Theses are exercises, rather than "full work"?

Question

Theses are exercises, rather than "full work"?

Does this view hold?

It's a bit vague sometimes, because a thesis is supposed to practice "real work", but since a thesis is often an author's first work of such kind, then I find that expecting it to be "fully professional" is same as asking some other "newbie" to perform like an experienced pro. Thus making me believe more along the lines that even Ph. D. theses ought to be treated as "first of an author's kind" work as opposed to "end-all"s like they often may feel for the author.

Answer 1

The truth, as so often, is somewhere in the middle. No, a PhD thesis is not an exercise in the traditional sense - it's supposed to be a novel, useful contribution to the scientific state of the art. For PhD students that leave research behind after their degree it will typically indeed be the most advanced, most complete piece of research they ever produce. However, for academics that stay longer at university it will often be only a starting point, with more, larger, better work to follow.

Basically, a PhD thesis is a student's masterpiece in the traditional meaning of the word ("A work created in order to qualify as a master craftsman and member of a guild."). It's not necessarily a "masterpiece" in the sense of "the defining piece of work of a researcher", although it might be (most commonly if this researcher quits academia after their PhD).

Answer 2

Your last sentence gets precisely to the point - it is to make the author adopt a new mentality and develop an approach to academic work; the thesis is supposed to be the start of the path, not the end of it. Or maybe a new beginning, if you wish, a new stage in life.

It is an accomplishment and is celebrated accordingly, but it is similar to the first item crafted by an artisan or the first song written by an artist. It is not supposed to be their last, far from it, but more often than not it is special and holds sentimental value to the author.