I believe that both teachers and students will have this kind of confusion at different times regarding the contradiction between the "excellent" and "wide" of learning.We often hear graduate/doctor complaints, and even employers complain that graduate students' knowledge and skills other than their own very narrow areas of master's/doctoral thesis are hardly satisfactory.The implication is that graduate students' abilities have been questioned in terms of breadth.Graduate students are, and so are professors.Not to mention others, even many professors themselves sometimes ask themselves, what do I know other than my narrow research directions?
Let's first discuss why this contradiction between "fine" and "wide" arises.First of all, we must acknowledge that this is not Newton's time, Einstein's time, many masters were skilled in many fields and had outstanding contributions in many fields, so-called generalists.The main reason is that cattle love that era, many disciplines are in the initial stage, very immature.In this case, many talented masters have been given the opportunity to break ground, and many pioneering achievements have come into being, which is understandable.And to contemporary, each discipline has experienced dozens of hundreds of years of development, has been relatively perfect, and the discipline division is becoming more and more detailed.It is often invaluable that a doctoral thesis can make little progress in one small branch after another.So a Ph. D. student has to focus his research on a very small point to graduate.Even so, the competition is still fierce, because even at this very small point, you may not be doing it alone, but there are many PhD students around the world competing.Therefore, it can be said that the so-called "fine" research direction of doctoral students is actually forced.And whether the content and quality of the study can reach the "precision" level, two more.Because a valuable, high-quality research subject is not born to fall.Ph. D. students need to have a relatively broad understanding and judgment of their major, which involves the breadth of research.
One might say, "Is it the wider one's knowledge, the better?"In fact, it is not necessarily true.Because one's energy is limited, it is often exhausting when you try your best to master every possible point of knowledge.It is difficult to drill too deep at one point.From childhood to adulthood, we often hear that one bottle is less than one bottle, half a bottle is confused, is criticized this person's knowledge is not solid, not perfect.In fact, we do research and ask ourselves, often in a half-baked state.This is not bad because you are the most passionate and the easiest to make unexpected.On the contrary, when everything is ready, the real innovation does not come as promised.That's the uncertainty of scientific research, and that's her charm.So instead of obsessing over the superficial problems of so-called "fine" and "wide", graduate students blur their boundaries, which are inherently vague.
The relationship between "expert" and "wide" is mentioned above.Let's talk about how to coordinate the relationship.from a teacher's point of view.My experience is that the best way is to do a good job of teaching while doing scientific research seriously.At first glance, it seems like the wind, the horse, and the cow are out of touch.In fact, teachers who are serious about teaching have a deep experience, that is, by giving undergraduate students, graduate classes will make your professional knowledge more solid and broader.That's because what each teacher says in class is not exactly the same as your research (and often relevant).If you want to give a good lecture, you have to prepare for it carefully. You have to review/learn a lot of relevant knowledge and literature.More importantly, interacting with students will give you a better understanding of what you're talking about.Therefore, insist on giving classes to students, good classes, is a professor to do a good job of learning "excellent" and "wide" the best way.
This is true of teachers, and indeed of students.I don't know if Korean doctoral students are also asking professors to teach "tutor."tutor" is a teaching assistant.This is very common abroad.Almost every Ph. D. student has experience as an assistant.This experience is very important for the development of doctoral students.To be a teaching assistant is not only to understand and master the teacher's handout, but also to train the Ph. D. students' ability to give lectures to students.The TA also answers students' questions.After teaching assistant training doctoral students will be very confident when they become teachers in the future, driving light and familiar.Similarly, through TA training, PhD students can greatly broaden their knowledge beyond their PhD subjects, and in turn contribute to their PhD research.The so-called teaching is also applicable here.