I had a two experiences:
I was reviewing his performance of a young academic from a foundation university very well known in research In Turkey. This &nb! sp;young man is specialized in audio interaction design . Highly few people is expert in this field. He has several international patent amazingly. Contrary, no one in his department, encouraged for an advanced research. He is practicing artistic work only and has very poor one or two conference papers. Under a good supervision, this young man would be good researcher but sadly, still he dose not know what he should. And He thinks he is doing well in academic level.
On the other hand, A musician who studied MA degree in a well-known national university in Turkey, completed his dissertation in 25 months. Because his supervisor tried to teach &nbs! p;how a research can be done in Art. The &nb! sp;stude nt struggled at the beginning but his supervisor did not give up to encourage him to finalize his research in advanced level. At the end of the day, The student managed not only a good master thesis but also had 2 articles published in A level- Art and Humanity Indexed Journals. ( I should indicate again that this is a master even not a PhD).
Therefore I am totally agree with Ken's statement below ... I believe the quality of a research work 80% depends on a good supervision.
Oguzhan
Modarator, To Phd or not to Phd?
-------------------------------------------
Prof. Dr. Oguzhan Ozcan
--------------------------------------------
The other problem is lack of supervisor skills. The teacher in question thought that she was doing these students a favor by helping them to get a PhD for simply doing their own work. Because she is a skilled artist and an unskilled researcher, she has no idea what will happen to them in their post-doctoral career, and she had no ideas of the responsibilities and pressures they will face - especially if they are hired at a good university.
