text:
Is it ethical to publish homework?
Sometimes when doing course work for university, I'd like to write about it on my website, or publish it in its entirety, because I think that other people might be interested in it.
My goal is not to reach other students, but depending on the work, I think it's likely that they would easily find it when searching for it, and most courses reuse homework questions and paper topics over multiple years.
So my question is if it would be ethical for me to do so, and under which circumstances.

Does it depend on the task? Eg I would assume that it's not ok if it's a very specific task that only other students would be interested in, but ok if it's a general problem?
Does it depend on length? What about simple homework questions vs page-long papers vs presentation slides vs thesis paper vs code?
Should I do something to conceal it? Eg change the paper title, remove any mention of the course and university name, not publish the homework question itself?

I'm mainly asking about the ethics of it, but if you know if it is generally legal or forbidden by universities, I would be interested in that as well.

In case it affects your answer: I'm studying computer science in Germany.

I can understand why you might want to publish papers/notes/nontrivial code you write (and many people do), but why would you consider this for simple homework questions?

Do "homework" works exist that cannot be directly derived from numerous public code repositories? Or from multiple vendor FAQs/technical manuals? Wikipedia?

If you decide to publish it, I would at least wait until the course is over.

@Kimball even simple homework questions can be interesting or fun (eg perform an XSS attack via SQL injection, or a proof for the prime number theorem). @ user2338816 that's a good point (and what I was trying to express with my first bullet point). @ Mangara that's also a very good point, thanks.

Maybe you have a different notion of simple homework questions than I do.  I don't know about XSS attacks, but the proving the prime number theorem is not my idea of a simple homework exercise (it's more involved than a typical "page-long paper").

@Kimball you are right, that was a bad example. Maybe something like proof of euclids theorem fits better. Or writing a sorting algorithm, or summarizing a paper, etc. So something that might take 0.5-4 hours, produces 0.5-2 pages max as result, but is still general enough to be interesting to others. So not something like "write ABC+D*(E+F) in DNS", but more like "describe how to transform a formula to DNS". (Although I like the XSS example best, because it's something that's not only interesting to other students, while eg the DNS example probably is).

Certainly I agree that many homework problems are interesting (and generally the good exercises are).  I personally wouldn't mind my students posting their own exposition of more interesting problems, as long as it's after the assignment's due (and ideally, after they get it back graded, to make sure their work is correct)--in fact I would probably be happy to know they also found these questions quite interesting.  BTW, at least for homework problems, I can see a blog format being more suitable than a bunch of pdfs with exercises and solutions.

A practical approach: ask the instructors in the courses where you want to do this. If I had a student routinely posting about interesting problems from the class, I'd want to let the other students know about this resource. (I'd want the student to wait until the assignment was due before posting though.)

I don't see a big deal, I like when I have available "homework and its solution", I can learn by example. Try my best solving it myself otherwise just take a look at solution and try to understand. Whoever copies solution is doing wrong to himself only. Exams are exactly for this. I made many pictures/images of solved problems and made them public (dropbox.. and shared link on uni-facebook group). If there is any problem between me and teacher I can show him that I KNOW how to solve such problems and thats the point. I am also computer science student.

Isn't the point concerning question re-use across multiple years moot? I'd imagine that those are already available to students that want to use them through student associations or other channels. The problem then wouldn't be the ethics, since the questions are already out there, but the possibility of backlash as the OP would be the only identifiable student publishing questions publically.

is it ethical not to publish homework?

Slightly off-topic: I found that the next step towards mastery of material after solving exercises can often be inventing one's own exercises (which need not be "from-scratch" innovations, but can be generalizations, analogues, or just answers to natural questions you found yourself asking) and solving them. If you can do this successfully, you will learn a lot more, and you'll have something genuinely independent to post.

Simplest way to resolve this: ask permission from the professor/school/textbook publisher/author (whoever owns copyright on the assignment). If they say you can, go for it. If they say you can't, think long and hard about how hard you want to fight this and what doing so will do to your reputation.

If you use directly the material of professor (slides, problem set etc.) which gives the course, I think you should ask him for his permission.

