Are these the qualities of a great PhD student or not?

[InquilineKea]

http://www.quora.com/What-qualities-characterize-a-great-PhD-student?q=qualities+graduate+student

Do you agree or disagree?

[juilletmercredi]

I agree for the most part...graduate school, and academia in general, isn't about brilliance or intelligence. Pretty much everyone who is accepted into the arena has above-average intelligence at least. But even the most brilliant of graduate students won't like the field if they don't have patience or can't stand constructive (or non-constructive) criticism.

And I agree - classes and to a certain extent exams are the easy part. I'm transitioning from qualifying exams to writing my dissertation proposal and coming up with an original idea is the difficult part...I have that I'm fairly certain will be approved, but it takes thinking, reading, writing, and independent thought. No one tells you where to look or what to do. And I feel like it's easier in the sciences (I'm in a social science that behaves like a science), because you're probably working with your adviser's data set and your adviser's tools and your adviser's budget. In the humanities...for y'all it's wide open. where do you even begin?

[StrangeLight]

well, humanities students definitely don't begin thinking about their dissertation proposal after writing their exams. they usually start coming up with an idea and doing research trips (if necessary) during their coursework years. most start with the field of literature and look for gaps in it or ask new questions of old debates.

perseverance is huge. i have not seen much of a correlation between intelligence and completion of a PhD. many smart people get out early, many less-than-brilliant finish their doctorates. i'm not sure i would say that tenacity determines the ability to get a tenure-track job. i think job applicants need carefully crafted application packages, well-connected letter writers and advisors, and sexy dissertation topics. the tenacity only comes in when someone decides whether to keep applying for TT jobs or not after 3-5 years as an adjunct or out of academia.

the ability to communicate is critical for any teacher or researcher. that's pretty simple.

[eco_env]

And I feel like it's easier in the sciences (I'm in a social science that behaves like a science), because you're probably working with your adviser's data set and your adviser's tools and your adviser's budget. In the humanities...for y'all it's wide open. where do you even begin?

I don't think that' entirely true- at least for me. True, I'm using some tools that my advisor already has available, and at least for now I'm relying on his budget to fund the rest of the materials I need, but I still need to figure out what tools I want to use and which I need to get, and what I'll be doing with those tools. and I certainly don't get my data from my advisor.

[Eigen]

For the original article: I mostly agree. I would add that creativity of some sort is important as well- and as similar as Tenacity and Perseverance are, I'd rank it as follows:

1. Tenacity/Perseverance.
   
2. Ability to communicate
   
3. Creativity/Originality
   

I think that last little bit of creativity and originality is really important- if you want to push past the edge of what's been done, you have to have ideas on how to do so- it's a combination of being able to analyze what's been done and see the holes, and being able to come up with ideas to fill the void.

I don't think that' entirely true- at least for me. True, I'm using some tools that my advisor already has available, and at least for now I'm relying on his budget to fund the rest of the materials I need, but I still need to figure out what tools I want to use and which I need to get, and what I'll be doing with those tools. and I certainly don't get my data from my advisor.

I'm going to completely agree with this. What you describe, Juliet, seems fairly typical in the social sciences, but not the sciences. We have funded labs and equipment, but my experiments are usually my own... As are my ideas on what directions will eventually be publishable, and where, and how I want to wrap my work up into a dissertation. We've got a different sandbox to play in, but what we make with it is still ours. My advisor doesn't give me any data, doesn't analyze any of my data, and really doesn't have any protocols prepared for me to follow. That's up to me to go find out from the literature. If I'm lucky and it's something he worked on during his PhD or Postdoc he'll have some good ideas on how to proceed if I approach him- but by and large, it's left up to me.