‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Wednesday, October 30, 2019 1:59 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@uw.edu> wrote:
> > > Hi Jason Cobb, I'm really sorry I've been delayed about your thesis. I keep > thinking "this falls between Masters and PhD and I keep meaning to look back > for ais523's theses to get advice" and then not getting around to it. > > One thing for everyone: do we want to support the idea of "academic > progression"? That is, your first "really long/challenging thesis" is a > masters, and the next one (even if the same level or slightly lower) is a > PhD? I prefer it being progressive. IRL you could theoretically produce a much better Masters thesis than your PhD thesis. The PhD doesn't represent just the final product but also the training and experience you have. Reserving the PhD for players that have contributed 2+ great theses makes it a marker of consistent contribution and effort, rather than a potential 1-off, and gives it more distinction. > > Right now, of the two PhDs we have Steve who got a B.N. first, and ais23 who > got a B.N. and a Masters first. > > Not trying to create obstacles I'll aim to start the award process in the > next 24 hours. > > Historical fact: One version of theses went "full academia", the candidate > chose an advisor, who assembled a committee (including a disputant), who > then gave some kinda exam on the thesis and awarded a degree. It was very > cumbersome. We've never (IMO) found a particularly good way of coming to > consensus on a particular degree other than "we know it when we see it". > > -G.
