tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post4055483466725102262..comments2024-03-28T08:16:02.178-04:00Comments on Eco-Evo Evo-Eco: Blinded by the skills.Ben Hallerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17875404974157070805noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post-6126796289565323582017-01-29T16:25:27.846-05:002017-01-29T16:25:27.846-05:00@William Ray - I completely agree and join your po...@William Ray - I completely agree and join your position. But there are worlds between the tenure-track positions and technician-level jobs … I’m thinking of education related positions such as lecturers, instructors, teaching professors, etc. I’m also thinking of all the private industry with consulting, outreach, NGOs, etc. All those positions are reachable via a Ph.D. and often require one. Graduate students need to learn about transferable skills, management skills, teaching skills, etc. not every job for which a Ph.D. is asked requires to “be a thought-leader in the field” … that’s the discussion that needs to happen.<br /><br />PS: yes inflation of the needed degree is a thing … because universities don’t work toward transitioning Ph.D. training from solely for tenure track positions to what the market is becoming (the tenure-track position is dying).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00097363517505369007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post-90189631951491185442017-01-24T15:09:05.298-05:002017-01-24T15:09:05.298-05:00@Luc Dunoyer - I would argue that there's no r...@Luc Dunoyer - I would argue that there's no reason for people to be trained to the Ph.D. level, if they're only interested in having the skills necessary to be a technician. It's also absolutely destructive to the concept of the Ph.D. to modify that degree such that the emphasis is on technician-level skills, rather than on the skills necessary to be a thought-leader in the field. The problem is not the training and targets of the different degrees, it is the "needed degree" inflation that leads so many people who really have no use for a Ph.D. down the path of trying to get one.<br /><br />At the same time, I don't think we're saying that our trainees aren't expected to learn the hands-on skills of the field - just that _those_ skills aren't the variety of skills that we are uniquely suited to teach. Technician-level hands-on skills can be taught by hands-on technician-level folks.<br /><br />No disrespect _whatsoever_ meant towards the technician-level folks. It's the difference between having an architect, and a carpenter, teach someone how to drive nails. The carpenter's work is just as necessary and important as the architects, and at the end of the day, he or she is going to be a lot better at teaching how to swing a hammer.William Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09655666401733396049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post-78411909327445234482017-01-21T10:04:37.853-05:002017-01-21T10:04:37.853-05:00Guys, I understand your point of view but based on...Guys, I understand your point of view but based on the academic market (only a small percentage of graduate students actually ends up with a tenure track position) a minority of the graduate students you had, have, and will have will not need those skills and can rely on ideas alone.<br /><br />A vast majority of them will desperately need those skills to land a job (ideas only land you a job in academia in a faculty tenure-track position, outside of this they don't hire on ideas).<br /><br />This discussion needs to happen at all levels (Universities, Colleges, Departments, Labs), we cannot continue to produce PhDs with the sole objective of being tenure track faculties and close our eyes on the reality of the job market --> the PhD degree doesn't have to die with the faculty tenure-track position shrinkage.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00097363517505369007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post-29561633831506869382017-01-20T09:34:12.040-05:002017-01-20T09:34:12.040-05:00I love the way you've put this Andrew. You...I love the way you've put this Andrew. You've articulated what I've practiced for ages, but haven't ever thought deeply enough about to formalize as an educational philosophy.<br /><br />One thing I'd like to amplify - and this has been bothering me for a while now, but until you put it this way, I've lacked the right framework to explain it:<br /><br />The other reason it's not my job, and actually would be destructive to my educational mission if I made it my job to teach "skills", is that nomatter what skills I could or did teach, those would not be the skills that a student actually needed after college/grad-school. The single most valuable skill I can help my trainees to acquire, is the meta-skill to learn new practical skills on their own. This recent emphasis on "job targeted education" in college is entirely misguided.<br /><br />Almost no-one comes out of college or a graduate program with the specific practical skills they need to be successful in the next stage of their career. Those who are most prepared, aren't the ones with the most practical skills, but the ones with the most practice in acquiring any new practical skill that they need.<br /><br />If I "teach them" practical skills, I deny them the opportunity to learn the single most valuable lesson that they can learn, which is how to learn without me.<br /><br />That's not to say that I don't "help" with nudges in practical skill areas when there's a nuance that they haven't noticed and a bump in the right direction will help them clear some hurdle, but I'm here to teach them how to think and be independent, not how to set up a PCR reaction, or code in C, or do terminal bleeds on rabbits.<br /><br />And to address Margaret's question - my colleagues are generally happy to donate their time to train my students in areas where they're experts (or, more often, to donate their trainees' time - which serves two purposes), for the same reason I'm happy to donate my time to help their students: Voluntary cooperation and collaboration is a necessary part of a well-functioning community, and learning to function as a peer who can both give, and accept help from that community, is a critical part of the "learn to learn" meta-skill we aim to teach. William Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09655666401733396049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post-61058967973668556212017-01-15T15:48:32.169-05:002017-01-15T15:48:32.169-05:00Thanks for the comments and link.
Usually my stud...Thanks for the comments and link.<br /><br />Usually my students learn hard skills through workshops and training courses taught by specialists and technicians. They also get specialized training through online tutorials, program manuals, and by interacting with their fellow students. However, I am sure some of my students wish I could actually teach them something concrete.Andrew Hendryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03653724437118653645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4456348657596914237.post-83636253431898168742017-01-15T15:03:00.511-05:002017-01-15T15:03:00.511-05:00Yeah, but. Someone still has to have the skills to...Yeah, but. Someone still has to have the skills to teach the students. If not you, who? And why should they take away time from their students to teach your students? How can you devote some of your resources to supporting all the hard skill learning that needs to be done by your students? Because it isn't necessarily so easy to just "pick up" these hard skills.<br /><br />See: http://ecologybits.com/index.php/2016/09/07/the-modern-grad-student-paradox/Margarethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07751118206415979391noreply@blogger.com