text:
Is a professor required to provide homework solutions?
For graduate school classes, if a professor writes his own homework questions and creates his own problem sets, is he required to provide solutions to the homework problems, after the homeworks have been turned in and graded by his teaching assistant(s)?

Leaglly, or maorally? Are you there to teach?

If, after you've attempted to solve such a problem, you find that you cannot, or that you do not understand what's being asked, first re-read the relevant material.  If that doesn't work, ask the professor during office hours.  You are a graduate student; you should not expect your professors to spoon-feed you.

The detailed solutions should exist, so that the professor can provide them in case of any complaints. I'm not sure about uni courses, but there has been trouble with contests and olympiads, where the 'official' solutions turned out to be incomplete or too complicated for the contestants' level

Required by whom?

The answer to "is a professor required to do X" is essentially always "no".

I guess they are not required but if they already have the solution I don't see why not provide it.  It aids in the learning process.

Just as a counterpoint I have had graduate mathematics courses where there were lists of problems in the book but no answer key or instructor's textbook containing the answers.  In those cases we would work out problems with the professor that we had trouble with in class or office hours.  Grading was usually random, in that for 10 problems assigned  two would be used for grading, you just didn't know which two.  I guess my point is that the assumption that there is an answer key to provide you might not be the case.  So, if you have questions ask them!

Why should it make a difference if the professor writes the homework questions?

@Paparazzi: It's true that a solution aids in the learning process. However, sometimes graded tasks are just not part of the learning process.

The Prof should be able to provide solutions to any level of detail on any work he or she sets .There are some profs that would fail thier own exams and there are students who know this.

@Ukko: "Grading was usually random, in that for 10 problems assigned  two would be used for grading, you just didn't know which two." - I think this might be legally problematic depending on the jurisdiction.

In many places it is obligatory to provide solutions to exams, so the question is not unreasonable. @Schmuddi "It's true that a solution aids in the learning process" is debatable. Students may feel that solutions help them, but they might be wrong. I intentionally don't provide solutions for most problems I pose because I feel that it is important to learn to tell when one has solved a problem correctly, and that having doubts about the correctness of a solution is usually a good indicator that one has more to understand.

@O.R.Mapper that is interesting, what would the legal problem be?  Is has been 20 years since I was a grad student but it happened to me often enough.

@Ukko: The legal problem could start when a student solves six out of ten problems, fails, and then goes on to sue the university because - as they claim - they wasted precious time on non-graded problems that they could otherwise have used to find the correct solutions for the two graded problems.

@O.R. Mapper: The practice of grading some but not all of the problems is fairly common in my circles.  On the other hand, I don't know anywhere in the world in which a lawsuit against a university for the way the homework is graded could be taken seriously by the courts.  I have to admit that from my cultural perspective this sounds prohibitively unlikely, to say the least.  If you have relevant information or experiences to share, I would be very interested.

There are cases where open research questions are listed as exercises; the professor may just be hoping that someone figures out an answer.

No. The professor gets to decide if it would be more beneficial for students' learning to provide full solutions, partial solutions, or no solutions to homework problems.

Frankly, invoking "more beneficial for students' learning" seems overkill. The professor gets to decide whether they want to provide solutions or not; they don't have to be motivated by which option is most beneficial for students' learning.

Seems relevant, as this would be the criteria under which the professor would be required to defend their policy to the Dean, should a student complain.

You seem to be asserting that no department or university in the whole world has a policy that solutions must be provided to students. I'd be very surprised if nowhere has such a policy.

@NajibIdrissi Sure. I wasn't sure myself whether I should vote to close on grounds that it depends on an institution's own regulations or answer that it depends on an institution's own regulations.

@Morgen: I think it's very unlikely it would get that far.  Should a student complain, I would expect that a dean would simply tell them "this is a pedagogical decision which the professor is entitled to make at their own discretion", and the professor would not be required to defend it at all.

@Nate Eldredge Like so much of this question, it's highly dependent on the institution. Assuming the worst case in terms of openness (a highly cloistered private institution), the child of a big donor would expect to be able to raise this concern. Public institutions would likely be a bit more open, if for no other reason than to safeguard their reputation in the internet age. Assuming the professor has a reason behind their decision, framing their response in terms of student benefit makes the most sense.

@DavidRicherby OP asked a general question, so he/she received the correct general answer, which is that as a general rule professors are not required to provide HW solutions. By analogy, if somebody were to ask me "do humans have green skin?" I would simply answer "no" and not bother to qualify my answer with caveats about some hypothetical insane person who might be in the habit of coloring their skin green.

@JackAidley I understand this answer and your comment, but those exact motivations made me question previously why (in some countries/states/counties) you are  obliged to attend classes, to wait until a specific date to take exams

Low quality answer; not satisfied.

This is entirely up to the policies of the university or department in question, and is likely to vary between disciplines. In the areas I'm most familiar with (STEM subjects as taught in the UK and, to a lesser extent the US), I'm not aware of any places where professors are obliged to provide solutions, though, in my experience, they usually do in at least some form. That might be by handing out printed solutions, or holding classes to go through the problems, or both, or something else. However, in arts subjects, where assignments are typically "Write an essay about subject X", there isn't really any such thing as a "solution" and one would presumably expect feedback about one's essay, rather than being given an example of a "correct" essay.

Even in arts, format can be of dire importance to an assignment and there can certainly be correct solutions over wrong solutions. Both Scriptwriting and indeed essay writing come to mind.

"This is entirely up to the policies of the university or department in question, and is likely to vary between disciplines." So you're saying that there are some universities in which professors in some disciplines are required to give solutions to homework problems in graduate courses and professors in other disciplines are not?  I don't know any institution where this is a requirement, so I'd like to see an example of this claimed non-uniform treatment.

@PeteL.Clark "So you're saying that there are some universities in which professors in some disciplines are required to give solutions to homework problems in graduate courses and professors in other disciplines are not?" No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm just saying (honestly, rather vacuously) that it's up to any particular department to choose its policy on this. For all I know, all departments in the world have chosen the same policy.

-1 because I don't see the point of a logically correct but most likely vacuous answer. Saying "it depends" when you don't actually know that "it depends" in a practical, real life sense is taking nitpicking to an extreme even by the rather permissive standards of academia.se.

@DanRomik So vote to close the question as being unanswerably broad.

No, I think the question is answerable, and @Johanna's answer is the correct one.

As a quasi-answer, I'd note that for all the (university, math) classes I've taught in the last 20+ years (that is, especially after the internet...) I've provided extensive "discussion/approved-solutions" to all homework and/or exam questions, at both undergrad and grad level. Mostly, this is to show an (attempted) model for writing style, format, tone, assumed context, etc. It is only incidental to make some point about why grading was as it was, which in my view is a very minor thing. E.g., I strive to resist publicizing "grade distributions" in graduate math classes, because it creates false goals, false comparisons. I do also try to emphasize the good features of attempted discussions/solutions, rather than "failings", although, of course, the latter have to be examined... and, hopefully, students want to learn why/how they're missing a/the mark.
Also, I did wish to demonstrate irrefutably that the issues I asked student to address could be easily, fluently, in-finite-time, no fudging, no weaseling, be persuasively answered from an expert viewpoint... hoping that I do manage that on most days. :)
It seems to me that implicit in the question is a sort of quasi-litiginous attitude, that there should be an objective standard [sic] against which students can compare the grading [sic] of their attempts, to possibly argue against loss of "points". Also, there's the confounding of "assessment" with "education/feedback". I am aware that in the UK the math exams are legally required to be vetted months in advance by people at other universities. Certainly an arguable cover-your-@$$ scheme, but really very silly and resource-wasting, apart from substantially insulting to very erudite and scholarly math faculty. But that's the kind of system you'd get if/when faculty prerogatives were sufficiently weakened (e.g., in comparison to most U.S. math situations).
Although I do try to remind myself, and my students, that education, not assessment, is the goal, The System (in the U.S., and let's not talk about current events) seems evermore to declare the opposite (since it is potentially rendered numerical, etc., I guess).
I have also been told by colleagues both local and otherwise that putting good solutions-to/discussions-of the standard, iconic questions on-line "ruins things". My response is that there will certainly be bad solutions/discussions on-line, and I'd like to further education by providing good solutions on-line... rather than perpetuating some cycle of bad-online-solutions-getting-bad-grades-for-incomprehensible-reasons...
But to require faculty to spend their time creating good discussions? Impossible, in research unis in the U.S., these days, where the main measure for salary raises each year has nothing to do with teaching, course notes, discussions/solutions, etc. To require a person to do a thing which is counted as 0 or negative in their "performance review" would be bizarre. If anything, spending time on course materials is viewed as a "loser" activity, low-status, etc. So, duh, certainly not "required".
But that should not have really been the question, I think. The question should have been about whether experts should divulge models for competent function, versus keeping them a "guild secret". To that, the answer is "yes".
:)

I agree with your comments, it sounds like you really care about teaching the students.  However, we all know that there are some lazy professors who want to re-use homeworks and tests.  They don't give out answer keys because they don't  want future students to have access to it.

