Ideal answer may be "both", but I need to clarify this question.
While there are many ideal characteristics for a guide (or supervisor), for a student, and the pre-requisites, ultimately the research topic for the student holds the key in timely completion. In the case of some extremely bright candidates, they themselves come up with a research topic and inform their guides - "I want to work on the problem X..., can you guide me?" In the case of other candidates, they may have identified only the field of research, but not the specific problem, and they may request the supervisors to give them choices of topics, and they may choose the one that suits their interest (for fast completion). We have also a third category of students, who identify the guide first, undertake courses offered by the guide to learn his/her areas, and then let guide decide the areas/problem also. "Whatever topic you give is fine with me, Sir. I shall work hard to complete it." This is said by the students at the time of registration. In my personal experience, my guide (late) Dr. Byrnes offered me two areas - "Control Systems Dynamics or Control Systems Design", and I chose the second one "Design". This led to my doctorate on observer design for Morse-Smale systems..
Your views are welcome on this topic! Best wishes, Sundar
I agree with both.
Choosing a research topic and methodology should ideally be a joint decision among student and supervisor. Ideal topic should match student's interest and supervisor's areas of expertise.
Student has to choose the topic of PhD not the guide.. The GUIDE is define as "one who leads, provide directions and process to complete the work as students are not aware of the research process"... guide has to show the pros and cons of that topic and help the student in choosing in better topic and supervise the work..
I agree with both.
Choosing a research topic and methodology should ideally be a joint decision among student and supervisor. Ideal topic should match student's interest and supervisor's areas of expertise.
The guide should know the literature better than the students, and therefore should be in a better position to choose a relevant topic. Does the topic evolve once the PhD started?
In my case, I proposed and my Guide helped me structure the research.
Normally, it is a collaborative activity, which identifies with "Jerk" satisfaction between Researcher and Guide through
This depends on the policy and instructions of the faculty. Usually, the student chooses the research subject of the PhD thesis, which should be of her/his interest and specialization.
The supervisor agrees on the subject if it is within her/his area of expertise, and then the student starts writing the proposal and then the thesis.
Dear Venkata Reddy & others - As in my case, there are many who study sponsored doctoral research, supported by the research grants of the Guide. So, the research problems we deal with are related to the project areas of the Guide. In this case, Guide has a say on what problems we can choose, as they all are supposed to fall under the project areas to justify the Research Assistantship given to us. My guide still gave me a choice to work under two broad areas. Best wishes, Sundar
Ideally the student should choose the topic as it is his/her interest and knowledge in the subject. But many a times based on the adviser available in the department it is possible that the adviser may suggest a topic or at least a broad area where he/she is already done or doing. Main advantage in such a situation is that already other students may be working and therefore the student will be benefitted by the previous work. The research is likely to be completed a bit faster. However if the student want to start a new area or topic then a lot of ground need to be covered by the student and that may require hard work and lot of time. If the student is interested in research assistantship and if the adviser is working for a project such as from NSF, then the student will not have an alternative except to work for the project.
The subject requires arise from a joint discussion between PhD student and supervisor. In this case, the supervisor should have the scientific nature of the problem and its solvability in the eye, while the PhD student should assess whether his knowledge is ausrichend. Also, both partners should realize that a good working relationship is possible.
Nageswara Rao wrote: " If the student is interested in research assistantship and if the adviser is working for a project such as from NSF, then the student will not have an alternative except to work for the project."
This is exactly what happened in my case, when I did my doctorate long ago. Guide gave me problems within the scope of his AFOSR/NSF Projects only, and in my thesis I quoted the grant nos. in the preface as advised by my guide (This research was partially supported by.. etc). When I had to make many copies of my dissertation (around 400 pages), I got a receipt from the Copy-binding centre, and my guide covered this expense also under his grant! Research assistantship has its own advantages, but the thesis problem has to relate to the project proposal topics! Best wishes- Sundar
@ Nageswara, I agree that the research topic should be decided by the researcher (as in my case); there are funded projects to which researchers join; in both the cases the contribution would be more when the area of research is where the interest of the researcher lies. When it comes to the Guide as an expert in the area of research, then many trial and errors can be eliminated using their expertise and learning curve contributions.
I think that it is a wish that a student chooses his research topic for the Ph.D. thesis.
Dear @Sundar, in my case I have choosed topics myself for Ph.D. Of course, I have made many contacts and discussions with the researchers in this area, as well as the major suggestions came form my mentor. So, emerging areas unstudied by others should be choosen and talk to your advisor will help!
Dear All,
The supervisor suggests the PhD student decides (if s/he is able to do it).
What about differences between countries?
In France, the student has to finish a PhD in max. three years, sometimes four years. It is the supervisor that proposes the topic for at least two reasons: (i) He has to find the money to support the student, and (ii) the student is not given the time to explore the literature in much detail before the start of the PhD. Exceptions are those that start with a Master to continue with a PhD to explore the Master topic in more detail during the PhD.
In the Netherlands, students are given one year to explore the literature and then propose a topic to be explored for the following three or more years.
Dear Marcel,
There are countries where decisions – in these subjects - are born by a logical way and the opportunities allow their implementation. In other countries the lack of money and lack of imagination predominate.
This is very interesting and I have been thinking about it. I also want to support the fact that the PhD topic should be chosen jointly by the supervisor and the student after some interaction. My major concern is when a university is asking a prospective PhD student to write a research proposal that include the title of the thesis, the methodology, the literature survey and the time-line, every detail. Is this not too much? How would a student do this without having taken some time with his/her supervisor that is beyond e-mail correspondence. I think this idea should be stopped otherwise they keep wasting people's time in the name of such detailed proposal.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science
- Research Topics