Google Books available to buy in India. Great! But…

I just tried my first ebooks sample through play.google.com (Google’s play store). In India, we finally have the ability to buy PlayStore books. They are expensive (really expensive). But still, they are available, which is great. However, I just found out that the Google Play Books (unless a scanned copy is available), do not have the accurate page numbers for academic references. What is ironic is that the book I was testing, was available to preview on Google Books with its academic page numbers (as we’re used to). But not on the Google Play Store. Now, that’s a downer! Why would I pay Rs. 2000+ for a book I cannot cite in my research?

To see what I mean, check out the two links of the sample pages of the introduction.

First link on Google Books (as we would expect google to show its books).

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=JTAHyyZJM4kC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Second link on Google’s play store.

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=JTAHyyZJM4kC&printsec=frontcover&output=reader&authuser=0&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA1

Uncertain

With PhD over, I’m strangely uncertain. For the past few (many, actually) years, my (academic) life has been focused upon one single purpose: finish. Now that I have, I am unsure about the academic trajectory I should be taking.

I know one must think about publishing their thesis. And I’ve already sent my work to one publisher. Plus, I know teaching is an important part of academics, and I already have a job teaching in an excellent seminary (SAIACS).

What I’m unsure about is “what kind of academician do I want to be,” “What kind of teacher I want to be,” “What am I to do with all that I have achieved.” Plus, there’s the feeling that I still don’t know enough… so, “how should I make up for missing knowledge, quickly,” or even, “how soon before my knowledge bank runs out!” are also on my mind.

I think the lack of focus gets me the most. Suddenly I’m missing the most significant part of my (academic) life. Everything else was secondary. Now the secondary has suddenly become primary… and I feel lost.

Anyway… this “lostness” is also causing some confusion about the purpose of this blog. It began with the purpose to telling my old classmates/friends about the process and struggles about getting a PhD. Now suddenly that, that is over, what is the new purpose of this site.

Anyway. My dissertation supervisor feels that these feelings are normal. He even states that once you finish a dissertation, a student is prone to depression and feelings of being a failure. Must say that while I am not in any great struggle… there is some truth in that. Hopefully this is a phase and things will become clearer soon.

Passing my viva

It is truly a big day when a doctoral student passes the viva. It is the final examination of almost a decade’s worth of work (in my instance at least). Everything hangs on how two examiners feel about your work… everything seems to hang on how you answer each and every question not matter how hard (in my case really hard). Still, when they approve your work, and better still say how they liked it, it feels like a huge accomplishment. A vindication. A triumph.

So why am I feeling low?

My supervisor, days after my viva, told me that it was normal for doctoral students to experience a form of depression after submitting their viva. Another PhD colleague vouched for this very thing. I can’t imagine how it makes sense. But neither does my feeling low at this moment.

Somehow I’m filled with feelings of embarrassment, sadness, in-completion and the huge daunting fear of all that lies before. I am overwhelmed.

On one level a PhD feels like an overstatement. Sure it is a big deal… to me. But does that justify the huge celebrations from friends and family all over? I never got these many congratulations even for my wedding! All that attention makes me cringe, and I want to hide.

I also feel a lot of shame. I see the inadequacies of my own work. I see the “hidden faults” that no one else can see (it’s only a matter of time, I think). I feel unworthy… why did I pass, and others (a few) didn’t?

Being overwhelmed about the future is also there. But more specifically, it seems useless/pointless. What will I achieve? Will I truly be significant? I know I will struggle to get my work published… chances are that it will never get accepted for printing. Even so, what else should I be doing? Where truly lies the impact that I want to achieve?

I am exhausted too. I am not motivated to even correct my work. Currently, all I want to do is watch movies. Or day-dream. A busy schedule with many administrative tasks (that my college has assigned to me) doesn’t help. I’m not just busy, but am involved with what seems inane/pointless and the whole PhD seems like a stepping stone… without having worth in itself. I am also getting no time to truly reflect on all this.

Looking back at what I’ve written… perhaps my supervisor is right. I am depressed. :)

He forgot to tell me that this is a phase. So let me pretend that he did say this is just a phase, and let me now wait for this “phase” to pass.

