I'd agree. For e.g. I am an RA on a pan European research project now. (Am a first yr student). A person with a PhD would join a project in my discipline only as Research Fellow, also called Post doctoral fellow and in fact one IS joining this same project as post doc fellow next year. Needless to say, our functions are entirely different.

Post-doc positions (targetted towards publishing, or new research, and/or some teaching) are usually fellowships offered for instance as: ESRC Post Doc grants or British Academy post doctoral fellowships and so on. Sometimes unis do it too. In case of the former, the salary of the fellow is split, usually most coming from the funding council and the rest supplied by the host department. Look up ESRC post docs, or Marie Curie Post Docs, British academy post docs or Leverhulme post docs or even Mellon post docs. Research associate/fellow positions on projects are others ways in which to get a post doc position, but these are not RAs..

RA is what I am right now...

Sorry, had to come back and write a slightly more detailed response to Rosy. Rosy, notice earlier in the thread how I lightened up and called it 'academese'? After reading the disucssions that followed our early chit-chat, I was merely inspired to think on it a bit more. So all I really did was that I added to my 'light' mode earlier with a slightly thought out post, that's all. It still says 'academese' and I still stand by what I said later. In no way does it mean I have lost my sense of humour. We can retain our lightness even when we plough through our thesis chapters on dead people's theories!

I merely thought we could agree/disagree here...

@Rosy: Thanks much!

@Sleepyhead: Yes, that's what I tried to say

@KeepCalm: Researchers are bound to disagree over semantics, so in all, a productive thread :-)

In the sciences/math, obviously the word means to produce a 'complex', i.e. where 'complex' is a noun, not an adjective..

That set aside, I think, when you use it as a *verb* to say (A) "he is complicating the topic", and (B) "he is complexifying the topic", the difference may perhaps be negligible, unless you mean that in the case of (A) it is a largely negative connotation, i.e he is just making things look difficult and in the case of (B) he is adding layers of sophisticated arguments to explain how things are not as simple as they look.

So, an argument that goes "hey ,if you want to got to the party, first find a blue dress, and even with a blue dress you need a headband with tiger paws printed on it, and then you need to sub bathe for 15 hours 65 mins before you go" could be taking as complicating matters..

But, an argument that says "geopolitics in this part of the world must be accounted for/analysed with the help of a multiple contributing factors. For one, one must keep in mind the treaty of XYZ, another thing is the theory of ABC"...this could be a case where the author has added complexity (complexity not as a negative word but as a word to mean more analytical layers) to the argument and hence 'complexified' the situation. Obviously in this case you cant say he has complicated the situation.


That could be one potential way of using the terms differently, not the only way, or the definitive way, but just one possible way

This, is precisely, the language of academese! Magictime, you've made me laugh at the end of a boring day :-) Well expressed!

:-)

Go and read the debate between Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky... the first stressed individual, inner biological developemntal stages, the second stressed the role of society, Both were psychologists. Since then, their differences have been the topic of much discussion, but some have tried to figure out similarities.

What I am trying to say ism oppositions are not always horrid things, sometimes they are fruitful, and they make you think. Try reading Jerry Bruner's piece 'Celebrating Divergence, Piaget and Vygotsky', or try reading Michael Cole on Piaget and Vygotsky...



Have you heard of something called cultural/historical psychology? Social constructionist psychologists? Like BRuner and Cole... These are all scholars who battle with your exact same query and find a solution in the intellectual oppositions :-)

Happy Reading (and be prepared for many mroe of such intelelctual end-of-the-road moments! I/We have it all the time)

I think my uni is actually being kind! We get £88 for 2 hrs and £22 for an office hour as I said, and it seems this is on the high side? But prep time and student time.... arrgh

Hi

Take a look at this thread from some months ago http://www.postgraduateforum.com/threadViewer.aspx?TID=11418

I am very tempted to start discussing horcruxes and similar... but there's too much to say!!

I got mine for IMAX Waterloo early last week :-) 15th was all sold out, btu 16th had a few left, so...

Hi my dept pays £44 per 1 hr of teaching a seminar (PhD students only teach seminars here, we have no undergrads) and £22 for 1 hr of office hour. Usually there are 1 or 2 hours of teaching each term week, and one hour of office hour. So per annum pay amounts to £1k to £2k...

Even I am going after supervision! :-) although my supervision will be nice!

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh!!!!!!!!!!!!! How amazing! I am going tomorrow!!!

I fear the subcontinent has generated many similar posts on this forum recently... am I amused, am I a little embarrassed, am I perplexed?

Naseema, why do you, in your words "want to join PhD"? What do you mean by "beneficial in the future"? Why and how will anyone "suggest you the topic"?