In article <Pine.SUN.3.95L.970815193454.1576E-100000 at namaste.cc.columbia.edu>,
Judith Gibber <jrg43 at columbia.edu> wrote:
>On 15 Aug 1997, Julia Frugoli wrote:
>>> how would someone with only a two year post-doc do in the granting pools
>> as new faculty?
>>They'd do fine, if there was pressure to ensure that ALL postdocs lasted
>only 2 years. I am not suggesting changing the length of a postdoc
>for any one individual, but rather changing the entire system.
>
Please excuse my tangent. I have been wondering how the recently
implemented 4 year PhD time limit in Britain has worked out. I believe
it is now mandatory for some institutions to get all PhD students out in
4 years, rather than the usual 6-8 (at least in my experience). Has it
worked? Are the students happy? Is it reducing productivity?
I would greatly like to hear how this has worked from those within the
British graduate system.
Here it seems many faculty outwardly regard the shorter term PhD as a
badge of shame when discussing it with students, but it does not prevent
them from hiring British postdocs.
While I'm at it: what is the general time to PhD in other systems than
Canada and the US? Do you think the time is justified?
Thanks,
Dave Shivak
--
--------------------------------------------------------
David Shivak - email shivakd (at) fhs.mcmaster.ca *
Check out the web site Careers In (and Out) of Science @
http://www.freenet.hamilton.on.ca/~ae047/employ7.html
