Re: 有人是研究室的大總管嗎？

看板PhD (博士班)作者lerudit (l'Erudit)時間20年前 (2006/05/19 21:05)推噓3(3推 0噓 1→)

留言4則, 3人參與討論串4/13 (看更多)

※ 引述《kwc1 (Never Give Up)》之銘言： : -.-a : 四萬砍五千，就剩下三萬五，也就是你砍的部份是打七五折 : 而且對方一口答應，表示還有再向下降的空間 : 不然對方如果是代理壟斷型的，應該完全不會降價 : 這是殺價的基本XD : 不過 : XX的一個月助理才領多少錢啊(我們學校給的是2k不到) : 花這麼多時間幹麻，隨便買啦 : 你省下來的錢也不是你的，你省下來的時間才是你的 : 有時候為了詢價會浪費兩三天咧 : 而且臭名遠播一次，就不會再找幫忙你買了 : 可是幹的起勁一次 Why a research student pays tuition fee and still have to do this technician job? I tell you what I saw not in Taiwan. Students can suggest something to buy or something to borrow. However, to buy them is not a student's job, and they are even not allowed to do. The procedures can be not that complicate or very complicate, depending on how cheap the goods is. For the cheap and regular stuffs, that is senior research fellows' job. The senior research fellows give orders to technicians, or whoever, and technicians do the rest. Certainly, the fellows got to check and sing-for to complete the procedures. When there is no senior fellow can do this, then it would be lecturers' job. Expensive stuffs are much more complicate. Even the money can be from an industrial project, the decisions got to be approved in the internal group meeting and then the case will be sent to the university central administration. It will be still the research fellow's responsibility to survey the suppliers/ manufacturers who can provide the machine or whatever. The information needs to be sent to the cantral administration to check every detail. Certainly, professional comments from the research group will be concerned. Eventually, the central administration signs the contract with the suppliers. The research fellow check the goods and argue/contact with the suppliers for the rest. There is nothing of student's job, although they would be allowed to take part in the market survey and enquiry, and group meeting. But they never seen the money and contract. A student's job is to do the literature survey and suggest what technology is available or realistic. Students won't be so good to judge a methodology found in a paper (and that might be too good to be true!); so the group meeting coming in. Price survey is basically not research. You can also say it is a low level job. At least, you got to be paid for doing this. This is also a reason why nobody put the price information even in an appendix of their theses. If you are not paid but have to this, sorry, you are unlucky. -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 81.111.56.53 ※ 編輯: lerudit 來自: 81.111.56.53 (05/19 21:32)

推

oplz

05/20 04:42, , 1^F

05/20 04:42, 1^F

推

lerudit

05/20 07:24, , 2^F

05/20 07:24, 2^F

In fact, if you are talking about the difference of classes, Are you happy with that academic culture in Taiwan? Is not the difference between students and lecturers even clearer? The truth is, when they are talking about holidays, salary, etc, the difference between the two classes are very clear. On the other hand, if they are talking about job (applying projects, writing proposal, even takes care of master students.. etc.), then the difference can be very unclear. If you are the student, do you like this? What I was talking about is a well-managed system. Everybody has their responsibility and characteristics. They should do something and should not touch some others. Once all these are well governed by laws or regislation, then lecturers and students can be friends and nothing to argue. Everything written on papers. If one side is not happy, go to appeal then. We all know the definition of the word, appeal, however, how many times have you seen this occurs? If you count the articles in this board, for how many times 'to appeal' was suggested, and for how many times 'not to appeal' was suggested, there is one much more the other. Why? and what makes this? My answer would be 'this system is not well-governed.' How about yours? There are even more concerns about the money issues. You might think to allow the students to spend public funds directly can speed up the processing. However, if the students make some mistakes, who got to be responsible for this? You might think to forbid to touch the money can increase loads on the lecturers, however, this also protect the students from guilty and they are not paid for doing this. The university central administration should intervene the purchasing processes, as they can be professional at this. There is less possibilities that they would be cheated by non-sense prices. The research group and the central administration can even monitor each other. The results is we can save more money and not to spend it stupidly. ※ 編輯: lerudit 來自: 81.111.56.53 (05/20 07:49) ※ 編輯: lerudit 來自: 81.111.56.53 (05/20 07:51)