Whether master students should send small papers before graduation has also been discussed, but I am here to discuss my own understanding with you.
Of course, our school requires every master student to publish a short paper in the core journals before applying for defense. I am an engineering major, so we often do experiments in the laboratory, hoping to write our own essays as soon as possible and graduate on time. Some students are also complaining about why they have to publish small papers to graduate. Many schools do not have this requirement. Those master students work part-time as tutors outside, and some schools only need to publish an SCI when they graduate from doctoral programs. Why does the boss of our research group want three papers? All three can graduate from doctoral programs according to the requirements of the school.
On the one hand, the above reflects a problem that many of us are worried about at present. Do master students have to publish papers in core journals to graduate? As far as I know, a liberal arts major I know only took 16 days to complete the topic selection and final paper revision, and it was published in a core journal. We were all shocked by his speed! You have to do experiments for a year before you can write a paper. Liberal arts majors work part-time during the day and come back to play games at night, but after just wandering around, the paper was published. We get up early and do experiments in the dark every day, and sometimes we are scolded by our boss for being slow. Many times, we have no idea about weekends. We all spend so little time, more than a year doing experiments, and by the time we write our papers, we are already in Grade Three. At that time, everyone will have to find jobs and write big papers. So if we finish one day earlier, we can find a job one more day in the third year of the study. Because some people haven't finished yet, they are still doing experiments and writing papers in the third year of research, which delays the opportunity to go out and find a job. Of course, they understand that graduation is the key.
From the above description, we can now be divided into two parts. The first is science and arts. The second part is two groups of people who are required to send papers to graduate and those who can graduate without sending papers. The difference between liberal arts and science and engineering is that most liberal arts majors don't have to spend a long time doing experiments. Of course, some liberal arts majors should also do some experiments. Therefore, once there is no tutor's arrangement and guidance, only one paper is needed, then the rest of the time is only to go out to do part-time jobs or find some activities to kill time and squander the impulse to enter the postgraduate entrance examination team because of their ignorance. Science and engineering will spend a lot of time doing experiments, and some of them don't have winter and summer vacations, just hope to graduate on time. This kind of liberal arts is very idle, and the current situation of science and engineering is so busy. Liberal arts students envy science and engineering students that they are full, and science and engineering students envy that liberal arts students can go out to work part-time to earn some petty bourgeoisie and have plenty of time to watch movies and play games. This siege-like mutual jealousy makes people feel that they are always lacking something to balance the current misfortune.
Let's focus on the second part of the crowd, with and without paper. What is the quality of the required papers? This has been debated by many people, and many famous schools have decided not to write papers. But if they don't want papers, what will they spend a lot of time doing? What should I do if I can't come up with a big paper without the requirements of the paper? How to graduate? Every year, the quality of education and the level of scientific research in China are mentioned. Are these conditions improving gradually? Or is it getting worse? The inversion of this study illustrates a problem. After the pyramid model was broken, people inevitably put a big question mark on the quality of master students. Many people who have just entered the school and have the intention to study for a PhD have finally given up this idea. Many of them think that studying for a doctorate is a waste of youth, parents' money and the country's money. Studying for a PhD? I'm going out to look for a job, which reflects the voice of many students. In addition, the employment rate of undergraduates is lower than that of doctoral students and junior college students, which is also an embarrassing scene for graduate students.
Some time ago, I heard an alumnus who graduated with a master's degree for two years say that those students who don't have to publish papers have enough time to prepare for finding jobs and cultivate their own abilities. Even if they don't publish papers, they will be competent in their future work, and some of them are still excellent because of some skills developed during that time. On the contrary, those students who request to publish papers, because they stay in the laboratory all the year round, don't have much time to cultivate the qualities they must have in their work, so they show great inferiority in their work. This also illustrates an embarrassing scene of current education, whether the direction of school training can be used in work, and where is the missing chain?
Therefore, I personally think that it is a bit unreasonable for a school to decide whether to publish papers and let students graduate. It may be more reasonable to require and train according to different majors. I think the quality of master students depends on their scientific research ability at school or their future work ability, which is also a standard to be evaluated at present.