Question
I am wondering how my colleagues on ResearchGate view scholarship? Also, do you think we coud refer to a masters and PhD student as a scholar?
I am co-facilitating a research coaching and mentorship programme for post graduate students who received funding for their studies at a University of Tegnology (SA). These post graduate candidates are referred to as new generation scholars in the context of the programme. They are engaged in research and teaching activities and have the potential to be appointed at the institution after successful completion of their studies. A reviewer contested the use of the concept scholar, asking if we could truly say that a masters and even a PhD student is a scholar. The reviewer's feedback resulted in a number of interesting conversations about scholarship.
All Answers (34)
-
Scholarship is a relative term and where you are in a career is not always an indication of one's scholarship. I have known doctoral students and master's students that have the maturity to understand the issues, but may not have the pedagogy to formulate hypothesis and run experiments for testing and generalization. I see tenured professors that lost all their scholarship capability as soon as they got tenure and live in a different world. To me scholarship is a journey and not an end result, just as expertise, maturity, wisdom, etc. -
I understand your concen - but I also undetsand the concern of your reviewer. My point is based on the analysis of the concepts. If somewhan is referrd to a a studentthan he or she may not be referred a a scholar. Once the student would be graduated he or she mig t be called a young scholar. It is purely an analysis of the concepts though and may not have any relevance to your and your programme's situation. -
Maybe, emerging scholar? New generation sounds as though they have jettisoned long-held beliefs and practices. Next generation scholars does not convey that same sentiment to me however. -
hmm interesting question. I think a "scholar" isn't dependent on one's education as much as one's activity. In other words, in my view, anyone who conducts research and shares that research with the larger community consistently over time is a scholar. I was slow finishing my Ph.D. and I had dozens of articles, book chapters, and presentations by the time I graduated. -
I think any person who is given the opportunity to study without paying tuition has a scholarship. If the person has sufficient merit to have a scholarship, there is no reason to complicate things.
-
Scholarship or scholar can be described parallel to motivation. Getting scholarship in monetary terms is an extrinsic motivation which is the recognition of someones achievements and abilities it could be academic and non-academic as well (people do get scholarship in sports, music, etc) but if you want to define or analyze the term as a process as mentioned by Mohan Tanniru then it is a lifelong learning and discovery journey which comes from intrinsic motivation not really for any honour,award or recognition. So in my opinion Masters and Ph.D. students are the beginners in this lifelong journey. -
I do not understand very well his question. I believe that it wants to know if the initial formation of the teachers and his later doctorate they must be scholarship holders to obtain major preparation. If it is it what it wants to know, I can say to him that, according to my opinion, the formation of those who will turn in forming of the young generations must be complete and of quality and the main futures you must be aroused of that they have to be the best and his task carries out the better thing that they can, for what has to be prepared thoroughly, with or without scholarship. Nevertheless for those that have a marked educational vocation and a great professional interest to obtain this formation, if they did not have economic means to obtain it there would be necessary to provide them with scholarship.
For those who want to do the doctorate, though it is not an indispensable condition to teach and therefore it is not necessary to obtain a scholarship, it is possible to do the same thing when already one is working. -
I am amazed by the various interpretations of the questions as evidenced by the replies.
PS Folks, please spell check before you submit your reply. -
A scholar can be define by his life´s work. So, the meaning of the word "scholar" cannot be linked directly to a postgraduate programme. How the scholar activity can be developed is the result of diverse factors, contexts, means and possibilites. Masters and Ph.Degrees are academic experiences that contribute directly or indirectly to structure reason, thought and discursive power. But a scholar condition goes beyond these mere experiences. In essence, the relation between master and Ph degrees is a extrinsic relation. I recomend to read the Max Weber´s lecture, entitled "Science as a vocation" in which Weber describes the external an internal conditions that characterize a scholar in the contemporay world. -
A little research and clarification re: the original question. By definition
1. a learned person, esp in the humanities
2. a person, esp a child, who studies; pupil
3. a student of merit at an educational establishment who receives financial aid, esp from an endowment given for such a purpose
Hence the funded post graduate candidates are by definition scholars, ...... but are they new generation?
New generation is an easy tag line to place on someone and carries a range of connotations that may either be connected to the notion that they were not "scholars' in a previous generation or that the way in which they are scholarly is in some way inherently different.
By these definitions I am a scholar, I have a funded place in a masters course at Melbourne University. But am I scholarly?
The Idea of a new generation needs greater expansion by the institution so as to take the ambiguity out of the equation. They need not change the way in which they refer to the candidates because after all when we research and construct new knowledge and understanding in answer to a question are we not all part of a new generation of scholarship and knowledge? What they need to do is define their conception and use of the term “new generation”.
