One of the conditions for a PhD thesis is its novelty. This is very important, which aims to forge a doctoral candidate in order to find new research opportunities. Questions that appear in these new criteria include:
- Can the research topic (which has this novelty) be from the promoter team?
- Can the research topic (which has this novelty) come from parties outside the promoter team?
- Does this research topic (which contains novelty) really have to come from doctoral candidates?
Please give your opinion about this "novelty" criteria.
Thank you very much four your kind participation.
Regards,
Nazar
Arturo is correct. The role of the supervisor is to 'guide' the student. Of course, all supervisions (and the institutional guidelines that govern the process) vary. For instance, a PhD student may be merely following the idea and direction of a supervisor - but it is still them that is credited in the end. Instead of 'novelty', it is probably best to use the term 'originality'. This is what defines a PhD. It must bring 'new' knowledge - even though it often builds upon existing knowledge. For the social/humanities discipline this can also equate to 'creativity'.
In the academy, it is said that the level of Master's degree corresponds to the improvement of knowledge (that is, mastery in a certain science) and the PhD corresponds to the level of contributions to knowledge in a given science. This brings us to the reflection that the doctoral student is able to propose a research topic (or novelty). It is true that the tutor can guide you through the process, but the work belongs to the student.
Thanks Néstor A. Montalván to your contribution.
It is useful for me....
Arturo is correct. The role of the supervisor is to 'guide' the student. Of course, all supervisions (and the institutional guidelines that govern the process) vary. For instance, a PhD student may be merely following the idea and direction of a supervisor - but it is still them that is credited in the end. Instead of 'novelty', it is probably best to use the term 'originality'. This is what defines a PhD. It must bring 'new' knowledge - even though it often builds upon existing knowledge. For the social/humanities discipline this can also equate to 'creativity'.
Nazaruddin - The first criteria for 'novelty' in the PhD thesis is to go for a rigorous review of literature. It helps you to look for gaps in knowledge or what work has already been done and what you are supposed to do. Second, to claim something novel, it needs to possess the "quality of being new, original, or unusual". The methodology itself can be novel. Third, make sure that results obtained are 'real' - they are not due to unusual sample characteristics or compromised methodology. Fourth, recommendations of the study should add to novelty of research.
Novelty in Ph.D. may come in different ways. Firstly the student is interested in the problem, guide or supervisor proposed a problem, contribution in research proposal and project and lastly a consultancy problem either for industry, private or public firms. This only can be done by reviewing thoroughly the literature concerned and getting an idea.
according to thumb rule PhD research need to contribute in science. the contribution can be bis or small, but need to be unique. uniqueness and originality of a research can be defined in many different scales. some research cam be purely unique, some research can be unique in respect of time and some in respect of space. the novelty mainly depends on the researcher his/herself. all researches are unique as long as we are not corrupting them intentionally.
Thank you very much Dean Whitehead , Mohit Bajaj , Dr Manzoor Hussain , Pisipaty Srinivas Kishore , and Shahab Uddin .
All your replies are very valuable.....
Dear Scholars,
I've just got from https://www.findaphd.com/advice/finding/criteria-for-phd.aspx
Key dissertation ingredients
A number of ingredients are essential for a satisfactory dissertation:
- A thesis: one coherent over-riding 'story' or argument that embodies a research insight
- Situation in existing knowledge: a critical review of prior research which motivates and justifies the research question
- Contribution of something new (the 'significant contribution to knowledge')
- Appropriate voice and argument: the provision of clear and explicit evidence, substantiation and chain of inference
More hangs on the student's ability to demonstrate intellectual maturity and critical depth - and through them to provide insight - than on the scale or scope of the research findings. A good PhD is based on an honest report of research that reflects sound practice and well articulated critical thinking.
Are you agree with above dissertation ingredients for all PhD subjects?
Thank you for your reply....
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science
- Research Topics