Second draft submitted… without fanfare.

I submitted my second draft of my dissertation without fanfare. When I submitted my first draft for my PreViva, it felt like a really big deal. I had finally finished my work.

But after the grueling PreViva stage, I made several significant edits, and then submitted again. This time it was supposed to be a bigger deal because this draft would go to the external examiners and determine the fate of my work. However, I somehow felt that after this draft, and after the examiners look at it, I would again have to make changes/alterations and it would be the final (third) draft that would be more significant. This draft just feels like a mid-way point.

However I know it is a really big deal. Just didn’t feel like it… because I was feeling cautious. I also enjoyed writing the acknowledgements page… partly because it was good to see free-flowing writing for my dissertation. Sadly, I missed an important name, so will have to correct that when I get the draft back to correct.

I do feel a little scared as well. I was disappointed with the PreViva because the comments were largely structural and there was very little engagement with my content. And I fear that now with specialists (theologians) reading my work, some content problems may arise.  So there is some anxiety within.

Currently, my Viva is set for 10 February.

After PreViva – update

I didn’t realise that it had been almost 6 months since I last wrote here. I have been updating some news on twitter which are displayed on a side-bar in this blog, but I guess there’s nothing like a “post” to update what is happening.

Well… I finished my final draft of my dissertation on the 27th of October, about a month later than I wanted to submit it.  The procedure then was to wait for a month so that the SAIACS doctoral committee could read my work, and then I would face them in a PreViva.

The PreViva was a new addition to the SAIACS doctoral programme. Theis was an opportunity for SAIACS to raise the standard of all doctoral research, in a multidisciplinary setting, before the work was submitted to the external examiners… where I would face my real Viva.

The consequence of me submitted about a month late was that November was (and is) a really busy time at SAIACS and very few people had the time to read my work. So my PreViva was postponed by a few days.

I was a little nervous, because the topic I had chosen was really  broad. But I knew I was happy with the research but was afraid if I had missed something, or some blind spot.

My PreViva was attended by my dissertation Supervisor, Dr. Chris B., through skype from Montreal.

The PreViva began at approximately 10am, and went on till 1:00pm… 3 hours. Then, after people had a day to submit further comments, there was a two hour long meeting going through the comments to consolidate what I would have to address.

I was finally given two documents, a long one giving detailed questions. And a shorter one, with certain points on what the committee felt I should address.

The basic gist was that I had to rewrite my conclusion, which was evidently weak. It wasn’t clear, after reading my conclusion, what I was actually trying to say. I had not covered all the basis (or implications) of my thesis. In view of this, I would have to modify my introduction as well. Plus a few minor points of correction in the middle.

In my view the changes were not drastic, but were still significant. I knew that after the PreViva, my work would be much stronger. And for that I was grateful.

I was a little frustrated at the kinds of questions that were asked… some of them were clearly asked without understanding my work. Still, the overall effect was positive.

Now, I have till January 7, to complete my final draft, for submission to my external examiners. Whoever they be. Hopefully, my external viva will be a month later, in February.

If all goes well, I have only minor corrections, and then I graduate in March. If not, then back to the editing table.

Goodbye McGill

A few weeks ago I got a mail from McGill University’s IT department telling me that on July 1 my McGill University library database id would expire. Since I was only a student at Presbyterian College till July 1, I knew this was inevitable.

The McGill library database was a immense collection of many e-resources that helped me supplement my other research. It was particularly useful when I was in Canada, but more so when I was allowed to extend my use by Presbyterian College for a year.

I used the McGill database primarily for its articles through google-scholar. It had a great feature that when I logged on to McGill, and then opened Google-Scholar, I could see which articles McGill had full-text access to. Apart from that, I really used the ProQuest dissertation database and also some ebooks.

Sadly, since I had been so busy with teaching in June that I wasn’t able to scour the McGill e-files for one-last run for more stuff. And silently it was all gone.

