Read on Twitter
Most U.S. based Earth Science PhD programs function pretty much the same way now as they did 50 years ago.
Take first-year classes, pass your comprehensive/qualifying exam, publish 3 papers, defend your PhD.
And people wonder why we aren’t more diverse.
Take first-year classes, pass your comprehensive/qualifying exam, publish 3 papers, defend your PhD.
And people wonder why we aren’t more diverse.
Students come in with very different preparation in math and *programming (*substitute key skill your program requires) leading to #ImposterSyndrome when students feel unprepared, even though they have valuable other skills.
Students then navigate some sequence of pass/fail oral exams that take different names (departmental/comprehensive/qualifying).
The exams rarely have a rubric telling students what is expected of them and examiners aren’t trained to recognize implicit (or explicit!) bias.
The exams rarely have a rubric telling students what is expected of them and examiners aren’t trained to recognize implicit (or explicit!) bias.
Students then do research, present results and write papers. But how do we make sure students are aware of and have the preparation for non-academic careers in non-profits, government or industry? And that careers outside of academia are not “disappointments”.