As always these definitions are relative to the perspective of the viewer, the academics who do not see the students as scholars view it from their own perspecive and relative to their perceived statusas "scholars". The course providers are trying to achieve some sense of vigour and interest using a populist maketing strategy and we discussing it have only minimal information to reflect on.
For me though it is about a conception of knowledge and wisdom in a domain of academic endeavor. I asked am I a scholar as a student? ….. yes. I asked am I scholarly? To that I would need to say I don’t feel it in relation to the masters course I am undertaking but that others who see me research, and contribute to my field and community through that endeavor see me as scholarly. -
Calling them scholars is perfectly reasonable. The term 'new generation' is a bit naff. If you must indicate seniority, use 'apprentice' or some synonym thereof. -
Goodness me... a discussion on the semantics of the word 'scholar'. Awesome. I think everyone else has really hit on the key points though:
1. Scholarship is often a word used to describe a type of funding for study, as opposed to a profession, so this is misleading.
2. By definition a scholar can be someone, of any age or any level, who is a student (particularly here in the UK), not just a contributor to knowledge. So this is also misleading as it is also not necessarily a profession which they are aspiring to, but a state they have already achieved.
Therefore, yes, it's fine to call masters and PhD students scholars. The adjective you use, whether 'new generation', 'emerging' or 'up coming' will be really subjective, and will completely depend on what you want to convey.
I personally think what you've said is totally fine! -
A Masters student is an aspiring or apprentice scholar since such a student has not developed research "muscle" to handle serious research activity while a PhD candidate can befittingly be referred to as a scholar because at least at that stage the fellow has shown considerable interest in the field regardless of the length of time taken to finish the doctoral dissertation. One may even use the term 'new generation' or 'upcoming scholars'. All these depend on the context within which the terminologies are applied. -
Your responses to my questions were insightful. Mario, thank you for referring me to Max Weber's lecture. It sounds as if there is general consensus that these students can be referred to as "scholars" or as some suggest, "apprentice scholars" linked to their engagement in scholarly activities. In our article we defined "scholarship" based on Boyer's model (discovery, integration, application and teaching). David, Rick and Leila, thank you for raising concerns about the use of the concept 'new generation'. Rick, I agree with you that this concept should be defined within the context of the institution to clarify any ambiquities. I have observed that this concept is frequently used in academic literature without a clear definition. My moment of truth: re-consider the use and meaning of the concept 'new generation' against the backdrop of contextual realities such as the adoption of a new institutional research agenda (the original institution did not have a clear research focus) and the wider socio-economic, historical and political factors (most post graduate students are from underpriviledged communities). -
Retha, you have clearly captured that the terms (scholar and scholarship) may be used to have different meanings. A student formally supported financially by funder (an institution or even an individual) may be referred to as a scholar and enjoys a scholarship grant. The scholarship grant may be at the undergraduate, graduate and post-graduate levels.
However, the 'other' scholarship referred by the others here in Research Gate is at a different context, at a higher level. Here, the MS and PhD (and post-Doc) pursuits become preparations or requisites for this scholarship - one that is scientific in nature. This is where the scholar is the scientist and scholarship is the scientific researches undertaken with outputs manifested as scientific publications or patents. -
I think that scholarships are really important as long as they focus on outstanding academic performance. It should also be noted that many researchers can ptener few publications, but their research is a success in practice.
-
It is common to associate the term scholar with research. A scholar is an individual with an intellectual interest who dominates the theoretical and methodological grammar within a specific epistemic field. This makes the voice of a scholar inherent to production of knowledge. A doctoral program has been understood as composed by actions, interactions and practices which tend to integrate societal, institutional, disciplinary and personal features directed to the internalization of both the form and content of a specific field, as I said. This is the reason to link a doctoral program with a scholarship experience.
Today, the demand for doctoral education has strongly risen, so the production of doctorates has changed considerably. The decline of high quality of doctoral programs has conducted to distort the meaning of scholarship, and to generate different levels of description of the term, from those which associate scholarship to a doctoral program to those which recreate the historical conditions of the research consciousness and identity. So, the meaning of the term depends on the context of its use, and on the interests which support its marketing. -
I think the most important is the background of what the high-level academic training means. Being academic entails a responsibility to oneself than with others. Conditions such as scholarships are complementary
-
Thank you for your continued dialogue about the concept scholarship. I have been engaged in extensive reading about the concept the last few days. I started with Mario's suggestion to read Max Weber's "scolarship as vocation" speech. It was good reading because I realised that after about 93 years, we are still struggling with many of the realities that Weber referred to (the fate of science is that science get outdated soon or as Weber stated: "Every scientific fulfillment raises new questions; it asks to be surpassed and outdated"). Weber had a more reductionistic view of scholarship and linked it specifically to the discovery of knowledge or science. Boyer on the other hand extended the definition to include other aspects (research, teaching, integration and application) in 1992. In 1996 he referred to the scholarship of engagement and pleaded for scholarly activities that will adress the most prevailing social, civic, economic, and moral problems (Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1996). And as Weber predicted, I am asking a new question: how should scholarship be developed in an academic context?
