so because of your bad experience all uk phds are rubbish?!!!

girigoriya

which university where you at? im not exactly sure that you understand how PhD education works in the UK.

As far as im aware, you cannot be registered for a PhD unless you pass some kind of Mphil transfer exam and as ive been told by a number of academics when your finally registered as a Phd student, you are effectively untouchable at least until PhD VIVA

so on the assumtion you passed this and were resistered resister as a PhD then you cant be just kicked out. so im assuming you didnt pass such an exam hence why you are no longer on the PhD program. its no shame as this happens to lots of people.

I didn't actually assume anything I just went on the information that you gave. Of course you are allowed to be upset, not one person has said otherwise as we all understand the ups and downs of the PhD process. The thing that has annoyed people is that you have branded all UK PhD's and UK science as crap, and then things were made worse with your remarks about the western world and 'the white man' on the thread that was deleted.

You didn't initially state that you were accepted onto a PhD programme as you said that you were on an MPhil with the chance of transferring onto a PhD. Inline with what RJB says, it would appear to me from your further comments that you didn't pass the required viva exam to upgrade from MPhil to PhD. Did you not get given a reason as to why you couldn't carry on with a PhD? I don't believe that the university would just kick you out without a reason.

If people get annoyed by facts, they should be smoking something exotic to escape reality.

UK PhD Programme does not require not even a single publication in a peer reviewed journal. and they then go for a post doc and suddenly they are thrown to the bitter reality of managing several projects. BOOM!!

It sounds like you were rubbish and they got rid of you.

I do not believe that there is any PhD programme in any country where you 'have' to publish in a peer-reviewed journal. So by defauly you don't have to publish for any PhD. Obviously it will help if you are looking for a future job in academia etc.

you may be right coastman,
Most people I know in academia publish during their PhD. As a rule of thumb I would say most people publish at least 1-2 conference papers and a journal article during their PhD or shortly after.

There is generally a lot of pressure to publish. The funding bodies invest millions of pounds of tax payers money into academic institutions. They need to ensure that they are getting value for money. The best way of doing this is by assessing the publication output of academic institutions in terms of both volume and impact of papers published

Hypothesis 1. UK PhDs are deficient. This is despite the sheer volume of science UK PhDs produce (second only to the US), the consistently high rankings in the league tables and the fact that some of the greatest scientists of all time have studied in the UK.

Hypothesis 2. girigoriya was a shitty student and has an axe to grind.



Btw Which country demands that you publish in peer reviewed journals?

In any case the majority of UK PhD students end up publishing their thesis otherwise they cant get work, which makes your argument even more pointless.

badhaircut. i couldnt have put it better myself.

Hi badhaircut! Are UK PhDs really really that bad? Surely it is a case of where and with whom you do the PhD. No disrespect to any institution but a PhD from, say Imperial, carries a lot more weight than the University of Chester, not least because the former receives an obscene amount of funding. More funding = better paid academics = higher stndards, ergo you get a higher quality of researcher.

Come on guys! You don't have to publish but it is highly recommended before your viva. In practice, in my department (biology, toxicology field) it is almost impossible to have a successful viva without any publication. Secondly it depends from your supervisor, department, topic etc etc as usual. I am not from UK but this is a fantastic place to do a Ph.D.! Just one experience is not enough to assert anything.

To go ballistic on all UK science PhDs because of one disappointmet is very unscientific in my humble opinion. I did ITT, an MA and now I am doing a PhD here in the UK and I am very happy with the quality of education I am getting. My research involves collaboration with a German reserch group and we are always discussing on equal terms. UK unis compare very well with others from the rest of the world. I have friends who are doing PhDs in the US. We get to bounce ideas off each other a lot and we always have an idea what each one is on about.
If one has a grievance, surely every institution has ways of addressing these.

Oh dear Lord, why has this thread been resurrected, was it not bad enough the first time round? olivia - time to get those Mouth-breathing trout recipes out again - was there one with lemon and olives, I think i might have missed it...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/database/asparaguswithgrilled_74649.shtml

This sounds like a lovely trout recipe, and it supports the local British economy by using British asparagus! Some chive creme fraiche and dill or is it the other way round and does it matter...and you are on your way to a fantastic trout meal!

Girigoriya, you claim to be a biologist batting at PhD level. You may have ha a bad experience with a supervisor, but as a scientist how can you formulate your judgement based on a sample size as one. If you think N=1 is an acceptable sample size on which to base your opinion thats a very worrying situation.
Please don't make generalisations about an entire nations research and education framework based on your own limited experiences. It is completely inappropriate.