sugest me for my ph.d.

[Nancy Kan]

Hi Ranchers,

I finished M.Sc. IT by correspondence with 77%. I'm interested for Ph.d. I want a topic which does not involve mathematical and theoretical studies, but should be of practical use to s/w industry like patterns or s/w arch. Can any one suggest me? Is there facility to work with sSUN Microsystems for this?

Thanks
Nancy

[Bert Bates]

I'm not sure this is exactly the right forum for this question, but I can't, off the top of my head, come up with a better one....

hmmm...

[Swapnil Sonawane]

You being a Ranch hand member, you would know that this is not the forum to ask this question.

[Nancy Kan]

sorry, but couldn't find a proper forum for this question. Didn't know what to do?, Just wanted a suggestion from ranchers.

[Ulf Dittmer]

With all due respect, if you can't think of a topic for a PhD yourself, it may be better not to go for one. A PhD is a labor-intensive, multi-year effort; if you work on something that you don't really care about you're bound to lose interest.

While some thesises include developing software, the majority of the work will consist of theoretical work and research, so any application of patterns or software architecture will be limited.

Lastly, -and that's just a guess- I don't think there's much PhD-level research on general software topics going on at Sun these days. But you can take a look yourself.
[ June 06, 2008: Message edited by: Ulf Dittmer ]

[Rusty Shackleford]

Originally posted by Ulf Dittmer:
With all due respect, if you can't think of a topic for a PhD yourself, it may be better not to go for one. A PhD is a labor-intensive, multi-year effort; if you work on something that you don't really care about you're bound to lose interest.

While some thesises include developing software, the majority of the work will consist of theoretical work and research, so any application of patterns or software architecture will be limited.

Lastly, -and that's just a guess- I don't think there's much PhD-level research on general software topics going on at Sun these days. But you can take a look yourself.

[ June 06, 2008: Message edited by: Ulf Dittmer ]

I was about to write the same thing. A "masters" degree that was "earned" through correspondence is completely different than a real MS in CS program and extremely different than a bona fide PhD program.

The question you asked can only be honestly answered by the response of Mr. Dittmer. Or in other words, if you need to ask, especially on a internet forum, you shouldn't be doing it.

Furthermore, any legitimate PhD topic will be very theoretical in nature and not something as simplistic as patterns or general software development.A PhD thesis has to be an original and significant contribution to the field, that implies that you have a deep theoretical knowledge of broad CS topics and have the ability to do original research on your own. This is a far cry from taking a few tests through the internet or mail.

You didn't say much about the program you completed but honestly, it doesn't sound like something that could springboard into a legitimate PhD program. I am not meaning to be rude or condescending, I feel it is better to get the unvarnished truth.
[ June 07, 2008: Message edited by: Rusty Shackleford ]

[Pat Farrell]

Read Bunny, Fox and Thesis

Getting a PhD is not getting a "more" Masters. Its very different. Its about becoming a world expert in a topic, doing research, and publishing new and significant work.

A lot of folks find that a PhD restricts their careers in industry. The obvious career is being an academic, but that is not as easy as it appears. You have to "publish or perish" and that means you have to attract grants so you can hire grad students to do the research, which you then publish.

In many positions, a PhD can be considered over educated. Jobs that will go to someone with a BS and years experience, or a MS and a little experience, are often not offered to PhD, because the bosses worry that it won't be enough of a challenge.

There are industry positions for PhD, but they tend to be very few of them, and thus they are very competitive. It used to be you could work for Bell Labs, or Xerox Parc, or IBM. There are fewer of those positions these days. You have to be really, really, good with degrees and post-doc work from leading programs to even be considered.

To get a PhD requires you have the drive to do the work in your topic, and you have to have an advisor who wants to be part of it. In reality, your advisor approves the topic. You can have ideas, but its only partially your decision.

[Paul Clapham]

As I recall, the usual procedure is for the PhD student's adviser to suggest a field for the student to work in, and subsequently to suggest a topic if the student doesn't come up with one based on this work.

[Nicholas Jordan]

Mail thirty or fourty companies, see what is actually wanted. You may well land a bloated research budget.

[Ulf Dittmer]

Originally posted by Nicholas Jordan:
Mail thirty or fourty companies, see what is actually wanted.

Just don't.

You may well land a bloated research budget.

Probably not.

This translation of a sarcastic NJ post has been a public service announcement.

[Pat Farrell]

Originally posted by Paul Clapham:
As I recall, the usual procedure is for the PhD student's adviser to suggest a field for the student to work in, and subsequently to suggest a topic if the student doesn't come up with one based on this work.

It starts with the adviser having a field that is his area or areas of work.

Yes, the student and adviser do a dance, like at a freshmen sock hop. There is a flirtation, and dating and perhaps more.

The student has to be interested in the topics that the adviser works in. The adviser is not going to change what his is researching. You can perhaps nudge the large ship a tiny bit, but it will not change course much.

[Rusty Shackleford]

A student would be foolish to choose an adviser whose interests aren't there own. A PhD candidate would never choose a professor whose work is in AI, if the candidate wanted to study hardware.

The first step in obtaining a PhD is to choose an adviser willing to work with you, not a school or a topic.

[Nicholas Jordan]

Your observations are welcome. I do not fathom what just don't intends, but we get these people who have had some remarkably sophisticated work in trainng and are a burden on the team because of lack of practical utility. It gets to the point that they have to be dismissed, so I am eager to grasp the just don't remark - why, if Original Poster has to ask what thesis ground to invest in would we do otherwise than to call up a company and ask what is actually of value vis-a-vis imaginary preconditions based on self-fulfilling belief systems?

I actually have invested enormous amounts in what I am asking you. I walked on traditional education, putting up my Master's Thesis a few years ago from actual life experience. Hard won nuances that passed the split of my Risk Analysis Specialist, a degreed Industrial Engineer.

I have several incidents that would be supporting, I do not want the level of attention that would bring as that would be counter productive. It is practice in the school of business to quit at the MBA level, "because let's get on with it"

Writing and asking what is needed may not get replies, but I have found better than expected results by writing letters and asking companies what they need.

For the grant proposal, yes - but maybe that would cause the poster to think. No? Could cause the poster to consider what might interest a funding body, thus arriving at a thesis candidate.

RE:

Originally posted by Ulf Dittmer:

[ June 09, 2008: Message edited by: Nicholas Jordan ]