2021-12-8 09:09 | System Classification: Comments
https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-729911-1315656.html
Doctoral supervisor is the highest level of university professors, which can be described as ace of aces.
At the beginning of reform and opening up, there were few professors, and those who could become doctoral supervisors must be old professors who were knowledgeable and highly respected. At that time, the doctoral supervisor needed the approval of the Degree Committee of the Ministry of Education. Later, after the doctoral application system was established, the Ministry of Education began to delegate powers, and the doctoral supervisor qualification was examined and approved by the school where the doctoral program was located. The number of doctoral supervisors expands with the increase in enrollment, but the enrollment indicators are still arranged by the state.
I applied for a doctoral supervisor that year, because the school did not have a doctoral program corresponding to my major, I could only apply for the qualification of doctoral supervisor from another school, and then transfer back to the school after the school obtained the doctoral program. After being transferred to the new unit, you only need to fulfill the certification qualifications, but you also enroll students at the doctoral program that is not in the major, until the college gets the doctoral program in the first-level discipline before returning to the college to enroll. Therefore, I recruit 4 types of students from outside the school, this school, the outside school, and the college. Degree-awarding units are also different.
After entering the new century, first-level disciplines were launched, and more and more schools increased the number of doctoral programs, and also increased the number of professors with doctoral qualifications. However, the enrollment indicators are still controlled by the Degree Office of the Ministry of Education, so there is a strange phenomenon that the number of doctoral supervisors far exceeds the enrollment indicators. In order to compete for enrollment indicators, the competition between doctoral supervisors is becoming increasingly fierce, and some schools have to re-queue up doctoral supervisors every year when formulating enrollment plans for the next year to determine enrollment qualifications (secondary confirmation).
Here's the problem.
The number of doctoral supervisors has only increased, far from catching up with the increase in enrollment indicators. Some phD directors become ornaments.
Once the doctoral supervisor is rated, it is a lifelong system.
The game of new and old doctoral directors has caused seniority rankings.
The allocation of admissions indicators highlights internal contradictions and interpersonal factors.
Now there is a status differentiation of doctoral supervisors in colleges and universities.
Those who have a doctoral supervisor qualification and have supervised at least one full doctoral student are considered to be a veritable doctoral supervisor. However, there are many doctoral supervisors today. There are those who have been qualified as doctoral supervisors but have never brought students (business card honors); there are those who have only taken one session and will never enroll students again (insufficient ability); there are hat titles with indicators (more than one) every year (cattle people); there are those who can only recruit 1 every few years (ordinary professors); there are those who have the ability but cannot get the qualifications (newly introduced young people); there are those who are close to retirement and do not give up (reluctance); and there are doctoral supervisors who regard the power of interests (tool monopoly).
There are also embarrassing situations, such as indicators but can not recruit qualified students, recruited students quit school halfway, recruited students have problems and can not be withdrawn, many years can not graduate to become the tutor "baggage". These are a waste of resources and energy. Mentors who only want to recruit more and don't want to bring are actually irresponsible.
Doctoral supervisor is a post, not an honor. Failure to do so (poor guidance, academic misconduct, empty reputation) will not only not receive honors, but even ruin their reputation. The same is the doctoral supervisor, in the eyes of teachers and students, the image and reputation are very different.
Doctoral supervisors are not interests, but responsibilities. When you recruit, consider being responsible for your students and develop them into scientific workers with the ability to do research independently, rather than your thesis workers and performance tellers.
It is recommended that the school review the annual review system of doctoral supervisors, and those whose performance does not meet the standards for several years or are close to the retirement age should cancel the qualifications of doctoral supervisors. Qualified to enroll, so that the doctoral qualification and enrollment qualifications are unified (not two layers of skin), to avoid causing artificial conflicts or interest exchanges.
The development of a school requires generations of young people to succeed them. The old doctoral supervisor should have the mind of being willing to be a ladder, retreating from the rapids, and having responsibilities and responsibilities, rather than just thinking about himself. The new doctoral supervisor should lay a solid foundation, learn from the old doctoral supervisor with an open mind, not rush to make quick gains, and make solid work. The development of the discipline is a historical process of inheriting the past and the future, and the former people planted trees and cultivated the soil, which requires long-term planning and measures.
Doctoral supervisor is the post, on the post is the doctoral supervisor, leaving the post is not. Responsibilities and rights are unified. As far as possible, let the young and promising people pick the beams, and the school will have a future.