→ ICS:台灣式英文 @-@ 03/10 09:11
推 Ysen:推樓上 03/10 13:11
※ 引述《ablackturtle (.............)》之銘言：
: 我覺得還是要看實驗室.
: 像我呆的實驗室, 反而是以專題生為主
: 實驗室傳統就是專題生都做很好,做很多東西
: 而且我們一開始進來都會先講清楚
: == 這裡很操, 非常操..沒必要不要進來
: AM9:00 ~ PM10:00 Mon to Sat
: 有課就上課.沒課就得來, 要把課表貼在實驗室, 沒得逃
: 平常不太能讀書, 考前一個禮拜才能放假
: 所以很有可能課業會退步, 對推甄不利
: 講這麼多還肯進來做專題的都會有一定的覺悟
: 而老闆的態度其實還是最重要的
: 他對專題生跟研究生一視同仁
: 一樣的空間, 一樣的器材 (題目一樣難 >.< )
: 相對的就必須要與碩士生有相同的付出與努力
: 所以我老闆這幾年發的paper,
: 專題生反而比研究所發的還要多
: 最好的是專題生畢業有留下來續讀的話
: 老闆等於賺到一個有兩年經驗的碩班
I cannot see the points for the nndergraduate students.
As it takes so long time from their life without any payment,
are they trained to do lots of works or more thinking?
If lots of thinking, that sounds contrdiction, because to think required
reading and survay, and this doesn't have to happen in, and usually not
happen in, the laboratory.
If just lots of experimental work, then they might just be generating data
for somebody's publication. What have they learnt then?
I would suggest the undergraduates, go to somewhere, think about the questions.
If you do like to do research, go to find a quiet environment, do some study
to get in a Master/PhD course.
You spend efforts as many as a master student, nevertheless, only can have a
bachelor degree; and even no 'free money'. Com'on... What's the point?
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 82.22.91.213
※ 編輯: lerudit 來自: 82.22.91.213 (03/10 02:42)
※ 編輯: lerudit 來自: 82.22.91.213 (03/10 02:43)