@NuclearFission, ah, yes, I know this all toooo well. :)

@Nuclear fission, there is another connected issue: some professors are afraid of providing answers to problems that might be shown to be wrong by students. And this is not an unlikelly situation.

Once you're beyond undergraduate level I think that  (at least in many cases) there can be a solid argument for saying to students "If you can't convincingly justify why your answer is right, why should it be considered an answer at all?". The student needs to progress beyond a secondary-school mindset at some point and actually move toward the world they're trying to prepare for -- one without a set of ideal solutions, where you have to convince people why what you did is correct.
That's not so say there's less work for the person teaching them; some kind of in depth feedback about the suitability of the justification of the answers is needed; in an academic setting the work and the value of the justifications offered should be discussed, either verbally (analogous to the feedback from a presentation or seminar) or in writing (analogous to feedback on a paper), albeit at a somewhat lower level than those activities -- such feedback can come from peers and people in the role of mentors (the professor and any assistants for example) - one or the other or both, as suits the nature of the activity.
There's not enough detail in the question to tell whether the nature of the particular activity is a case which is better fitted by requiring students to convincingly justify their answers as part of answering the question with no ideal solution to be provided, or whether it's better fitted by giving them solutions.
[Actually I think some of this kind of thing should come in much sooner, at least in the later part of undergraduate level work -- since many students who graduate and go into the workforce will be in a similar position of having to justify why their work is correct without there ever being "correct answers" available. They should have some actual practice at this in their education. On the other hand I recognize that sometimes there are policies in place which could make this more difficult with undergrads.]
On a somewhat indirectly related note -- at least for mathematically related subjects, giving students numeric solutions before they have answered the questions themselves often seems positively harmful. It very often leads students to abandon thinking about the characteristics of the problem in any deep way in favor of trying random things until they happen to match the solution, without actually coming to any kind of understanding of what they're doing; their focus is on getting the specific number in this particular instance rather than on the comprehension of ideas needed for dealing with that kind of problem.

I'm sure the actual requirements vary.  There isn't just one standard that applies worldwide.  (Or even city-wide, in the city where I live.)
As the Lead Instructor of a college department, let me tell you what was required of me:

show up
teach students
give students grades
other minor amounts of requirements, like bi-monthly meetings which I viewed as nothing more annoying than relatively minor inconveniences
Have a mid term
Have a final exam
have quizzes (the number of them were up to me)

I was given a list of topics I was required to discuss.  I was required to discuss each of those approximately 12 topics for 5 minutes each.  The rest of the class time was entirely at my discretion.
If I wanted to have more tests or fewer tests, that was okay.  If I wanted to have sessions where I answered questions before an exam, or after the exam, that was okay.  I could even give away answers during an exam, if I wanted to.  I'm not saying that would necessarily be a good idea, but what I am saying is that I totally had the flexibility to handle things the way I wanted to.  If I wanted to answer questions outside of class time, I could, but there was no requirement to.
If a student demanded answers, I could provide answers, if I wanted to.  However, if I decided to do something different instead, I could.  For instance, if I wished to focus on the college's goal of instilling professionalism, and discourage an unwarranted sense of entitlement, I could say that the student had no right to control me, and so I was not required to give answers.
So, based on my experience, I would assume that the professor has no such requirement unless there is a (probably written) policy that imposes such a requirement on the professor.  Requirements could come other ways: there were people with authority over me, and if you got the college president to give me an order then I would be required to do that.  But, otherwise, no.  Instructors can potentially have a fairly large amount of freedom.
Just to give another experience, though, in a different college, I recall hearing a math instructor explain that she covered only the information that she was told to.  Every math instructor in the college had the same orders from the Math Department, and every day each instructor was supposed to cover the exact same questions (from the book) as every other instructor.  This instructor described a whole lot less freedom than what I experienced as an instructor (which is why I stated the first two sentences that I did).

No! But considering that feedback is a important part of self evaluation you probably should give some feedback other than grades. Giving out at least some answers can be of great help.
This is a bit of a two edged sword. On the otherhand students should know how they were graded, to check for mistakes. So they should be able to evaluate this somehow, even in the case that they are failing badly. But then you can nolonger recycle the questions as easily and some students take the short route to passing.
In any case make sure the policy is well defined.

First, it depends very much on the level of the class.
When I taught junior high and high school, I naturally went over solutions to major problems and tests in detail in class. Not that many students take it seriously, but we try. Providing model solutions and teaching students how to write properly is a vital part of their education. Those of you who try to teach undergraduates, and those of you undergrads who have survived the trial by fire of leaving high school and meeting some slightly more real expectations, know that coaching students only to check the right box on multiple choice is deadly.
As has been pointed out above, giving numerical solutions and worse yet evaluating only those same numerical solutions is anti-educational; the learning process is directly short-circuited and the students go directly to copying the answer. "Giving answers" in that case means turning the whole process into a silly meaningless ritual and is to be avoided.
On the other hand, I took an excellent seminar in advanced combinatorics with the professor and author Kenneth Bogart, since tragically killed by a car. He was to be my advisor :-(
In that seminar, we used a book on "problems in combinatorics" and nobody, professor or student, knew the "right answer". The goal of the class was to explore problems and to develop methods of solution when faced with the unknown. I well remember one day when the professor had left us with four or five problems to work on over the weekend. He asked if anyone had found a solution to #2. Three of us, out of six, raised our hands. He asked the first student to share his results. This was a stellar student, winner of many prizes. He came up to the board and wrote out a solution containing many strange symbols and a new function of his own invention. As far as we could follow at that speed, it was a good proof. Then the second student shared his results. He was a very smart and hard-working guy and had clearly spent the weekend in the library doing research. He wrote out his proof and referenced five theorems by five different authors nobody had before heard of. As far as we could follow the twists and turns of reasoning at that speed it was a good proof. Then I, and adult student, single mother returning to school after a few decades, went up to the board. I drew boxes. And boxes within boxes. I did a placement and counting argument. The professor was happy with all the answers; so happy with my style in fact that he asked to be my advisor.
The point of the anecdote is that chasing after the mythical "right answer" is like chasing after unicorns. After you master rote arithmetic in elementary school -- and hopefully you get some problem-solving teaching even before that, starting early in primary school -- the topic of the math class is NOT chasing "right answers", the topic of the class is the PROCESS of using logical connections to solve problems. The answers in the back of the book are just a by-product of knowing how to solve problems.
Many people have reacted to this post more or less negatively. Clearly a lot of them feel a distaste with the question. They may not be able to articulate why they feel that distaste but it is there. Having spent my entire career in teaching at all levels, I have realized what the issue is. Elementary students and alas many secondary students being crammed for SAT's and far far too many underprepared teachers (most North American teachers last took a math class in Grade 10 and barely passed the terminal general level even then) and parents raised the same way. by poorly prepared teachers with bad curricula, all think that they must fill in "right answers" and do it snap-snap-snap at speed. This of course is antithetical to learning something in depth, to profound reasoning, to development of useful problem-solving skills for any career, or to any useful retention. Better secondary teachers and most university professors try to change this attitude but it is often too little, too late.
So the question is based on a false hypothesis. Hypothesis: Mathematics consists of a rigid set of procedures and formulas and there is a secret list of "right answers" to all and every question; Conclusion, professors, teachers and instructors must be forced to reveal the secrets to students instead of keeping them as a mystery that only they know, because we must nowadays be democratic and open up the sacred mysteries.
Answer: sorry, there is no secret book of "right answers". You are asking the wrong question.
The first question, as has been pointed out above, is "Is this person qualified to teach this subject?" This has to be judged overall; everyone has varied strengths and weaknesses and will be able to do more in some areas than others, but unfortunately yes there are some people out there who should not be in this position. If a high school math teacher cannot answer 90 percent of the questions in the textbook they are teaching, no they should not be there. Yes I have met several. And these are the people who seriously mislead students by rote copying of numerical answers.
The second question is "What am I supposed to be learning to do here?" I had one student in a college upgrading class who was brilliant in arithmetic and logic but absolutely refused to do algebra. He would never write an equation with an x, but instead wrote pages of closely argued logic and calculations. He got the "right answer" in the sense that his numbers agreed with the back of the text. He would have been a gem in a grad school class, if he could have gotten over this mental block. After the first test when he protested being marked down, I re-wrote every test question to be sure to say "Write an equation and solve it." No, he simply would not. I had to give him an F in Algebra because he would never do any algebra. A real pity and a great loss. It is the PROCESS you are meant to be learning, and in a calculus class you had better be using derivatives, in a linear algebra class matrices, in a Euclidean geometry proof theorems and deductions, and so on. So make sure you understand what processes you should know and how they are to be applied.
The third and final question to ask is "How do I know if my work is right or wrong, good or bad?" Way way back in elementary school, back in the Dark Ages when I was a child, we had an excellent arithmetic program which included plenty of problem-solving techniques and a host of methods for checking your own answers. When we reached basic algebra we were supposed to check our solutions to equations and show the check. Of course as children we hated it; it was so much writing and so tedious and what a waste of time. Luckily our teachers persisted. By the time I was in senior high school I was rarely dependent on either a teacher or an answer key to know what was going on. This dependence on an outside authority to validate you is another thing that irritates the people answering here.
So again, you are asking the wrong question based on a faulty hypothesis concerning what math and education are all about. It's a common enough false hypothesis.  If you are a young student trapped in the system and it is your teachers feeding you this false hypothesis, very sorry, do the best you can, and read as much as you can outside of class and solve problems on places like SE to dop some real learning. It does get better. If you are already past the basics, well, sometimes we have to change our worldview. it is a real wrench at times but worth the effort. Anybody who has made it to advanced math probably remembers a wrench or two learning to look at things a new way and we are here to help.

Yes, I'd agree that the real sense of the question (as opposed to the superficial-literal question) needs several hypotheses which are not necessarily correct. Arguably seriously misguided-incorrect.

The other answers have considered legal and pedagogical aspects, maybe sufficiently. I'd like to add another perspective: resource allocation.
Professors (at least in my country, might differ in yours) have a host of duties, including

research,
education,
(university) politics,
supervision of PhD students,
writing various reports and reviews on all kinds of things
(scientific as well as non-scientific), and
general management of the department.

It is simply impossible to pursue all these duties to perfection. Hence one of the most important decisions to be made by each professor is that of resource allocation: which fraction of his (and his employees') limited time does he or she devote to which of his duties?
Even if the professor fully believes that providing comprehensive solutions to homework problems would be desirable from a didactical point of view, it may still be a completely valid decision not to do so in order to perform better at other tasks. On a side note, I highly doubt that any dean would question such a decision.

Here are my answers to each of the questions I think you're asking.

No, they aren't required, unless it's somewhere in your school policy--it's worthwhile to consider whom you think would do the requiring. I can't see most schools micromanaging their profs like that.
No, I don't think they should be required, either administratively or philosophically. After all, the real point of the homework is the process.
I do think it's wise for them to have the solutions ready, if they've made up their own problems, just to make sure they haven't flubbed something. Also, I think that, if I were teaching, I'd want to post the final answers. Again, the real point is doing the work to get to the answers, so posting the solutions gives students the chance to check their work and correct it before turning it in. That way the grade reflects what they've learned rather than where they started. (Along the same lines, I think that, ideally, homework should be attempted and graded at least twice, so the student can really engage in a feedback cycle with the material.)
While having the solutions available can give you reassurance, you have the whole Internet (including this site!) to forge your way, and I can't tell you how lucky that is. I think you're more nervous about letting go of that safety rope, and you don't need it. Strike out on your homework confidently, and know that, pretty soon, you won't be concerned if the solutions aren't available.
The best change I've made between graduating from undergrad in 2003 and starting grad school in 2016 is to use office hours like I'm the only student in the class. The difference between me at 21 and me at 35 is huge, and it's because now, I'm working full time and I have a family, so I'm paying for school with my own money and eking out every minute I can to spend in class and on homework. I do not waste my time, so if I don't understand, I ask a question in class. I don't care if it sounds stupid, or if everybody else knows it because my background is different than theirs, or if it's a little esoteric. If I need it to understand, I ask. Then I go to office hours and ask questions after class--last semester I went to my prof's office with questions after every single class.

Very similar to what I was saying in my answer, and my experience as an adult student as well. Great.

If a student (almost finishing graduate one, but still one) can give his opinion, I think professors should give solutions, at every level.
If you consider them still students that have to do a homework, I think you will agree that they are still learning, still in the need for an explanation. So yes, after grading them, I think you should give the solution with the full reasoning that led to it, doing it live in a session if possible.
No, no rules are obliging you to do that, but as a professor I think your main interest is in how much the students learn, and the best way for them to learn is to let them try and after show what is the right way, to highlight their mistakes.
EDIT (to address the comments):
In Italy, where I study, every professor has a lot of liberty in the courses he gives. Every degree refers to a council where all the professors and some students (me and other two) decides about the rules and usually the content and the way a course is held (homeworks, written exams, oral exams etc) is decided mostly by the professor that gives the course. Some modifications, mostly about the content, can be started by the council, but it has really low power on the way the couse is given, on the material provided. If a professor would give homeworks without solutions, they could really do nothing about it because there is no rule that allow them to act, the professor has total control over his courses.

"If a student (almost finishing graduate one, but still one) can give his opinion, I think professors should give solutions, at every level." This does not address the question.  "No, no rules are obliging you to do that" This does, but not in a way that adds to the other answers and comments.  Can you provide any additional information about in what settings faculty are not required to provide solutions to problems?


text:
Will resercher lose funding for taking maternity leave?
According to Rhiannon Pugh tweet.

I'm sad that the funding we were successfully granted has been revoked because I am going on maternity leave and apparently an extension to account for this is beyond the remit of the funders. It's hard to win funding, to have it taken away again after so much work is gutting

I haven't lived in Sweden for more than 10 years, but are these kind of things legal?
Especially in Europe/EU.
My friend is an assist. prof in Czech Republic and the only thing that was different during her maternity leave is that she received 80% salary.

This will be down to the conditions stipulated by the controllers of the funding, ask them.

@SolarMike but isnt usually there PI and coPI? she claims PhD students will lose funding as if she is only  advisor. Sound strange. is it possible?

Are twitter posts a contract or more of a rant? much may be strange but the funders have policies which they abide by, until you know what those policies are what can you say?

@SolarMike do you have any evidence that in Sweden is ok to discriminate base on maternity?

I am not saying anything is ok.... But until you read the policies you know nothing.

The question and the body text don't seem to agree what the question is.

I think it is discrimination against someone who cannot perform a study which was funded. Which would be most likely legal.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
I was sexually assaulted by a professor writing me a LOR for grad-school applications. What should I do?
I’m a foreign student currently applying to extremely competitive doctoral programs in the US. Recently, one of the professors writing a letter of recommendation sexually assaulted me. I live in a country where things like this, when reported, are usually unpunished and even more difficult for the victim. I’m currently deciding what to do, all while trying to get my applications done and finishing up my last semester of my master's program. To put it bluntly, my life is currently hell.
Severe trauma and everything aside, I’m really trying not to let this derail my academic career. My question is, would it be possible for me to contact the universities that I’m applying to and ask them if I could submit just two instead of the required three letters of recommendation? With some deadlines less than a week away, I’m worried that this professor might write a bad LOR to try to keep me out of academia, or threaten me with it. Most importantly, it’s too late for me to find another professor to write my letter of recommendation at this point in time (unless I can explain the situation to them, but even then, that would be extremely difficult).
However, I’m also wary of spinning what might seem like a sob story to admissions committees, even though this is not my intention at all. I’m not sure how something like this would be viewed in the US. Please, I would appreciate any advice on this matter.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

That's really awful, and I'm so sorry someone whose job it is to help you instead put you in this difficult position.
When you applied for your masters program did you have strong letters from professors at your undergraduate school?  While all things being equal it is better to get letters from people who have interacted with you more recently, having one letter that's only a year or two old should be fine.  Since those professors already wrote you a letter, there's a good chance that they'd be able to update it and resend it easily.  This may be more practical than getting a totally new person on such short notice.  It also seems clearly better than only having two letters.

Note that in many countries you don't need letters to apply to a Master's program.

I'm very sorry about what you're going through. The key to the answer I'm about to offer to your question is the following general observation: the people in academia are not robots. Despite how it looks from the outside, all these rigid rules and deadlines that we have were made by humans and were designed to serve specific purposes. When we judge that the purposes are not served by these rules, it is often possible for us to ignore or bend them, within certain constraints of law and common sense.
With that said, here's a way I suggest to handle the situation that will leave you with a fighting chance of having your grad school applications be considered seriously in this application round. The most urgent thing you should do is write an email ASAP to the programs you are applying to, in which you explain that you were involved in a serious and irredeemable confrontation with one of the professors writing your LORs. You don't have to explain the precise nature of the confrontation (I don't have a strong feeling about whether it will be to your advantage to explain it, and there are obvious privacy and even legal issues that may make it problematic to share too many details), but either explain it, or if not, do your best to stress how severe the situation is and make it clear that you are a victim, not an instigator, of the conflict. I.e., find a way to make sure they understand that "something really bad happened, and it wasn't my fault" and sound sincere without providing details that are too sensitive for you to want to mention.
Then explain that as a result, your LOR from that person (assuming it is even sent) has become invalid, and say that you would like to make two unusual requests, which are, first, that they give you a deadline extension to allow you to obtain another reference, and second, that they discard any LOR that may be sent by the professor with whom you are in conflict without looking at it.
In the email, emphasize that you are only asking for an exception to the rules due to the extreme and unavoidable nature of the situation, and emphasize that you will still submit your application and all other materials on time by the original deadline, so that the amount of rule-bending you are asking for is as absolutely minimal as possible.
In parallel to sending the email, start looking for an alternative letter writer ASAP. Ideally it would be someone who you think would be sympathetic to your situation and whom you would feel comfortable confiding in (I imagine a female professor might be more likely to answer that description, for obvious reasons). It may be that you would find someone sufficiently understanding that they would be willing and able to write the letter on short notice, as others have suggested, which would allow you to even meet the original application deadline; I certainly can imagine myself helping you in precisely such a way in a situation like this.
Finally, in this answer I wrote to a somewhat analogous question I also suggested trying to find a local ally such as the department chair who could also contact the places you're applying to and advocate on your behalf, since you are making unusual requests which the places you are writing to may feel inclined to ignore. That situation involved something much less serious than a sexual assault, but the advice may still apply (though in your situation a tricky bit is the problem of how much information you're willing to share; if you do not want to talk about the sexual assault that makes things potentially more difficult).
Good luck! I can't be certain that what I'm suggesting will help, but I don't think you're asking for all that much given the circumstances, and think there's a reasonably good chance the people you write to will be accommodating to your requests. One last remark is that I don't think it makes sense to ask the departments to waive the requirement of three letters and ask if they would allow you to submit just two. The problem is that this would make it impossible to compare you with the other applicants on a level playing field, which would create an ethical and perhaps legal dilemma for the admissions committee, with the likely result that they would be forced to reject your application even if they may be sympathetic to your problem and wish to help. But I'm not completely sure about this point - if anyone else can offer more authoritative advice on this issue that says something else then I'm open to being convinced.

You want to send the email to the person in charge of graduate admissions at the school you're applying to.  Hopefully the department lists this info clearly on the grad admissions webpage.  For example, my department has a dedicated email address for inquiries from potnentil grad students.

Faculty aren't robots but the application management systems we use are. Many systems won't show incomplete files by default, and manual intervention is needed.
Either get a short (or older) third letter from a  previous faculty member, or contact the director of graduate studies or your presumed future advisor at the school you're applying to. You can ask to speak in the phone if that is less triggering than writing it out.
And, please think seriously about filing a sexual assault claim. In the notable cases that have come out of the Smithsonian or UC Berkeley, one brave woman making the initial claim resulted in many more women emboldened to also make claims against what turned out to be a serial perpetrator. Both cases resulted in the perp leaving academia. You can wait to do this until after you've gotten into your new school (within statute of limitations). Do this only if you feel safe and strong enough to do this, though.
Justice can be served.

I removed this entire comment thread, as it was entirely tangential to the answer itself. Please use upvotes and downvotes to indicate agreement, and take side discussion to [chat].

@eykanal: While lengthy discussions in comments are justifiably deleted, isn't it normally considered good practice on this site (or at least an often-uttered wish) that downvoters leave their reason for downvoting in a comment? (By the way, I fail to see how comments directly criticizing statements made in the answer can be "tangential to the answer".)

Would you feel safe and otherwise be able to defer to the next application period? If so, you could develop a diplomatic illness (a fake illness for purposes of saving face) that prevents going ahead this cycle. Next cycle, get a different reference. That would simplify your life a bit for the next few weeks - concentrate on finishing your current program and dealing with the trauma, and do the applications next year.
If you, understandably, really want to get the applications done this cycle, I suggest a two part strategy. Immediately look for a new reference, and ask for letters ASAP. For those applications that are due too soon for that, tell them something a bit less dramatic than the truth, but in the right direction: "I recently had a personal interaction with the professor who was going to be my third reference that makes me uncomfortable interacting with them. I will get a third LoR as soon as I can."
Since your application will presumably be weaker, and may be automatically rejected from some programs, without the letter from the offending professor, you may need to consider applying to one or more less competitive programs.
Obviously, if you do decide to report the assault you can be more direct, but your decision on that must take into account local conditions and attitudes.

In the context of looking for another reference, I agree with Noah Snyder's suggestion of going back to the references for the previous application.

Conversely, I agree that your second paragraph is a very good idea for any deadlines that are missed.

@PatriciaShanahan As I commented under Noah Snyder's answer, in many countries you don't need letters to apply to a Master's program.

I suggest you ask References #1 and 2 to ask the admissions committees to disregard Reference #3.  If you feel comfortable communicating to them what happened, great; if not, you could just say you had a falling out with him but don't have time to find a third reference at this time.  (And if one of them asks a colleague to serve as a substitute reference, so much the better.)
Consider taking some incompletes in some or all of your courses.  Protect your safety by being escorted by friends, classmates, campus security, whatever it takes to avoid leaving yourself vulnerable to a second attack. Find a women's organization that can help you with self care.
If you wish to communicate what happened to the departments you're applying to, you may.  Nothing is accomplished by sweeping it under the rug and pretending it didn't happen.

Could you elaborate why you are suggesting taking an incomplete in some courses?

@Aditya - OP wrote, "I’m currently deciding what to do, all while trying to get my applications done and finishing up my last semester of my master's program. To put it bluntly, my life is currently hell." OP needs to process the recent trauma.  There's nothing to be done about the application deadlines, but it could be helpful to get some wiggle room for finishing the semester.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Can someone ever be accused of self-plagiarism after the course is over?
I submitted a philosophy essay to a professor for his 2nd year class that was almost the same as an essay I submitted to a TA for the same professor's 1st year class.
I thought that I had authorization from my professor but I recently discovered that I needed permission in writing. It's been almost 4 years now and I graduated last year...can I get in trouble for this/get my degree revoked? Would the university have kept a record of my assignments from both first and second year? Would this written permission only be submitted between the student and the professor or does the university keep the letter/email on record?
Any info on the types of penalties that could result from this would also be appreciated.
Thanks in advance for any insight.

Heh. What you should really be admonished for is taking a class in second year that an assigned essay from first year was satisfactory. (big wide grin) Admonish! Stretch yourself and take a class that requires different material! (kidding, trying to add levity)

In theory, you could get in trouble for this, but the risk is very low.  Universities generally retain the authority to change grades and revoke degrees forever, at least when matters of academic dishonesty are involved.
However, nobody is likely to be looking over your old work to find this.  It probably doesn't even exist in recorded form any more.  So I see little cause to concern yourself, especially if this was a product of a misunderstanding.

Agreed. It probably doesn't exist at all —My university requires records to be kept for two years, although for accreditation stuff we may keep student work for longer. But 4 years later, even if they do notice, they'd probably just assume the student had professor permission to reuse.

As others have commented, it is possible but unlikely for you to get in trouble this far out from the course.
It is worth noting that most academics do not have that much time or energy to focus on plagiarism cases this far removed. It should really have been flagged earlier in the process and rarely is it brought up again later.

Objective parties don't seem to be able to assuage your concern very effectively.  Have you thought about how you might exorcise this particular anxiety so that you can move on?
Here's an idea:
Write to the instructor of the course where you turned in the rehash of the previous work, and make some proposals for an alternate project you could work on over December and January, to substitute for the one you are concerned about.
The other thing you could consider would be a few sessions of a special type of therapy called EMDR.  It's very helpful for getting out of one specific thing one is stuck on.
Edit

I've tried to get a hold of my professor but he is retired now and the TA from the first year class is apparently no longer a TA. Not really anything I can do. It's unlikely to be a thing but just wanted to see what advice I could get. Thanks for the insight.

@ATomz - Well, if you find you are still having trouble moving on from this, perhaps you could approach the person who currently teaches the course.  The reason I've focused on this aspect, the how to move on, is that I noticed you asked several versions of the same question.  That suggested to me that you might be somewhat stuck.  If I am mistaken, so much the better!

Yeah, you're right. It's just a hard question that I haven't got a straight answer for and even the school registrar's office and my old academic advisor say it's "unlikely" and "up to the prof" and not really any definitive answers to give me peace of mind. It's these kinds of things that are hard for me to move on from with the small chance that it could happen in the back of my mind. I'm not a fan of gray areas and I'm kind of angry that the university doesn't have measures in place to prevent dilemmas like this. I almost registered in another course proactively in case I lose the degree.

The only solution I can think of other than taking another course would be the fact that they would have to prove it with the two essays as evidence. Although they have the two essays, they can't really prove the professor deducted marks off the essay to make it more fair to other students, or if there was another revised/new essay submission of mine at the time that their negligence caused them to misplace and would show that the professor isn't remembering the circumstances correctly. I would argue that these things can only be fully proven at the time of the fact....

I gave you a funny picture to give you some perspective.  Please review my specific suggestions.

Haha, thanks for that. But it kind of makes it worse since it's saying to be paranoid cause they could still be out to get you lol unless it's an error and it's meant to say "PARANOIA -- just because you're paranoid ... doesn't mean they are out to get you" I get what you're saying though.

Yes, I think you are starting to get it.  Me, personally -- I would definitely not be paranoid if everyone weren't out to get me.  And remembering that is one of the main coping mechanism I use to remain somewhat sane....

Technically, anyone can accuse anyone else of anything at any time. But the more important question is whether you have, or should feel, any guilt about this incident.
If you truly believed that you had permission to reuse an essay, then you should be free in your mind of any hint of fault. The fact that it may have been required in writing is immaterial in this and is a technical detail.
As others have answered, it is extremely unlikely that any negative consequences will accrue, but if permission was given then there is no misconduct.
And any serious consequences driven by overzealous rules would require some specific evidence of fault and that is unlikely to exist in any case.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Do universities keep records/a database of student assignments from the past? Or is only Masters/PhD work kept to publish in journals?
Do universities keep work done by students for later research and/or plagiarism detection by future students (eg. self-plagiarism)?

The CS department at my undergrad held onto student projects for several years and used plagiarism detection software extensively to check for shared code. Conversely, the ECE department rarely if ever held onto student work. I suspect this is determined by a combination of university-wide policy, department-wide policy, and instructor preferences. I doubt you'll find a single answer that's applicable to all universities.

The rules of different institutions vary, so there's no one-size-fits-all answer here. However, plagiarism detection software like Turnitin does store copies of papers indefinitely:

Our database contains 58 billion web pages, 570 million student papers and 150 million articles from academic books and publications.

They also store archived web pages no longer available on the Internet. Other plagiarism software likely works in a similar fashion.

When you say "our" database, are you referring to your school or turnitin?

@ATomz: Luigi is referring to Turnitin - it's a quote from the site he's linking to.

At the universities I have worked for, course convenors are required to keep copies of all student assignments and exams for a certain period of time (mostly to allow grading challenges, etc.) and after that time expires they dispose of them in secure disposal bins.  The period of time is usually something like 2-4 semesters past the original course, depending on the institution.    In cases where a lecturer uses online tools for student assignments, or saves them in softcopy format, it is possible that the work might be preserved indefinitely.
In theory, student work could be used to try to detect self-plagiarism across different courses, but they are not usually shared between different lecturers so that would be unlikely (and academics are generally much too busy for this kind of exercise).  As far as using those materials for research, in theory that is possible, but it would require ethics clearance.


text:
How should one deal with fellow students constantly asking for notes?
I'm an undergraduate student in the Netherlands, and as the title states, I'm encountering an annoying situation. How should one deal with the situation of constantly being asked for the notes of a lecture, summaries of book chapters, flash cards, etc by other, fellow-students?
I do not mind to share my stuff with my study-group, because everyone is working hard in the group, and we all benefit from each other, however what I do mind, is strangers (from my course) approaching me for my work; it even went as far as people offering me money for summaries, and other work of mine.
Also, I don't mind when someone approaches me asking for an explanation to something; I like to explain material to other people; since I benefit from that as well. I, and others, however feel that it would be unfair to give away the work, on which we worked on very hard, to someone who didn't do anything.
I know it would be easy to just give in, and thus having dealt with the problem. I just fear that:

The students will come back for more
They will give me the guilt if they can't study with my notes and don't receive the grade they wanted
It will go around and more and more people will come to ask

So, how can one politely deal in such a situation? I do not want to appear as hubristic or miserly.

Why not just give them the notes and adopt a Gandhi perspective? I believe you can help and at least give the lecture notes courses. Of course, for projects, homeworks, I too wouldn't be so helpful.

Say it with me: "Nee."  (But take the repeated requests as a complement.)

Sure!  I'd be happy to share.  Um, may I have a copy of your notes to see what I might have missed?  You don't have notes?  Well... that changes everything!

@JeffE: "complement" ≠ "compliment".

Giving course notes is probably ok, if you are happy to provide them as a one-off.
If becomes a regular occurrence and the person has no very good reason to not take their own notes (disability or serious family constraints), I think it is perfectly reasonable not to be "their mule". Once is fine, twice is perhaps ok, three times is being exploited. You are not being rude by saying no. It is simply unfair to you for them to exploit you. Don't let them define what is acceptable middle ground, they clearly push the limits to their own advantage.
However, in my time some students produced LaTeXed versions of course notes for everybody to use. If that's what you want to do, it's your perfectly acceptable choice (but it would be a good idea to check with the lecturer - in my time, our lecturers were enthusiastically in favour of a student-typeset version of their lecture which could even serve as a basis of a book; these days, copyright issues may make some lecturers wary of agreeing to that, so - ask!).
Giving out homework is a strict no-no - it's an assessment offence (collusion), and plus, you do not really help them this way to learn.
Addendum: since you are worried that they blame you for later failure, if you give them out make a clear disclaimer that the notes are incomplete and inaccurate and you take no responsibility for their content.

One possible way of making the disclaimers clear would be to put your study materials (excluding homework, of course, and with prior permission from instructor) on the web.  This would have some added benefits: (a) people pestering you on an individual basis could be reduced, because you'd have a standard answer to repeat ("whatever I can give you is posted at [address]"); (b) it would be more consistent and fair; and (c) students asking for materials would be able to contribute to this body of materials through comments and submissions to your website.  It would be reasonable to...

... ask some of these fellow students to help out with setting up and maintaining such a website.  It would also be reasonable to ask your department for support.  I can imagine a variety of ways the department could support these efforts.  Basically, what I'm wondering is, how did the responsibility for so many students' learning come to reside on your shoulders?

@aparente001 those are some great comments! you should form them into an answer if you have the time. Regarding your question. the responsibility came from that people saw my notes and exam preparation and were very fond; I created several glossaries and plenty of flash cards which include plenty of helpful mnemonics I thought of for the exam - and that somehow spread around.

@Ebbinghaus You now learnt that: doing someone a high-quality favour  turns it into your duty ;-) There's this Chinese proverb: when you save someone's life, you become responsible for them....

@Ebbinghaus - I see my comment as an embellishment to the answer from the Captain. //  It seems you have a natural pedagogical talent.

If the student is making the notes available outside the course, especially in a web-published form, that would be specifically a violation of my school's updated Academic Honesty policy.

@ScottSeidman What's the rationale for that? (I still adhere to the old continental view that students should be self-responsible; and that IP "awareness" has pretty much gone overboard by adopting US standards, but what would be the concrete violation of Academic Honesty in this particular case?)

@ScottSeidman: That's a sad policy:(

Actually it’s not bad at all to say no even at the first time. I am a student from Netherland and study in University of Padova, Italy. I have asked to few of my classmates to share their lectures and they refused to share by saying “sorry”. And I did not mind. On the other hand one girl said she will share her notes but when I asked to give she made excuses that I will bring tomorrow and then next day and then next day. I really felt bad because she didn’t say NO and actually played with my belief !!!!. So i recommend to simply say NO on a very first time.


text:
How to publish in genetics without access to funding or a lab?
I am currently working in quite new university as lecturer for applied medical science undergrad in genetics subjects. I am facing some issues:

The university requires every lecturer do some publications in their field ( at least 2 papers a year). In genetics, this usually requires access to a lab and good fund for research. However do not have any of those. Any good suggestion ?
I have been trying for roughly a year and half now to do some collaborations with some scientist who I know, but I face the same issue , they asked if I have funding. I fully understand that to do research or ask for collaboration , I should have either funding, access to a lab or ideas, lab or ideas. I tried to give some proposal, but I have not got any response or some of them might not be interested.

I am thinking now to try to do research based on dry lab projects, but I would need some guidance for that.
I hope i can get some suggestions for these issues .
Thanks in advance
i am

Do you have an advisor of some kind? The person who offered you the position should have an idea how you are expected to satisfy those requirements.

unfortunately i do not have. The issue is that the university have regulations that can not be applicable to each school, for instance they ask to have at least one paper or 2 papers during the 4 year as single authors. This is can not be done in genetics filed or medical science filed in general.

I see.. I am not in that field so I do not have good suggestions. I edited your question to make it more clear what you are asking, maybe that will help you get more answers from people who know. Feel free to roll back the edit (assuming it is approved) if you are not happy with it.

Which country are you in? This looks like you have a bunch of rules for all lecturers regardless of field that make no sense in some fields, for example in yours.

Can you "define" your field more broadly? Say "Medical Science" instead of "genetics" specifically. It would open more possibilities.

I am in Saudi Arabia, you are right. They have some rules which need to be updated.

Yah that's what I said , medical science  would be easier, but the issue is that they ask in my speciality ( medical genetics). That's fine, but if they give me at least fund


text:
How difficult is it to switch from non-tenure to tenure track in Japan?
There’s an opening for assistant and associate professorship in non-tenure track of maximum of 5 years. I’m currently living in Europe and my Japanese is basic level.
I was wondering how difficult it is, or even possible, to apply for a tenure track while in non-tenure track in Japan?
It’s a big risk & investment to move to another continent but I’m willing to take the risk.

It would also be advisable to investigate whether Japanese and non-Japanese employees are treated equally, which probably depends on the institution. In the past, these two groups were often not treated equally. See https://www.debito.org/univquestions.html.  Things have improved to some extent in the last 25 years, but I don't know much and you should definitely investigate.

I think it depends on your particular organization. Say, at my university there are no such restrictions, so you can freely apply, and perhaps it's a good thing they already know you  personally. At least from what I have seen, "non-tenure track" usually means simply that you are funded by a fixed-time grant that is not going to be prolonged.

Generally speaking, it is not easy to have a tenured position in Japan, especially at a good university. However to discuss details maybe you want to add your long-term goals, your field, etc, because without that the discussion is very general.

In my experience and from what I have seen, it is very difficult to secure a tenure-track position in Japan. This challenge exists even for Japanese nationals and is even more pronounced for foreigners.
Most non-tenure positions that differ from a typical post-doctoral role often have titles like "Program-Specific Assistant Professor" (the exact title depends on the university). However, in many cases, the responsibilities are similar to those of a post-doc, with possibly a slightly higher salary.
These positions are typically tied to specific projects funded for about 3-5 years. If you have the necessary skills, securing such a position as a foreigner is not overly difficult. I have often seen researchers start as post-docs and then get promoted to roles like "Program-Specific Assistant Professor" after a few years. By law, you can claim a permanent academic position at a university or research center after 10 years. However, this often means that contracts are not extended beyond 6 or 7 years due to funding uncertainties.
Switching to a tenure-track position is challenging for two main reasons:
Limited Availability: There are only a limited number of tenure-track positions available.
Language Requirements: Teaching is predominantly conducted in Japanese, and non-Japanese classes are often handled by personnel in non-tenure track positions. Therefore, becoming fluent in Japanese is crucial.
I recommend exploring the job listings on JREC-IN to understand the requirements for tenure-track positions.
Additionally, these Nature articles provide a good overview of the postdoc situation in Japan:

‘I feel disposable’: Thousands of scientists’ jobs at risk in Japan
Freeing up Japan’s PhD potential


text:
Work publishable at conference
In the course of writing my master's thesis, I developed a new algorithm that outperforms several state-of-the-art algorithms. However, I have encountered a study that uses a similar idea but implements it in a more complex manner, which also presents several disadvantages. Given this context, I am trying to determine if my approach is sufficiently novel?
How would determine this?

Have you asked your advisor? This is what they are for.

Yes I will do that, but from what you reading, what is your opinion?

It all depends on details that we don't know, in particular, how similar exactly is the "similar idea", how severe are the disadvantages, at what level will you try to publish it, and how convincing is your "outperforming" case - it can be surprisingly easy for a method developer to make their method look better than some competitors, and sometimes when others try the new method out, these results do not replicate. (And I'm not talking about cheating here - rather you know how to use your own method in the best way, but maybe not the competitors.)

This is not a place to ask for opinions.

@ChristianHennig: Thank you for your answer. Simply speaking, I want to achieve a related goal, but can achieve that in a much simpler fashion. The disadvantages are severe in that sense, that extra steps have to be done, which might not be practical, to make their approach work. The problem is, I found the approach after I developed mine, but this hard to prove.

If your new algorithm has all the advantages you claim, it should be publishable. Just cite the other work and say what the advantages of your work are. Obviously nobody here can ultimately assess the quality, importance and novelty of what you have, so other than asking your supervisor the only thing you can do is submit it and see what the reviewers say.

At least it should be enough for a master thesis. Thank you.


text:
Quitting PhD and graduating with an M. Phil
I could really use some advice right now. A few months ago I got out of a Ph.D and decided to submit for an M. Phil after 2 years in an incredibly damaging and hostile environment in a UK University.
I am an international student and I am currently in the submission pending period of my M. Phil thesis (I am submitting a thesis with 5 chapters).
I have tried to apply for various other PhD projects that intrest me after having spoken to numerous PIs about my situation, they seemed to understand, but I haven't been able to make it through the DTPs shortlisting. Which I think is understandable because they must view me as a high-risk candidate as a quit my previous PhD.
I have also tried to apply for RA positions but to no avail. I'm extremely anxious and am incredibly stressed out if I'll ever make it out of this situation. I'm starting to feel extremely hopeless. Any advice/ help will be greatly appreciated. Should I try to do lab placements in my area of interest?
Thanks a lot!

Also don't forget that the majority of people do not stay in academia, even if they finish the PhD. If it turns out you don't have an option to finish it that you like, you'll probably find a better paying job outside of academia than if you had stayed.

Everyone's path through life is different. I don't think a question as broad as "What should I do in life now?" is going to yield much useful material.

In what area of science are you working? Are you planning to read for PhD in the UK only, or are you also considering the US?

Not your question, but make sure to check your visa restrictions.  In the UK you usually cannot move to another university on the same student visa (you would need to go back to your home country and apply for a new visa). This could be a significant restriction on your options. There are very few, if any, exceptions...

(1) Quitting PhD and getting a Master's degree is very common; you have nothing to worry about if this would have any negative impacts on you. (2) You don't have to mention you quit from your PhD program when applying for PhD positions, you don't need to say anything about it. (3) I don't know UK student visa policy. If UK doesn't work, why not try other countries? (4) Working in a hostile environment eventually hurts you.

Only a person who has never experienced any difficulty could be condescending and not relate to your experiene. Many of us have been there or had friends experience hostile environments. Of course you would be extremely stressed.
You made a great decision to salvage your work and graduate with a M. Phil. Focus on the positives. I wouldn't hide that you came out of a very negative environment, chances are that group is already known for it. Just don't focus on it, it does not define you, just state it as a reason to move on and find something better. The fact that you got out, still achieved M. Phil. and show such dedication to the fild that you are wiling to go on, says a lot. Focus on your abilities and your persistence to pursue this work. Such environments are far more common than you think, unfortunately. Check on GlassDoor, maybe someone already described it as a toxic place, and maybe leave a revierw there as well to help others.
Hang in there and keep trying, present yourself as a determined person who does not stop because of such setbacks.

Why not stop sharing your 'sad' story and focus on preparing a high-quality research proposal for your future study? You don't need to tell everyone the 'truth' to prove that you didn't do anything wrong. Strong person never struggles with the past. Can you guarantee that you won't quit again? This is the question in the other PI's mind. No one wants to take that risk. If what you care the most is your research work but not the honour that a PhD degree will bring to you and your family, you won't suffer any more.

Is professional antagonist the career path you chose, or is it just a natural talent?


text:
I handed in my physical copies of my PhD thesis too late (Germany) - what are my options?
I am an international student who started my PhD program in 2014 in Germany. I defended my thesis in fall 2021, after having moved to a different country while writing my thesis. After the defense, I did not receive the corrections to my thesis for several months due to incorrect address. Compounded with that were Covid-related delays. I'm writing briefly, but due to severe mental health issues (traumatic stress, anxiety), I was very late in submitting the final copies of the thesis to library (2024).
The crux of the problem is that the regulations state that the final copies of the thesis must be delivered within 1 year of the date of the defense (i.e. fall 2022). And any extensions to this date must be requested prior to the deadline.
The PhD thesis was well received, with publications, and the defense was passed well. Now after more than half a decade of blood, sweat, and tears, I will fail a PhD due to an administrative rule. Is there a remedy for this situation? Are there lawyers that would be able to convince the dean?

Have you asked for an extension? Would they consider Covid as a factor (don't know until you ask)? Would they redo the defense? All questions for a specific institution/dean.

What have you actually tried so far? Anything?

If you want legal advise, then you need to talk to a lawyer not to random people on the Internet. My first step however would be to talk to your advisor explain the situation, and see if she/he/they know who to talk to. Maybe they can talk on your behalf. Often things can be resolved without all the legal trouble and all the costs that come with that.

Remember that no lawyer can convince a dean. As soon as a lawyer gets involved, the entire case moves on to the legal staff of the university, which is probably not what you want. At least not as a first step.

Nobody here can answer your question. Only your university can answer your question.

Thank you for all the helpful suggestions. For transparency, I wrote this question in first-person but I'm not the one with the problem.
The advisors have been contacted and now the research dean is the next person to talk to. I just wanted to exhaust all avenues and crowdsource some opinions/experiences. Thanks.

Any reasonable academic institution is likely to grant post-facto extensions for a bunch on unfortunate bagatelle delays - not bagatelle for you, to be sure, but all reasons given are minor in the grand scheme of things as far as the department is concerned. It is not that you have actively conspired to drag everyone by the nose, made committees convene multiple times and waste their time, etc. - instead, you were simply caught in a cascade of unfortunate events.
Unless you made enemies, I do not think people will want to sabotage the work of a semi-decade, and typically academia is good at finding ways around formalia that hamper academically worthy achievements, especially in Germany.
That being said, as some comments mention, don't involve a lawyer if at all possible. This should be considered to be only the absolutely last resort. You need to consider this the nuclear option from which there is no return. No academic will touch a sue-happy candidate with a barge-pole.

I'm not familiar with the term bagatella.

bagatelle - approximately translatable as "trifle". With less of the negative connotation.

Thanks! Does that mean the original answer has a typo? (bagatella vs bagatelle)

I intended to use it as a foreign word, that's why 'a' felt more appropriate.

Apparently "bagatelle" is French but the Norwegian "bagatella" means the same thing :) In any case, I think it would probably be clearer answer to just use an English word.

Bagatelle is an English word.

My point was that the origin is French. But as you said, bagatella is not an English word. I also think it's not a particularly well known English word.

@MichaelMior After your comment, I checked. Bagatella is not English, but bagatelle is. Do you insist on me changing it? I feel that "trifle" is too dismissive.

It's your answer, so I can't really insist on anything, but I do think a decent percentage of readers would not know what the word means. "Small" or "minor" could also potentially work.

@MichaelMior Got it. I have reflected and decided to keep the word. I find it gets the nuance just right and checking the spectrum of its meanings is, nowadays, just a few keystrokes away for the reader. Personally, 1. I enjoy learning new words and connotations, 2. I am not a fan of oversimplification of language; I believe in exerting effort to keep it rich. Thanks for the suggestion, in any case.

Extensions to the deadline for submitting a PhD thesis are extremely common.  Only your university can decide if you will get an extension.  Just ask the administrators for instructions.


text:
How to volunteer as a temporary research assistant?
I'm in a role in industry with a 9 month paid period governed by a non-compete clause. If I were to leave this job, I'd like to do something productive during the non-compete period, before starting my next job. Does anyone have any experience of having unpaid temporary researchers / assistants in academia? How did these temporary researchers get the role? Should I think about trying to forge these connections now with academics whose research I find interesting? How would you recommend trying to make these connections?
For additional context, I have a master's degree (so some, but pretty limited experience of academic research) and my job is writing mathematical/statistical software (presumably a useful skill for certain areas).

What country are you interested in?

@buffy I'm based in the UK but it wouldn't necessarily have to be here (though I don't know how visas etc. would work elsewhere)

Is your goal to do something useful and productive in the short term or to try to move towards academia in the long term?

what is your goal? if you want to study PhD then doing this for potential advisor will be a good way.

There are a fair number of mathematical software projects needing some serious project management as well as documentation (because mathematicians as a group tend to have less of those skills, and less inclination to do those tasks).  Are you interested (and capable) in those kinds of tasks?

@BryanKrause, the former. I like my job and I'm not considering this with the intention of changing career (though I guess I'm open to it if it turns out I really love it). I'm just looking to do something useful and interesting for a short period.

In some places there might be laws that govern what you can do as an "unpaid employee". But I doubt that anywhere you would be prevented from a collegial and collaborative relationship with an academic that didn't involve pay.
The problem would be contacting people who might value your skills and wish to collaborate. It is too easy to ignore blind emails. But there are a lot of folks who could benefit from having a skilled model builder on the team.
The best place (in some fields) to meet people is at conferences where the coffee table is a good place to start conversations. You can also stay after talks and discuss what you can offer.
The second best place, I think, is to go to a local university and ask for the possibility of meeting people. You might need to go through "official" channels to get started, say by visiting a department head. There is usually a coffee lounge in large departments where informal conversations happen.
The third (perhaps) idea is to have a former professor make contact on your behalf with a few people who might have a need for your skills.
In all of these, the big obstacle is getting ignored on first contact attempts. People have no reason to trust you initially.
You might get a co-authorship eventually if you can make that contact, but you might also need to promise some participation after your 9-month period ends.
And, the things you seem to be contemplating don't necessarily require co-location. There are a lot of tools for remote collaboration these days.

I am a professor of mathematics and statistics. You wrote:

my job is writing mathematical/statistical software (presumably a useful skill for certain areas).

Yes, that's an extremely useful skill-set! If such a person lived in my city, I'd be happy to collaborate (working together over zoom would also work, but then I'd need to be more confident that the other person really knew what they were doing). I'm constantly given far too many interesting research questions (many by colleagues in other departments who want help with a more statistical or computational approach to a research question in their field), and could use help on them, which could lead to a joint publication. I suspect that there are plenty of professors who would be happy for such help.
Another option you should consider is to do a self-directed project and put it on your GitHub. You want a portfolio of projects to show when you apply for jobs. Even my professor friends who are trying to leave academia end up spending months doing such projects to show their chops in the kinds of settings that future employers will value.
Lastly, you can use your skillset and free time to contribute to open source software projects. I have been told by folks who moved from academia to industry that this kind of contribution is valued, and that it would also earn you respect from others who contribute to such projects. A lot of people who contribute are outside academia, so their respect can matter a lot when you're looking for a job.
As for your other questions:

Does anyone have any experience of having unpaid temporary researchers / assistants?

I've had plenty of students do research with me that has led to publications or to them updating their github with a new project completed. I'd view your situation as analogous but you probably have far stronger programming skills and maturity than most of the students who work with me.

How did these temp researchers get the role?

The students ask me. When my colleagues elsewhere want me to work with their students on a project, the colleague sends me an email outlining the project and trying to get me interested. When a random member of the community wants to work together, they also "pitch" an idea to me by email. But it helps if I already know the person or if there's an introduction by someone I do know, because professors do get a lot of random emails from people wanting to work together, and don't necessarily delve deeply into all cases.

Should I think about trying to forge these connections now with academics whose research I find interesting? How would you recommend trying to make these connections?

Yes, absolutely. Line it up ahead of time. Professors are very busy and need to know a new person will be coming on board, to block out regular times for meetings. Email is the way to go, and leveraging your network (former professors of yours for example). You can find professors you might want to work with by searching for recent research, e.g., on Google scholar, doing the kind of stuff that you feel you're good at.


text:
Hopping areas and professors in undergraduate
I'm an undergraduate student at a good University in India. The issue with me is I get interested in almost everything and overcommit to too many projects. I continually wish the day had more than 24 hours so that I could do multiple things.
I want to apply for higher studies (Masters/PhD) and believe that while I've learnt a lot and had fun in my undergraduate studies, I haven't really mastered any particular area or dedicated myself to a field. No publications, no real expertise etc.
In this era of hyper-specialisation, where things like publications in undergraduate and mastery over a particular subject at a young age are rewarded, how do I justify my (bad?) attitude towards education.

No undergraduate has mastered, well, anything. Even if they got a publication out of being part of some project.

Sampling lots of areas while an undergraduate is precisely what undergraduate education is (or can be) for. Doing that does not signify a bad attitude.
To go on to graduate work you should be enthusiastic about a particular area, and have done more than a smattering of work in it so that you and the schools you apply to will know you are serious. That is what a "major" means in colleges in the United States. Publications and mastery are what graduate school is for.
(The questions you have asked on mathematics stackexchange suggest that your mathematics background is more than enough to support applying to graduate school in mathematics.)
Good luck.

This is quite an encouraging response. I completely resonate with the first sentence of the answer and was a little overwhelmed by my peers spending their undergraduate in a single area they liked and really excelling in it (more than one first author journal papers in undergrad!). Thanks for the wishes sir.


text:
About low cgpa for German universities
Is it possible to get offer letter for a masters degree in civil Engineering in both public and private universities with a CGPA of 2.73 out of 4? I am open yo learn german. I am willing to go to German taught Programs as well.

duplicate/related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/210392/can-strong-research-experience-and-recommendations-offset-low-gpa-for-masters-a/210396#210396


text:
Revise & Resubmit: changing the text color of revisions in the text?
I am about to resubmit a project proposal for a postdoc grants. I am wondering whether I should submit a normal black & white text, as the original, or whether to highlight the new parts in-text. The proposal will be seen by past and new reviewers.
Do you think it is a good practice to inform the reviewers in-text about some changes reported in the revision report? If yes, how would you highlight the new additional elements? Is there a common practice?

Do you think it is a good practice to inform the reviewers in-text about some changes reported in the revision report? If yes, how would you highlight the new additional elements? Is there a common practice?

Yes, I definitely think you need to tell the reviewers what changed. Normally, in math, we prepare a separate document explaining the changes. As a referee, I have sometimes seen authors also highlight any new text in red, which does make it a lot easier for me to check the new stuff without having to re-read all the old stuff. As an author, I've done this, too, but sometimes my co-authors think it makes the whole thing messier. Plus, it's a lot of mucking around in the latex file.
My new favorite way to deal with this, both as an author and as a reviewer, is an online PDF comparison tool, like this one: https://www.draftable.com/compare
As a referee, when I receive the new version, I use such a software to compare it to the old version. As an author, I might consider mentioning the existence of such software in my "response to referee" document, if there were lots of changes, and I want the referee to be able to quickly check them without re-reading the whole paper, but also don't want the hassle of making text red only to later turn it black again.
This process holds both for publishing a paper in a journal, and for a back-and-forth over a grant or research proposal.

In my areas, the highlighted file is expected. We work with Word documents.

Using an online tool to compare submissions might be problematic in terms of data protection.

@StephanKolassa Yes, but you can download software to do such comparisons locally.

If you are using Latex, Latexdiff automates a lot of the revision marking and removes many of your negatives.

What is preferable or allowed might depend on the funder; for the US NIH, for example, no highlighting or similar is allowed in resubmissions.
I would start by checking policies of whoever you are asking for funds from, look carefully through any instructions or supporting documents that are available to you, and ask either grants staff at your institution or the funder themselves for how to proceed.

For a publication, changing the color might add another cycle, depending on the publisher and the format. And, even for a grant proposal, color may not be as effective as you might think, as some people are colorblind in various ways. It might even be irritating to some.
The old standard is to send a set of notes pointing to changes. For example, 6+3 means the third line on the sixth page should be looked at and 7-2 means the second line from the bottom on page 7. This is all that is really necessary. A sentence for each such notation will help. The same page-line scheme can be used for references to a reviewers comments. You might want to do this even if you use color in some way.
For large changes, pointing to pages may be enough, or even sections.
Some reviewers might not even need that, if they want to look again at the paper or proposal as a whole, rather than incrementally. An you should probably take that attitude as well, assuring that it holds together rather than seeming a bit "patchy".

OP is submitting a grant, not a paper.

@BryanKrause, noted, edited. Sorry I missed that.

For papers, it's not uncommon to submit two versions, one with the changes highlighted and/or with inline comments, and a clean version. The handling editor is smart enough to figure out what to send to the proofreaders.


text:
Can authors/acknowledgements be edited once paper is published?
Following on from my previous question, can the authors/acknowledgements section of a (review) paper be edited once the paper is submitted? Specially adding on people to the authors/acknowledgements.
If yes, how should this be done? I'm assuming it requires the permission of the people already listed as authors on the paper?

Please clearify whether the paper is PUBLISHED or SUBMITTED. Your title says "published" but the text reads "submitted".

Generally speaking, adding to the authors or acknowledgements after publication would be very unusual.

I can imagine it might happen for acknowledgements ("terrible oversight, very embarrassing, we didn't mention XY, please could you change..."), but even then, it would not be surprising if the journal says no.
However, I am finding it very hard to imagine it happening for authors. The editor will ask - if this person had already contributed enough to be an author, why weren't they listed earlier? And if they hadn't contributed enough at the time, why are you trying to make them an author? I can't think of a good answer to either of those without imagining a very unusual set of circumstances.

After submission but before publication, however, things are a little more flexible.

It should not usually be a problem to add to the acknowledgements during the submission process - note the enormous number of papers that acknowledge the help of the peer reviewers, which of course couldn't have been known at the time of submission! Many publishers even explicitly recommend that you do not include acknowledgements in the submitted paper, as this can be a problem for double-blind peer review.
Adding an author at this point would still be pretty unusual. You might be able to persuade an editor that there was a simple administrative error that meant you missed off an author from the original submission, but this would still be seen as quite strange; in theory everyone who contributed to a paper enough to be an author should have seen it before submission and been able to notice that their name was missing.
The one plausible circumstance I can think of where it would be reasonable to add an author is if the paper has changed and they have contributed an appropriate amount to the new version of the paper. For example, perhaps the reviewers concluded that your work needed some particularly specialised statistical analysis, so you went off, found a statistician with the relevant expertise, and incorporated their work into the revised paper. The statistician has now done enough work to be considered an author, so you add them to the authors list (and explain very clearly to the editor why you've done this, because they will ask those questions above...).

Finally, minor clerical changes should usually be fine before publication - changing a name because you've written Jane D. Smith rather than J. Diana Smith, etc. After publication, this comes down to journal policies - some will permit it, some have a hard line against it, some are vague.

I think this understands how common this is. I have certainly seen enough "oops, we forgot this author" corrections that, while it doesn't make me feel great about the paper, it doesn't shock me, either.

Understates, I mean

@AJK I could see that being the case in physics or other areas where the set of authors can be very large.  On a paper with hundreds of authors, and where standards for authorship are calibrated to permit hundreds, it seems almost a statistical inevitability that someone gets left off by mistake. Smaller authorship lists, like is typical with nearly all research mathematics, makes this seem really unlikely.

@zibadawatimmy - good point. But a lot of research is done in groups larger than math groups! Hypothetical: paper is collaboration between group A and group B, but is primarily written up by A. Student B1 starts, but leaves way before the project is finished. B2 restarts later. Only B2 works closely with group A. Prof. A writes up the paper, including only B2's name. Prof. B doesn't spot the omission because it's been years since B1 was in the lab; B2 doesn't spot it because she thinks that work was done by someone else already credited (B3). Once paper published, B1 wants credit/correction!

Yes, authors can be added after submission but before publication. Yes, additional people can be acknowledged after submission but before publication. Moving somebody from author to acknowledgements or vice versa after submission but before publication might raise a red flag with the editor where you have to explain the rationale but might not as well.
After publication any edits require a formal correction to be issued, see for example, pubs.acs.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1021/ma102771k

Generally, you cannot change anything after publication. At that point the hardcopies might already be printed, the electronic versions will already have been distributed, and so on. If you must make changes, you'll have to issue an erratum or corrigendum - see the journal's website on their policies for this.
After acceptance but before publication (as well as after submission but before acceptance), then it's still possible to change. The difference between the two scenarios is that after acceptance you're probably liaising with the publisher, while before it you're probably liaising with the editorial board of the journal. However practically speaking there should be little difference: both are likely to accept acknowledgements changes without much thought, while requesting an explanation for author changes.
To change the acknowledgements after acceptance, just request the extra text when the publisher shows you the proofs. To change it before acceptance, do it if the manuscript receives a decision of 'revise', with a small note on the change in the response to reviewers. If your paper is accepted without revisions, then just change it during the proofs stage. Changing authors is similar, but be ready with an explanation. You might also be asked for a letter signed by all other co-authors, per Mark's answer.

Generally, yes. For details, check the author guidelines of the respective journal.
As long as the paper is under review, it should be fairly easy to add someone to the acknowledgements: just do it. Adding an author is possible, however, might require you (the corresponding author) to contact the editor, explain the situations, and possibly submit a letter signed by all authors that they approve the changes.
Once the paper is published, you would have to submit a correction. Again, adding (or removing) an author will require approval of all authors as well as an explanation. You might have to convince the editor that you are not just adding someone you like, but that this person actually contributed. The same can work for adding someone to the acknowledgements, however, it might be seen as insignificant, and therefore not get accepted.

I do not agree with your answer since it is based on several assumptions. "Generally" this is not true. I have come across several conferences which explicitely state that no changes to the authors can be made after submission (not even talking about after publication).

@J-Kun The question was about journal papers, so is my answer.

The question just says "paper" and does not mention any journal so far.

For clarification, the paper is for a journal (not a conference). Thanks


text:
University asks not to promote other university's research
A university sent a letter requesting/advising its staff members not to interact with or promote a media coverage of a research study by a another university.
The letter didn't include any explanation. Some colleagues believed it undermined academic freedom.
Apart from this specific case, is such request common? What are good reasons, if any, for it?

I would say the ONLY good reason is if somebody at the other university was caught falsifying something. If it's for political reasons (as I suspect), or because somebody at your university has a competing project, or some other personal reason, that's B.S.  imo.

I can imagine this coming from a legal conflict (e.g. a patent battle) between the two institutions. Either way, I wouldn't think much of such a request and would break it if I had reasons to (such as citing relevant work).

@darijgrinberg I would actually not even think about counting citing any work to be included in "interacting with or promoting media coverage".  That sounds more like they asked their staff to not make comments to the "mainstream" media (newspapers, TV stations,... not scientific journals) about this. Is the topic/result of the study (ethically) controversial?

I think more details are required. i.e. what do you suspect the explanation is?

The only reason why you should not promote another university's research should lie in science itself.
(fell free to add more examples!)
Acceptable reasons:

Severe scientific misconduct by the other university (made up data)
Their results are too weak and do not support their conclusions
Their research is done incorrectly (bad methods, etc.)
...

Not acceptable:

Your professor does not like their professor
They got their project funded but you did not
They are more advanced on the topic than you
...

Also, note that the "acceptable" reasons are all matters of professional judgment.  Individual researchers should be left to reach their own conclusions as to whether the data is made up, the results are weak, etc., and then be able to speak out as to their professional opinion.  Different researchers from the same university should be able to disagree on these questions, and to do so publicly if they wish. I think it's a clear violation of academic freedom to tell researchers what to think, or to restrict them from saying what they think on scientific matters.

@NateEldredge So how about industry funding « research » for the « independant » results that they want with no consequences for future funding...

@SolarMike: We handle that by requiring researchers to disclose their funding sources and conflicts of interest, and by encouraging other researchers to critically examine the claimed results and identify flaws and biases, both during and after peer review.  But in any case we don't try to censor researchers from publicly speaking about their work.