Seemingly random, but this is bugging me. I’ve seen multiple renditions of the following phrase: “I can’t believe ___ wouldn’t let me ____ simply because I can’t write PhD after my name.”
Can we start a movement to squash the sour grapes? [If I knew anything about wine, I'd potentially have something quite clever to say here. Pretend I did and let's take a moment to chuckle together, friend.] I mean, the petulance of downplaying the rigorous nature of doctoral study in trying to prove you [not you, love, the editorial] actually *are* qualified to do that thing that someone won’t let you do because you aren’t qualified is just maddening. I may be mistaken but earning a PhD is not a matter of learning to write three letters. In the words of one of Cronk’s shoulder buddies: come off it.
April 30, 2012 at 10:18 am
Anyone willing to put themselves through the rigors of a Ph.D. deserve respect because goodness knows, they don’t get paid well enough to reflect their tenacity and hard work. Well, most of them don’t, I mean.
May 4, 2012 at 4:14 pm
True, true, but recently I wrote about the oposite perspective on Peevish Penman. My professor had told me no one is a librarian without a Masters degree. She meant that although I did the same job as librarians with qualifications for five years, I didn’t deserve my job title while my two coworkers did.
I now have the Masters degrees, but I still have a healthy respect for librarians without qualifications. And I agree a Ph.D. should be respected, because on-the-job or in the classroom, knowledge has value when we pursue and achieve excellence in study, especially when it’s well directed.
May 4, 2012 at 4:51 pm
Without a Masters degree in library science or without a Masters? With several librarian friends, I do understand that the job refers to someone with an MS as opposed to a library tech who may do the same job.