Jump to the list of recent wpisw
At the forum discussion on selection recenzentw support system. Talk KRTKA system criticized everyone, I have a similar experience as the others, not doo wic s subsequent criticism about mad Quite the wyborw of reviewers proposed by the system. However, I would add a few words about ranking recenzentw.
Ot like other zawuayem that the reviewers are not setting ranked according to their competence, but by degrees held. I admit that my jaw drops when I saw doktorwz obvious komptenecjami recenzenckimi, ktrzy set S ranked below the OSB less competent, but with habilitation, and those below osbz scientific title.
These rankings show but jake true picture of Polish science. Science, in ktrej is not yet competence, but porzdek pecking. Professor of must be better than podwrkowego, podwrkowy val des mont of assistant professor and assistant professor of master's degree .... Actually, this Master up and so does not count, maybe at most a beer jump . And I do not zauwayem as to my powers of the reviewers wzrosy with obtaining a PhD degree. They result from examining KTRE lead and lead. This is a PhD student, who, well, let's write a doctorate val des mont ends on X is more competent to write a review artykuu about her professor, his promoter.
> This is a PhD student, who, well, let's write ends doctorate on the X is more competent to write a review val des mont artykuu on this topic than the professor, his promoter. <Here already you healthy transplant . habilitant2012 wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 3:22:22:
No exaggeration. This graduate student, not a promoter, an expert val des mont on the subject of his doctorate. val des mont This is a doctoral student knows the whole literature, and debate it. The professor has a bigger experience, but writing grantw in zarzdzaniu sciences, in psaniu reviews, can writing a broader view of disciplines. Does this mean that they know up on everything? No. Expert in the subject hearing is a graduate student, not a promoter! val des mont First reviews for magazines as a fashion international val des mont PISA doctor. I do not think that mj knowledge and competence wzrs dramatically since koczenia doctorate. pawcio69sk wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 8:43:53:
I confirm that criticized the system is not the highest LoTW ... List of recommended me recenzentw may also contain the three familiar names and are not necessarily closely related to the my specialties . Very interesting and I am positioned as a reviewer. If I were reviewing how powan The future of work assignments to me by tene system, val des mont probably musiabym val des mont odmwi (lack of competence). However, the most interesting are tumaczenia s key to English. val des mont Spaceballs! :-) Habilitancie indicated by you turn on the list is a consequence recenzentw tytuomanii, dbl describe in the previous sweat. Just me and not the other sequence is not surprising. And to refer to either the PhD student as a reviewer - bybym cautious. Byby undoubtedly the best expert when it comes to the substantive content of the reviewed studies. However, val des mont his assessment of the adopted methodology of the survey byaby mao reliable. Strongly disagree, however, that a well-prepared and active research doctor is often a much better reviewer than the professor, val des mont who for several years nothing new to read or write is not alone. dala.tata wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 11:38:16:
Caution shown by pawcia makes sense. Doctoral students because there is no experience val des mont in writing a review. We, the professors, the experience we cover, in turn, our shortcomings. But at the same eksperckosci, I do not have many watplwisoci, with a graduate student, not a promoter, is an expert in the subject of his doctorate. for sure it was in the case of my doctorate and promoted PhDs me. According to me, can not and should not be otherwise. trzy.14 wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 12:36:47:
PhD student PhD koczcy SWJ more knowledgeable of its promoter ... If gwnym author of publications val des mont (required plural) wchodzcych a doctorate from where, it does not exclude such a possibility you, although in this case both should val des mont odmwi, possibly wspln write a review, I would crown does not fall. In my opinion, the ability val des mont to reviewing is obtained with the abilities to publish. Number of publications and std RESULTING experience val des mont is usually sufficient as already several (2-3) years after the doctorate, provided that the author is a gwnym and not an auxiliary. I recall that in the Polish system niehabilitowany doctor has the right to reviewing the science, but without the consent of the higher val des mont weight has no right took care of a graduate (I do not remember, or can be a reviewer, but logic dictates system that they do not). trzy.14 wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 12:42:50:
Spryciurko, you're seems to habilitation and before you write these to Polish magazines. Do zdarzyo you get up to
At the forum discussion on selection recenzentw support system. Talk KRTKA system criticized everyone, I have a similar experience as the others, not doo wic s subsequent criticism about mad Quite the wyborw of reviewers proposed by the system. However, I would add a few words about ranking recenzentw.
