Most of the - Recent doctoral theses - are essentially focusing on the various PROJECTS that the research advisor has.
Does it NOT amount to a programmed instruction?
Does it NOT eliminate the Mental Effort from the learning process?
Does it NOT curtail the scholar's freedom to work on an objective/scope of his/her interest?
Yes...securing more number of projects is a very big GOOD to the respective Research Advisor and it proves the advisor's individual potential as a LEAD RESEARCHER in her/his area of interest.
Definitely, advisor gets more advantage.
But, how about his/her research scholar?
Are the scholars being given the REAL research training in the area of their OWN interest - by the way he/she want to formulate their focus (as against the scopes/objectives of the gained projects by his/her Research Advisor)?
OR
Is it that, in this competitive world, such issues have NO relevance?
Also, it seems as if we are focusing more on the applied research rather than on the fundamental research - as any work on fundamental research hardly gets funded.
And, it is all about academic-industry interaction, where industry wants only the results oriented applied aspect of the research and NOT on the fundamental work, mostly.
(Maybe, Research flows along the direction of funding. But still, nothing wrong in it, it seems}.
Are we moving in the right direction?
OR
Where are we heading towards?
Will research come to an END, with Limited Funding OR No funding?
In addition, some PhD supervisors do ask their students to cite their (supervisor's) articles to increase their (supervisor's) citation profile, which in my opinion is unethical. This practice needs to be discouraged.
Dear Dr. Suresh Kumar Govindarajan ,
In my view that is part of a good mentoring style of the research advisor.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publication