And now, I am a plain old PhD student from India without superpowers! :)

Who should lead the church – Jesus did not choose scholars

That Jesus did not choose only scholars to lead the Church is quite obvious; but of late, it seems that in the western church, scholars are the most influential in the church. Even in India, for anyone looking to make an impact in Indian church must aspire for a theological degree (the higher, the better). However, here’s an interesting article that challenges that mentality in the western context; urging non-scholars to take greater responsibility in the way the Church is going.

http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life/current-events/op-ed-blog/25384-who-should-lead-the-church

A response article in the emerging scholars blog: http://blog.emergingscholars.org/2011/04/jesus-didnt-choose-scholars/#more-4579

My own quick response is that the need for scholars is different from the need to understanding God and His word more deeply. In the Indian context, most lay Christians are satisfied by just listening to their pastors preach; it is their main source of teaching. Even if they have their own bibles, rarely do people study it. Similarly, many pastors are themselves non-scholars, in that they too pass down knowledge that they got from other sources, whether their bible school or their own teachers, without serious study that is necessary to understand God’s word. The answer for India however is not that therefore we need scholars/theologians to run churches, rather more and more people must think theologically/more biblically/be studious about God and His word. Whether these students of God come from the lowest parts of society or the highest, the demand is the same; take God and His word, and His Church, seriously.

In the library

This photo was taken in the SAIACS library, where I have been hard at work on my chapter 4.

One day I’ll look at this picture and marvel at how God led me through this impossible journey.

One day… I hope, I hope.

Subjective Google

In an interesting interview of some high-up Google-guys in wired.com, I came across a quote that is significant to how knowledge is so subjective, especially even in a Google search engine.  In response to how Google is filtering out spam results, or even low-quality content from its search results, Cutts went on to say:

Cutts: In some sense when people come to Google, that’s exactly what they’re asking for — our editorial judgment. They’re expressed via algorithms. When someone comes to Google, the only way to be neutral is either to randomize the links or to do it alphabetically. If we don’t have the ability to change how we rank things to try to improve the search engine, that goes right to the crux of everything.

While most of us would agree that search results need to be filtered, we are often not aware that when we “google” something, we are actually seeing a list that is editorialised by Google. Any search result is therefore not neutral but determined, by a complex algorithm along with user involvement.

Of course other search engines do the same thing. And one of the reasons Google is so successful is because they seem to aim at neutrality as well as quality (a fine line between subjectivity and objectivity). Plus, they still provide the most useful and best search results (compared to what I’ve found in other sites).

So, this is not a critique of Google, just an interest heads up for me… a reminder that there is more subjectivity around us than we think.

Research at Gurukul Lutheran Theological College

I am currently in Chennai doing some supplementary research at Gurukul Lutheran Theological College. Actually the full story is that I am running away from my college so that I can focus for two weeks on writing my chapter four. SAIACS is having so many activities and people asking me for one small thing or another, I really needed to force the issue and get out… to write. But back to Gurukul, I’d heard about this college from my Mentor, but actually had no idea about it. So coming here was a journey into the unknown.

Thanks to google-maps, I found out where it was. Even though I struggled over the one-ways to get there.

The Gate-guard let me in after I said I wanted to go to the library, and even helpfully guided me where I should park my bike.

The library was up, above the auditorium, I think, and so I had to climb a bunch of stairs to get there.

The library itself was a large one hall-size room, with a smaller level up for the archives.There were about four tables for reading/working, in the front, while the stacks were at the back. There were two computers for online catalogues (they used the same software as UTC), but when I did some preliminary search queries, I found it was best to check the card catalogue as well.

While the librarian was not there that day, another person (assistant librarian perhaps?) handled my admission to the library. I had a letter from SAIACS, plus my id card. I had to fill a form, and pay Rs. 50 per week. Also, I had to give a photocopy of my ID card, something I didn’t have on me, so I said I’d do it later.

There were limited plug points though, for computer laptop/notebook purposes, but that is just like UTC.

My first impression was that it was smaller than expected.  Upon glancing on the shelves, there was a lot on Luther and related subjects. So I know where to go, if I want to study Luther!

I immediately found the resources that I needed, which was what was important. And so since so far, the Chennai weather is not too hot, the library itself wasn’t that uncomfortable to study in.  I’ve already made some progress, and so, for now, this trip and library is very much paisa vasool.