^ Yes, but on this issue he's clearly correct. If you care about this you're small and pathetic.
PhD Student versus PhD Candidate
(84 posts) (5 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
This isn't something that I would have understood before I received my PhD and I'm assuming those who think the student/candidate distinction isn't a big are still in grad school.
There is a very big difference in the way the world looks at you, the way you look at yourself for that matter, when you're a candidate and when you're a PhD. There's a reason for this. Before my defense I thought I was as smart as everyone else who had already defended. I was wrong. I was very, very wrong. The act of completing the dissertation gives you something that no ABD is even close to.
So there is a difference between a student and a candidate and an even bigger difference between the candidate and the PhD. If you can't recognize that and call those who honor those distinctions small and pathetic... I think that reflects very poorly on your own knowledge.
Posted 2 years ago # -
^ is right. It's not that some people care more personally about the difference (although some might). Rather, it's just an objective reality that 'candidate' designates a particular status. That is, having passed coursework, comprehensive exams and a dissertation proposal defense. At many universities doctoral students can't teach courses until they are candidates. At my institution, it was indicated on our transcripts when we switched to PhD candidate status. People are not being 'petty' for explaining this. If you call yourself a 'candidate' while still doing coursework it is empirically inaccurate. I think it is a little much to interpret such an error as necessarily intentionally deceptive though.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The act of completing the dissertation gives you something that no ABD is even close to.
While that may be the case, the act passing comps does not give the Ph.D. candidate something that no Ph.D. student is even close to. Let's be clear: passing comps is a big psychological hurdle. But that's about all it is. The difference between a Ph.D. student and a Ph.D. candidate approaches the trivial. Pointing that fact out does not reflect poorly on anyone's knowledge or intellect. It's simple reality.
Posted 2 years ago # -
While there are obvious differences between student, candidate, etc., those differences become more insignificant the longer you've been around. Seriously, folks, this is something that 4th year students get really upset about (what? a third-year student is calling himself a "candidate"?? Abominable! This shall not stand! Let's report this to PSJR!). And I understand why--you just went through a difficult process and you would like to be able to signal to anyone who cares that you've succeeded doing it--while others have not. That's fine.
But you'll realize in a few years that all of that stuff is just really, really inconsequential. And not worth stressing about. And, the important part, faculty who are in a position to affect your career (discussant, search committee member, grant reviewer, journal editor, etc.) really, really couldn't care less.
My 2 cents.
Posted 2 years ago # -
So there is a difference between a student and a candidate and an even bigger difference between the candidate and the PhD. If you can't recognize that and call those who honor those distinctions small and pathetic... I think that reflects very poorly on your own knowledge.
Are you a little bit retarded? Oops, I mean, are you a little bit "r-worded"? Nobody in this entire thread has argued that there is no "difference between the candidate and the PhD." You just made that up in your stupid head. Of course there's a difference. It's called a dissertation. And someday, when you finish your dissertation, you will realize that it is the dissertation---specifically, the completion of said dissertation and subsequent receipt of PhD---that people actually care about. These petty distinctions between "student," "candidate," or "ABD" only matter to insecure jackasses.
Posted 2 years ago # -
This isn't something that I would have understood before I received my PhD and I'm assuming those who think the student/candidate distinction isn't a big are still in grad school.
Nope.
This is the sort of thing the status-obsessed care about, which are mostly people who just achieved some new status (candidate, PhD, TT job holder, tenured, whatever) and want to make sure others don't try to claim that status unjustly. Those for whom status is of secondary importance tend to not care. In my 20 years of life in this profession, I've never given a second thought to the difference between PhD candidate and student (except if I'm considering hiring, but non-candidates generally don't apply anyway. If I meet someone, I don't care whether they're one or the other, I care whether what they have to say is interesting.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I think you're all missing the point. People who like to point out the difference between "student" and "candidate" status are probably not as "status-obsessed" as you think. They're just pedants, that's all.
Posted 2 years ago # -
DrRight is 1000% correct in ^^^. The only title change that really matters is when you get your Ph.D. No one that matters even hears what you call yourself as a Ph.D. student. Call yourself a Ph.D. Ninja for all I care, until you get the Ph.D. you're still a grad student.
Posted 2 years ago # -
These petty distinctions between "student," "candidate," or "ABD" only matter to insecure jackasses.
Insecure jackasses, and those who haven't been around the profession long enough (read: 3rd year graduate students) to think that professors give a **** that you passed your comps and now somehow look at you differently.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Is it possible that the distinction is both actual and trivial? Technically existing but not something anyone really cares about?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Crazy much, DrRight?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Having seen how offended some people act by this sort of thing, I would tend to aim low. I would accept being called a high school level, or even a middle or elementary school level student, if that is what it takes to make people stop acting offended by this sort of thing.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I found this interesting post looking for information on when during the course of graduate studies is the appropriate time to use the "candidate" designation, if so desired. I had heard at one time that it is after course work is completed, another said only after preliminaries were completed. Whether the use is thought to be as a status symbol or has some useful purpose is really in the eye of the beholder. A universal definition of the appropriate timing would be useful to know when considering job candidates as it provides some idea of how far along they are in their graduate studies.
i must add, that the tone of some of the entries is hardly what i would expect from Phd's. It is the tone and not the discussion that is embarrassing.Posted 2 years ago # -
I do think of post-comps people differently: because I never see them anymore, they matter to me significantly less. Nothing nefarious--just out of sight, out of mind. Once you have a dissertation proposal (or at least hare-brained idea) in hand, then it's time to talk.
Incidentally, the target audience for most of this stuff seems to be the undergrads these folks serve as TAs. They grad students think that their title confers some authority. I don't think the undergrads care.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Not that this is at all important, but you call yourself a doctoral candidate when you have advanced to candidacy. The rules for advancing to candidacy differ across schools, but they are always clear. Now, if you want to call yourself a doctoral candidate without having fulfilled the formal requirements at your school, go right ahead. Nobody who matters will hold it against you.
Posted 2 years ago #