish a good paper, supervisors get some material benefits too.  So yes, journals continue to publish the work together whether it's the research of students or professional scientists.

For me - as scientist and as senior advisor in agriculture - the bigest problem is, that nearly most of scientific reasearch done by Universities REASERCH INSTIUTES OF THE STATE here in AUSRIA and I know it also as senior expert in CHINA - in applied agriculture IT IS NOT KNOWN by farmers, as it is not appropiated published in a readable and understandable form and matter.

In CHINA I noticed there are ten thousends of scientists in universities. And the state spends millions of dollars avoiding overfertilization of farmland. But the chiefs of the state farm bureaus dont not know how to measure soil pollution caused by nitrogen overfertilization of most of their small farmer with only 5 mu = 3000 m2. And therefore China invites foreign experts to give advice in this problem.

Today scientific publications are also so difficult to understand as they are written in such a propiate difficulte understandable language even to quit good educated persons as me.

Especially agricultural science would be better understood if it would be written not only in a scientific way but also translated in a understandable language and added with good educating figures and pictures for advisors and simpler educated farmers.

Scientists of today are - as it looks that they are mostly only interested to be cited much for being ranked and scored very high only by counting the published papers and beeing topped to get cited.

For me agricultural universities are loosing always more the connection to the good applied agricultural practice. Students in Austria for example learn only some of small window of special knowledge of their extremly special university teachers. So even basis knowledge to know the agricultural grown crop plants or grassland plant with importance are getting more and more is no sufficient surveyed teached and examined. I know this as auditor and examiner in Austrian farm schools.

What do you think about my observed developement in transforming science and their difficult understanding papers to translate it in practice in farming schools and upcoming farmers?

J HUMER, AUSTRIA

Senior expert and consultative advicer in agriculture

For me - as scientist and as senior advisor in agriculture - the bigest problem is, that nearly most of scientific reasearch done by Universities REASERCH INSTIUTES OF THE STATE here in AUSRIA and I know it also as senior expert in CHINA - in applied agriculture IT IS NOT KNOWN by farmers, as it is not appropiated published in a readable and understandable form and matter.

In CHINA I noticed there are ten thousends of scientists in universities. And the state spends millions of dollars avoiding overfertilization of farmland. But the chiefs of the state farm bureaus dont not know how to measure soil pollution caused by nitrogen overfertilization of most of their small farmer with only 5 mu = 3000 m2. And therefore China invites foreign experts to give advice in this problem.

Today scientific publications are also so difficult to understand as they are written in such a propiate difficulte understandable language even to quit good educated persons as me.

Especially agricultural science would be better understood if it would be written not only in a scientific way but also translated in a understandable language and added with good educating figures and pictures for advisors and simpler educated farmers.

Scientists of today are - as it looks that they are mostly only interested to be cited much for being ranked and scored very high only by counting the published papers and beeing topped to get cited.

For me agricultural universities are loosing always more the connection to the good applied agricultural practice. Students in Austria for example learn only some of small window of special knowledge of their extremly special university teachers. So even basis knowledge to know the agricultural grown crop plants or grassland plant with importance are getting more and more is no sufficient surveyed teached and examined. I know this as auditor and examiner in Austrian farm schools.

What do you think about my observed developement in transforming science and their difficult understanding papers to translate it in practice in farming schools and upcoming farmers?

J HUMER, AUSTRIA

Senior expert and consultative advicer in agriculture

I found in my research Institution that the use of a menotor was most helpful to me as I moved along in performing research knowledge and skills in the eduction of physicians.

I think that the scientist gives good fruits around 30 years of researching an area of work. In that time he knows what he received and what he believes about that matters. And it is after these fruits when a scientist  will give good experience to other students if he has this opportunity.

Published science: mainly based on work from editors that learn how to do science/research in a field they do not truly master?

I think that the path to become a scientist is very individual and depends both on talents and learning. It is like to become an artist or writer. Well, many students are also taught those skills, but not all become.

In principle, there exists a standard path to become a researcher: get basic degree, then Ph.D. courses... With a good supervisor a student can learn how to be coauthor of a paper, how to write a survey and what obstacles need to be passed before publication. But it may take a lot of time to find his own area of research, both fruitful and important for public.

It is not the public that should decide what science and its output should be?

You have an idea 'Nest' in scientific Framework 'Nest' in mind and try to convince another potential collaborator Y without experience with Framework 'Nest' to test idea 'Nest'. How to convince person Y to test idea 'Nest' when you not show person Y how to test idea 'Nest' and also not show the results and possible interpretations and implications of tests of idea 'Nest'?

How do you define a specialist in science?

Example:

You work on the impact of artificial light on nest dimensions in an urban area. Should one person working on this topic be simultaneously specialist in how light impacts physiology and behaviour and reproduction (much literature involved), how urban environments impact physiology and behaviour and reproduction (much literature involved), how and why nest design is expected to be associated with the environment (much literature involved)? How can a student (e.g. not truly mastering English) handle all this in the Framework of a PhD study that let say lasts 3-4 years?