PhD students should not be solely judged by the number of journal articles they have produced. While publications are a critical measure of a PhD's productivity and contribution to their field, they are not the only indicator of success or ability.
PhD students should be evaluated on the quality of their work, their critical thinking skills, their ability to solve problems, and their contribution to their discipline in general. These factors can be considered in evaluating their contributions, whether or not these contributions are made in the form of publications.
Additionally, many doctoral students face challenges such as funding, access to data, and time constraints that may limit their ability to produce journal articles. These limitations can result in the prioritization of other modes of scholarship such as conference opportunities, poster presentations, patent applications, data sharing, and policy briefs, which are equally valuable.
Ultimately, the doctoral process and its evaluation should be viewed as a holistic process with an emphasis on professional development, creation of new knowledge, and producing work of high quality across a range of relevant platforms.
Based on the research results and my knowledge, PhD students should not be solely judged by the number of journal articles they have produced. While publications are important, they are not the only measure of success or ability. Other factors such as critical thinking skills, problem-solving ability, and contribution to their discipline should also be evaluated. Additionally, many doctoral students face challenges that can limit their ability to produce journal articles, and alternative modes of scholarship should be valued equally. The doctoral process and evaluation should prioritize professional development, knowledge creation, and high-quality work across relevant platforms.
Agree. Also 1) with the growth of universities taking on phd students with less academic positions after or not wanting to go down academic career maybe its other style of publications that will be useful to in the real world 2) with the development of practice based phds in diverse diciplines the researcher can think about the communities in their specalist area i.e research being for the audience 3) publication has changed somewhat and maybe about access and autonomy
Hello Dr Omar Tanane
I agree with your points and those raised by Dr Emma Astra A.K.A The Disabled Phd Student - these criteria SHOULD NOT be used to judge about a student. But they still are. Which is wrong.
And it does not stop with PhD students. Even after you get a PhD (which I did not, but my opinion is as another publishing scientist), people still judge you for your whole career by your number of publications, your h-index and so on.
The assessment of Ph.D. students should not solely be based on the number of journal articles they have produced. While research productivity is an important aspect of a Ph.D. program, it should not be the sole determinant of a student's success or capabilities.
I think that what you said Omar Tanane about the quality is very important. At any stage of an academic career a single high-impact, widely-cited paper is worth more than several average articles.
On the other hand, waiting to produce a single brilliant paper might not be the most productive approach for a new PhD student. It would increase the pressure on the student in an already somewhat stressful situation. What if the great idea doesn't materialise?
Regarding quantity vs. quality, I'll just quote something interesting that I read this week (I think in a review of the book 'Art & Fear'):
"The ceramics teacher announced on opening day that he was dividing the class into two groups. All those on the left side of the studio, he said, would be graded solely on the quantity of work they produced, all those on the right solely on its quality. His procedure was simple: on the final day of class he would bring in his bathroom scales and weigh the work of the "quantity" group: fifty pound of pots rated an "A", forty pounds a "B", and so on. Those being graded on "quality", however, needed to produce only one pot - albeit a perfect one - to get an "A".
Well, came grading time and a curious fact emerged: the works of highest quality were all produced by the group being graded for quantity. It seems that while the "quantity" group was busily churning out piles of work - and learning from their mistakes - the "quality" group had sat theorizing about perfection, and in the end had little more to show for their efforts than grandiose theories and a pile of dead clay."
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics