The student has, in a word, learned how to learn at a very sophisticated level. The paradox, of course, is that in the course of deep, specialized inquiry, one acquires an intellectual armamentarium that may be of great general utility. The training of the scientific or engineering specialist in fact provides much of what might be termed training for the advanced technical generalist. It is a further paradox that many new graduates do not seem to value this powerful generalist capability - perhaps because their professors seldom value it either. Training for Ph.D.'s in the sciences is best described as apprenticeship.
Graduate students attach themselves early and tightly to individual professors.
The attachment is so tight in most cases that the apprentices identify more strongly with the research group of their professor than they do with the department or even the university of which they are a member. Despite mechanisms to ensure common standards, the nature of the apprenticeship depends strongly on the personality and intellectual style of the individual professor. Candidates for Ph.D.'s in different groups often have very different overall experiences and have to meet differing de facto standards. On balance, the flexibility of this system has served us well. The acceptance of overspecialization, however, often has unfortunate consequences for the new engineer's or scientist's self-image.