Nature 472,276-279 (2011)| doi:10.1038/472276a
There are two responsible courses of action: either radically reform doctoral programmes or shut them down.
The necessary changes are both curricular and institutional. One reason that many doctoral programmes do not adequately serve students is that they are overly specialized, with curricula fragmented and increasingly irrelevant to the world beyond academia. Expertise, of course, is essential to the advancement of knowledge and to society. But in far too many cases, specialization has led to areas of research so narrow that they are of interest only to other people working in the same fields, subfields or sub-subfields. Many researchers struggle to talk to colleagues in the same department, and communication across departments and disciplines can be impossible.
If doctoral education is to remain viable in the twenty-first century, universities must tear down the walls that separate fields, and establish programmes that nourish cross-disciplinary investigation and communication. They must design curricula that focus on solving practical problems, such as providing clean water to a growing population. Unfortunately, significant change is unlikely to come from faculty members, who all too often remain committed to traditional approaches. Students, administrators, trustees and even people from the public and private sectors must create pressure for reform. It is important to realize that problems will never be solved as long as each institution continues to act independently. The difficulties are systemic and must be addressed comprehensively and cooperatively. Prestige is measured both within and beyond institutions by the number and purported strength of a department's doctoral programmes, so, seeking competitive advantage and financial gain from alliances with the private sector, universities continue to create them. As is detailed on page 276, that has led most fields to produce too many PhDs for too long.
By Kate Shaw
In developed nations, the number of PhDs given in the sciences each year has grown by almost 40 percent since 1998, reaching about 34,000 doctorates in 2008. This type of expansion sounds great in theory: interest in the sciences is growing, and we now have a population that is more educated than ever. However, the effects of this worldwide trend are troubling. The workforce cannot absorb all these highly trained graduates, there is little money to support these expensive programs, and the quality of education is often low, among other problems. This week’s issue of Nature examines the problems with the expansive growth of the PhD.
What can we do?
If you use a polarized capacitor, then the + sign needs to be connected to the more positive node in the circuit. If you use a non-polarized capacitor, then polarity obviously doesn't matter. Non-polarized capacitors are rarer, bigger, and more expensive than polarized ones.
You are mixing descriptions; there are bypass capacitors (such as an emitter bypass in a transistor amplifier), and then there are coupling capacitors (such as coupling between stages of amplification, if the DC level at the source is different than at the destination).If you use a polarized capacitor, then the + sign needs to be connected to the more positive node in the circuit. If you use a non-polarized capacitor, then polarity obviously doesn't matter. Non-polarized capacitors are rarer, bigger, and more expensive than polarized ones.
Aha. So it boils down to a question of cost then. Oh well, at least I can stop searching for some magical property related to polarity and move on to the next problem with my project. ...
And size. Non-polar capacitors are generally physically much larger than polar (electrolytic) caps.
Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo.
You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things.
They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.
Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.
- Apple Inc.