Posted by alexandra_k on April 26, 2022, at 20:42:06
because that really makes the whole world better.
let's consider the work i did in 1 year...
and let's consider the work that my supervisor did in 1 year...
since what's required for 'university' be that everyone is required to be engaged in and engaging in this little activity called 'research'.how long did it take kim sterelny to write the Jean Nicod lecture and turn it into a book? Was that a 1 year project, a 2 year project, or a 3 year project?
I'm not actually sure. But let's state what it was (how much money was he paid) and let's compare that to the work that I did over a comparable period...
Now, you would expect his work to be of CONSIDERABLY and VASTLY higher quality than me. his beign full professor and all and my being that of working on my PhD.
Consider the quality of his reasoning. Consider the evidence that he offers and the quality of that evidence (including where some of the labs have subsequently been shut down because of dodgey lab practices where students felt forced to make up or maipulate or fabricate data).
I say those thigns specifically because those are the sorts of 'we say them because we think they are most subjective where nobody can prove or disprove so that we can say whatever we like with impunity' so let's consider those things comparatively, then.
Again, we would expect his work to be of higher quality. I'm not doubting that it is. But I'm saying my work isn't that bad. His work was speculative. ANd that's okay. It was opinionated and a bit one sided. It was telling a narrative for a point or purpose. And that's okay. People can disagree and that's okay.
My supervisor from Waikato did in fact say that his work was 'sh*t'. And that she wouldn't have passed it if it was a PhD.
Which says more about her than anything else.
I'd like to see what things she has failed. And what things she has passed if she thinks she would have failed 'the evolved apprentice'.
I think she also said she passed everyting that came her way. All of the external things she had examined. She passed all of them.
But then she said that that was because she believed they wouldnt' have come to her if the supervisor didn't want to see them passed. And the univesrity. So she thought her job as external examiner was to pass the work because everybody wanted it passed or it wouldn't have come to her. So,then, she was not (and has not ever) being doing her job properly as external examiner. She hasn't been externally examining the studnets for academic quality and merit...
And apparently if she had have been engaging in that process. She would have failed a book from a professor at australasias leading research institution.
SO lets' take a little look at her own research output over the 2 years that she required me to work for her, then.
What's that?
Nothign?
Not so much as a talk to the department / a conference talk.
No work output, then.
I wasn't invited to come along and say what I thought about the quality of her work.
Sounds legit. Don't it??
poster:alexandra_k
thread:1119602
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20220419/msgs/1119602.html