-
To me, a scholar is one who has read and assimilated a vast array of writings of thinkers, experimenters, theoreticians, researchers in the scholar's general area of expertise and in his particular special area of interest. This person can often cite a long list of references to bolster his/her point of view.
Unfortunately, what we lack today is original, creative thinking to yield needed paradigm changes. This frequently comes from people who have in-depth knowledge in fields of investigation that are totally independent of the area with the problems to be solved. Such a person may lack the extensive background citations that a specialist in the field may have. But this person may see patterns or analogies with outside areas of investigation and development that the specialist will be blind to.
So, I would argue that if you want to make a significant, fundamental impact, master the general principles in your general area of interest (e.g., physical science, social science, math, etc.). Work for a time with renown experts in an area of research and development, if necessary at low pay, to learn from them. After a few years, work with other experts in related, but different, areas of research and development. At each change in work, you will see analogies where you can apply what you have previously learned. Soon, you will find that you can go out on your own into new, but somewhat related areas and contribute something unique and significant that opens up new vistas - i.e., a paradigm change
It is unlikely that a scholarly approach will achieve this. -
Thank you Ian for your response. It sounds as if you are suggesting a combination of selfdevelopment and engagement in the apprenticeship model for the development of scholarship? Your suggestion is pragmatic and make a lot of sense.
-
We can consider both of them scholar -
Thank you, Brijesh for your response to my question.
-
@Retha. Thanks for the thanks. My comment has auto-vanished from above. Do you have a record of what I said? -
Ian, no I did not keep record. That is weird.
-
when you spend a lot of time researching a particular problem, i thing you don't need any paper to be called a scholar... Plato did not have a Phd -
@Retha: Yes. TheSage's definition 2 for scholar reads "A learned person (especially in the humanities); someone who by long study has gained mastery in one or more disciplines." Thus if a person has as M or PhD then they have done research for two or three years and can be regarded as a scholar. To develop scholars we have to develop their ability to do research. @Lasha: I am not sure how we will handle the queue of self-proclained scholars queueing at our door without documentary proof!
-
Ian what do you call scholar? do you really think that Albert Einstein needed a documentary prove for being called a scholar? I know a lot of people who have Phd but are at zero level of scientific knowledge... diplomas still cant be a prove for anything... I am sure time will come when scientific world will appreciate real value more than "paper backed" boy scouts ...
-
What makes a person scholarly? What would you expect a scholar to say, produce, inspect, consider, etc? In my view, a scholar is someone who knows the field of study and its many aspects, one who knows how to produce scholarship in writing or other production, one who appreciates and cites foundations to topics and names precursors in a literature. Becoming a scholar in a field takes time--10 years to expert level. A scholar is one who knows a field in depth and has something to add/advance the field.
-
@Lasha: Would you be happier with this as a better definition of a scholar: Someone who has produced an accepted publication that has an Abstract at the beginning and a list of References at the end?
-
i would add a 'valuable' publication that has " that has an Abstract at the beginning and a list of References at the end"
-
@Lasha: I am happy to include the word valuable: "A scholar is someone who has produced a valuable, accepted publication that has an Abstract at the beginning and a list of References at the end." We could go on to discuss how value is added... (Also, I suspect that Google Scholar first started its database by including only such documents found on the Web.)
-
Great responses on the term "scholar" and wonder if the act of having one's research be submitted for peer-review / presentation / publication could be added? Also wondering if there's a difference between a researcher and a scholar. My guess is that the there will be differences between and with the sciences and humanities. -
I am elated that colleagues are still commenting on the question that I added some time ago. What are your thoughts on Boyer's conceptualisation of scholarship with reference to the multidimensional functions of scholarship, thus implying that a scholar should engage in the following activities: research, teaching and service? According to Boyer's conceptualisation a scholar would be both a reseacher and a teacher. This conceptualisation creates huge pressure for academics within a context of "publish or perish" - especially if their identity as teachers is overshadowing their identity as researchers.
Popular Answers
1. Scholarship is often a word used to describe a type of funding for study, as opposed to a profession, so this is misleading.
2. By definition a scholar can be someone, of any age or any level, who is a student (particularly here in the UK), not just a contributor to knowledge. So this is also misleading as it is also not necessarily a profession which they are aspiring to, but a state they have already achieved.
Therefore, yes, it's fine to call masters and PhD students scholars. The adjective you use, whether 'new generation', 'emerging' or 'up coming' will be really subjective, and will completely depend on what you want to convey.
I personally think what you've said is totally fine!