Talk:Kandidat nauk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] Outside of Academia

By "accredited institutions outside of Academia" I meant "otraslevye NII". I find it stricken out. I thought it's notable. Any reason of removal?

IMO one could only defend under the patronage of:

  1. Educational Instituion (University, Institute)
  2. any Institute of the Academy of Sciences
  3. "otraslevoy NII" such as NII under "MinSredMash", "MinStroy", etc.

If it could be said better, please do. But we should say it in some way, I think. --Irpen 19:25, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

The following lines were removed from the article:

A little Comment from a Master of Arts(from FSU): the fact is that a Candidate of Science Degree is not equal to Ph.D. at all the degree which is equal is a Doctor of Science Degeree the Soviet Propagada always said that "Candidate of Science = Ph.D and Ph.D is not a true Doctor Degree" just in order to say "our Doctors are smarter" and unfortunetlly conisderable amount of people in fromer Soviet Union (FSU) Countries still believe that Ph.D. is not a true Doctoral Degree :( whoever the major difference between MSc and Candidate of Science is necessity of a Candidate Dissertation as far as I know the Soviet (as well as Tsar's Russian) educational system was made on the base of midevial German so a person graduated from a high school did not have any degree like a bachelor (the system also did not have division of schools to primary and secondary)this graduated person may continue to study in order to get a Candidate Degree

...as these claims are very disputable and doubtful. --V1adis1av 16:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

There is an international group that decides what is equal to what when people accredited in one sphere try to move to another realm. This "roughly" should not exist. I knew of a situation in an American university where a degree (probably this one from the old Soviet Union) was challenged. An international referee who decides these things said it was not equivalent to a doctorate and the person was demoted! I think we need more than an encyclopedia from the old Soviet Union as a reference for this. I don't believe it! Student7 (talk) 23:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
That sentence with "roughly" is not from the GSE. What makes you think it is from there? How could GSE write on "post-Soviet states"? Hence, feel free to add {{cn}} tag there. In case you don't believe, that in Soviet time Ph.D. was equal to Candidate of Science degree, I've added English reference in addition to GSE reference.86.100.231.115 (talk) 01:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plagiarism

I don't think, the part "Plagiarism" is necessary in this article and it is insulting for the Russian and Soviet Science. Plagiarism is possible, of course, as everywhere. But everyone can appeal to the VAK and ask them cancel the kandidat status of plagiator. And there were precedents of it.

"Closed defence" - is a normal common procedure for technical scients. If we did not have closed dissertations everyone was able to find the draft of the nuclear bomb in the hall of Russian State Library :))) . The defence of my kandidat dissertation is planned in this Autumn, so i have idea about all this things.

That is why I consider, the part "Plagiarism" should be deleted --D'Arahchjan 12:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

BTW, closed defence procedure is common in ourdays too (this dissertations are called "Диссертация для служебного пользования" in Russian). Here, on the official site of VAK, you can find the official Act about it (in Russian): http://vak.ed.gov.ru/norm_doc/197/ I'm not an expert, but I think, a similar procedure for secret researches should be in other systems too.--D'Arahchjan 12:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Your deletion reverted. If you know the subject, fix it. The title (deleted) was added by clueles or trollish person. The text itself is valid. The "atomic bomb" issue does not contradict the text. While you are planning "this autumn", I used to know the value of "Kandidats" from Soviet Central Asia. Photocopies from their opuses (I meant opera (no vspomnil kak Petka operu pisal)) used to be hung on message boards of our institution (the First Department, clearly din't unerstand the humor. They thought it was regular scientific announcements. Management, whenever noticed, quietly removed.) `'mikka 18:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Science in poor countries can not be leading. That is a problem of countries, not candidate status (i think thу word "Candidate" or "Candidat" is better).
    • It is problem of soviet union, not "poor countries. `'mikka 23:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
  • the "closed defence" is a very rare procedure. i dont think, that it is necessary to write about it in encyclopedy. Probably there was some corruption here, but it was not necessary . If you have such an opportunity (or even just money), you can order to write a good dissertaion to some scientist and make an open presentation of it.
    • No it was not. `'mikka 23:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I reverted fiends of science.
    • I removed it again. It belongs to VAK, not here. `'mikka 23:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

My sense of encyclopedic style differ from yours. I think, encyclopedy should avoid information, one could not check. Your information about "apparatchiks' defences" seems to be doubtful. I've looked through the "Soviet" part of English Wikipedia, and I've found, that it is very Hollywood-style. I don't have enough time and wish to fihgt against all these cliches.

In case you didn't notice, I deleted the whole section until clarification, because myself I don't want to waste time on digging to prove this. On a personal note, your naivety is not surprizing. There are still people who refuse to believe in Stalin's purges (quite "Hollywood-style" in many cases). `'mikka 17:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Do you really think the anecdote about Putin is needed here?--D'Arahchjan 22:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, I do. It is not about a director of a Uryupinsk teakettle plant. It is a highly visible anecdote and sheds some picture on Soviet Kandidats. `'mikka 23:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed section

In Soviet era there were two forms of presentation: "open defense" and "closed defense". "Open" means that the general public is admitted to the session. "Closed" means nobody is admitted but the immediate participants. The latter is performed when the topic is declared to be a matter of national security. It is widely recognized that "closed" dissertations were often below real scientific merits and arranged for Soviet apparatchiks that were to hold an office that by statute required a scientific degree. The most featured of such cases is the recent accusation in plagiarism against current President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin. According to The Washington Times, large portions of Mr. Putin's Kandidat Nauk dissertation in Economics were taken 'nearly verbatim' from other sources. However the American researchers who initially discovered plagiarism in Mr. Putin's dissertation suggested that this fact should be viewed in the context of Soviet bureaucracy, where an advanced degree was often necessary for career promotion.

The topic belongs to Higher Attestation Commission or other, because it concerns not only cnadidats. Arahchjan, please provide the proper text basing on the Russian source you quoted here. `'mikka 23:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)