wow. there is a war brewing in TODAY.
pdf
txt
txt for 2nd
article
Look elsewhere, doc
Contrary to popular belief, having a PhD won't guarantee work in
life science research
Letter from Peter Song
I REFER to your report, "The life sciences conundrum" (Oct
9).
I studied civil engineering at the National University of Singapore
(NUS). Then, with so much hype being created about the future of
life sciences, and with the civil engineering industry in the
sunset stage, I took a shot at being retrained for the life
sciences. I got a scholarship to do an NUS PhD programme in
bioengineering.
I stopped after three years on my own accord, deciding to graduate
with a Masters degree instead. Contrary to what some have said, a
PhD will not get you a research position in Singapore.
I learnt this the hard way.
Firstly, a PhD is very specialised and most students learn only
within a small sub-field governed by their thesis' area of
research. So, when the student graduates, he is considered
experienced only in that small area of science.
He thus loses all chance of working in any life science research
position even a junior post, as he is over-qualified. He will
likely have to find a post-doctoral position in the department from
which he obtained his PhD. But his supervisor may not have the
grant money to employ him.
This lack, despite the Government's generous funding, has to do
with the research environment at the university, which views
students as the main source of manpower.
When PhD students graduate, the professor simply gets another group
of students to continue the research. The students are paid a
stipend from another department in charge of scholarships;
effectively, the students come free to the professor because the
grant money isn't used to pay them.
For grant approval, the professor competes on quality of ideas,
commercial potential of ideas and estimated cost of research. All
things being equal, the professor who quotes the least amount is
given priority.
So, the PhD holder has one last option for employment: A*Star's
research institutes and private sector research firms. But A*Star
seeks out researchers who are experienced and have good track
records. The private sector also requires people with a specific
set of experience. And, unless their thesis is related, fresh PhD
graduates do not have a chance.
Finally, A*Star scholars, due to their bonds, can start as fresh
PhD graduates in its research institutes. The moral of the story?
If you want to work in life science research, you must be an A*Star
scholar; a PhD from elsewhere in Singapore would be useless.
We're scholars for good reasons
Letter from Ran Xia
I REFER to He Yi Hua's letter, "Degrees of distinction" (Oct 10). I
am from mainland China and I was a research scholar with the
National University of Singapore (NUS), from which I graduated with
a Master's degree. I feel I must clarify some distorted
facts.
Ms He says only graduates with first and second-upper class honours
are accepted to the NUS graduate school on scholarship, while other
local undergrads with a passion for research are not given a
chance.
Universities evaluate potential scholars based on criteria among
which academic results are usually key. What is more appropriate
than scoresheets in assessing a student's capability for the
purpose of advanced study and research?
Ms He pointed out that the Cumulative Average Point (CAP) system is
a problem. The CAP system applies equally to everyone, so blaming
it is not right.
As for passion, that is not all it takes to be a good
researcher.
Yes, as Ms He points out, there are no degree classifications in
China. But it takes more than a professor's recommendation to get
into the NUS graduate school. Every Chinese student has to submit
their scoresheets with all the marks of their subjects.
A CAP score can also be calculated using the marking system in
China as a comparison. There is no basis to assume that NUS only
looks at recommendation letters when it offers scholarships to
mainland Chinese students.
Ms He said: "When it comes to doing research, some (postgraduate
students) seek help from the undergraduates." I do not know what
"help" she refers to. If it is about academic guidance or research
direction, then I guess the undergraduate is doing the job of the
professors at NUS. If it is about lending a hand in experiments or
clarifying English terminology, what is the big deal?
I am not discrediting the help in any way. But the way Ms He
perceives the significance of such "help" may be quite different
from how others view it.
It is not graceful to justify one's deservedness of a scholarship
by discrediting another's, especially without knowing the facts.
And if one wants a scholarship, the right thing to do is to prove
that one is worth, not depend on the grace of a system
change.