Ot like other zawuayem that the reviewers are not setting ranked according to their competence, but by degrees held. I admit that my jaw drops when I saw doktorwz obvious komptenecjami recenzenckimi, ktrzy set S ranked below the OSB less competent, but with habilitation, and those below osbz scientific title.
These rankings show but jake true picture of Polish science. Science, in ktrej is not yet competence, but porzdek pecking. Professor of must be better than podwrkowego, podwrkowy val des mont of assistant professor and assistant professor of master's degree .... Actually, this Master up and so does not count, maybe at most a beer jump . And I do not zauwayem as to my powers of the reviewers wzrosy with obtaining a PhD degree. They result from examining KTRE lead and lead. This is a PhD student, who, well, let's write a doctorate val des mont ends on X is more competent to write a review artykuu about her professor, his promoter.
> This is a PhD student, who, well, let's write ends doctorate on the X is more competent to write a review val des mont artykuu on this topic than the professor, his promoter. <Here already you healthy transplant . habilitant2012 wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 3:22:22:
No exaggeration. This graduate student, not a promoter, an expert val des mont on the subject of his doctorate. val des mont This is a doctoral student knows the whole literature, and debate it. The professor has a bigger experience, but writing grantw in zarzdzaniu sciences, in psaniu reviews, can writing a broader view of disciplines. Does this mean that they know up on everything? No. Expert in the subject hearing is a graduate student, not a promoter! val des mont First reviews for magazines as a fashion international val des mont PISA doctor. I do not think that mj knowledge and competence wzrs dramatically since koczenia doctorate. pawcio69sk wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 8:43:53:
I confirm that criticized the system is not the highest LoTW ... List of recommended me recenzentw may also contain the three familiar names and are not necessarily closely related to the my specialties . Very interesting and I am positioned as a reviewer. If I were reviewing how powan The future of work assignments to me by tene system, val des mont probably musiabym val des mont odmwi (lack of competence). However, the most interesting are tumaczenia s key to English. val des mont Spaceballs! :-) Habilitancie indicated by you turn on the list is a consequence recenzentw tytuomanii, dbl describe in the previous sweat. Just me and not the other sequence is not surprising. And to refer to either the PhD student as a reviewer - bybym cautious. Byby undoubtedly the best expert when it comes to the substantive content of the reviewed studies. However, val des mont his assessment of the adopted methodology of the survey byaby mao reliable. Strongly disagree, however, that a well-prepared and active research doctor is often a much better reviewer than the professor, val des mont who for several years nothing new to read or write is not alone. dala.tata wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 11:38:16:
Caution shown by pawcia makes sense. Doctoral students because there is no experience val des mont in writing a review. We, the professors, the experience we cover, in turn, our shortcomings. But at the same eksperckosci, I do not have many watplwisoci, with a graduate student, not a promoter, is an expert in the subject of his doctorate. for sure it was in the case of my doctorate and promoted PhDs me. According to me, can not and should not be otherwise. trzy.14 wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 12:36:47:
PhD student PhD koczcy SWJ more knowledgeable of its promoter ... If gwnym author of publications val des mont (required plural) wchodzcych a doctorate from where, it does not exclude such a possibility you, although in this case both should val des mont odmwi, possibly wspln write a review, I would crown does not fall. In my opinion, the ability val des mont to reviewing is obtained with the abilities to publish. Number of publications and std RESULTING experience val des mont is usually sufficient as already several (2-3) years after the doctorate, provided that the author is a gwnym and not an auxiliary. I recall that in the Polish system niehabilitowany doctor has the right to reviewing the science, but without the consent of the higher val des mont weight has no right took care of a graduate (I do not remember, or can be a reviewer, but logic dictates system that they do not). trzy.14 wrote (a) comments dated on 2013/08/20 12:42:50:
Spryciurko, you're seems to habilitation and before you write these to Polish magazines. Do zdarzyo you get up to
No comments:
Post a Comment