In brief, I claim that this should not be a question a student has to comtemplate... So, operationally, the answer is "no, it is not unethical, but it may be against the (unreasonable, indefensible) rules to an extent that will create fatal trouble for you..." So, no, it's not unethical, but probably often "seriously illegal", dangerously to you, though it should not be.
The points the other answers have made are "not unreasonable", but, I claim, essentially untenable. That is, if there are indeed very few tasks whose performance could be "tested", example executions will certainly exist "in the wild", whether or not a student in a specific class puts their own solution on-line. Although I'm thinking primarily about a mathematics environment, I'm well-enough acquainted with CS issues to not feel too out-of-it in thinking about such issues, as well. Indeed, the number of "stock" issues in both cases seems similar ... and small. That is, there is a greater underlying issue, that the number of reasonable, answerable questions (apart from trivial variations) is very small, and a conscientious person can merely collect "solutions", rather than think them through themself.
To my mind that is the "real issue", if it is an issue at all. That is, we might take the poverty-of-variation as a signal that pretending to keep some trivial idea secret so as to "test" on it is perverse!?!
There are two fundamentally conflicting issues: promoting understanding and scholarship, versus arranging convenient "testing" for various purposes. "Convenient testing" prefers as many secrets as possible, obviously. Promoting understanding would exactly want to explain to interested parties how to resolve issues raised... among other places ... in the "tests".
Some events that finally "got through to me" about this, some years ago, involved my colleagues firm admonishments that "approved solutions" for (graduate) Qualifying Exams should never be published, because otherwise the students would learn how to do those problems... uh... whah? :)
Ok, even if we "buy" that for a moment, one can observe that then bad "solutions" are the only ones available, so people study from bad material... ?!?!
The meta-comment is that many "educational" institutions have not-at-all figured out how to cope with the fluidity and availability of information, and, instead, try to prohibit all the obvious "new" avenues, simply to avoid change. While it is arguably true that the motivations of some students may not be the most honorable, I am absolutely not in favor of sting operations that declare them guilty of serious malfeasance by "using the internet" or "telling people what they know", and so on. That'd be perverse. Instead, things need to be reconstituted so that "keeping secrets" is not an essential part of appraising competence.
Summary: it's not at all unethical, but it may be so illegal that you must ask your local authorities. (Yet, again, while it's good to ask, it is terrible that there is an issue here...)

Whereby illegal here you mean "against the university/departmental rules which could lead to your expulsion due to academic dishonesty charges of some sort" and not "against the laws of your country such that you could go to jail/get fined," right?

@BillBarth, in the US, probably just "against the Uni rules", yes, but it is my impression that more severe repercussions may exist elsewhere, so I don't pretend to know. For that matter, if one's Univ claims copyright on all material generated by students in their coursework (which is apparently often asserted!), copyright laws, DMCA, blah-blah-blah could be brought into play by whoever can better afford lawyers, or just threaten that they could afford the lawyers... (Idiots...) If it weren't clear: I think students should "own" their own work, even if stimulated by insights of teachers...

@paulgarrett: Universities (in the US) aren't likely to legally pursue any sort of copyright claim concerning student (as opposed to research assistants) results.  The money simply flows in the wrong direction; a court would almost certainly throw out any uncompensated copyright assignment, and might even find that the students, not the university, own rights to the for-hire work of faculty whose salaries are derived from tuition, which would be a nightmare scenario for any university's tech transfer office.

@BenVoigt, indeed, I would have thought so myself until some recent years' wranglings I've witnessed (in the U.S.). Nothing ever went to court, no, but students were bullied into believing that any work they did for courses belonged to the university... Doesn't matter whether it'd stand up in court if one side is intimidated by mere threats.

@BenVoigt That would apply to the answers to the questions, but not the questions/problems themselves.  Generating good assignments, test questions, etc. can be a lot of work, and that content (I would expect to) be the property of the university.

@Servy: Agreed.  Whether it is the property of the university or the individual professors or some textbook author, the question then becomes whether it falls under "fair use".

@BenVoigt Indeed, which is why distinctions such as, "one particular question, of many, assigned in the course," versus "every single homework question/problem given in the entire class," could become relevant.  I imagine the former would have a strong case as a fair use argument, the latter...less so.

@Servy: But the fact that the activity may not actually be criminal is of little comfort if it violates an institutional honor policy and triggers punishments.

@BenVoigt -- Would publishing on a web site for infinite dissemination meets fair use?  It barely meets fair use even if I take a paragraph out of a book and put it up on an internal web site, according to our librarians.

@ScottSeidman: Fair use is not the same as de minimis.  Presumably the "commentary", "criticism", and "scholarship" permissions would be invoked here.  I refer you to https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107

Sometimes when doing course work for university, I'd like to write
  about it on my website, or publish it in its entirety, because I think
  that other people might be interested in it.

This re-enforces your learning BUT will current students have access to it.
Once, a student from my University did this, and someone else copied from her. There was a big mess about this. Fortunately the student got a passing grade for the class.

and most courses reuse homework questions and paper topics over
  multiple years.

and

So my question is if it would be ethical for me to do so, and under
  which circumstances.

Instead of using exact question answer, can you create similar question and give solution. This way you are tutoring other people and making them think (and making yourself think), rather than giving the answers to students who just want to pass the class and forget what they "learned".

This is a very good point for homework questions, and I think redoing problems slightly different will also often help me to deepen my understanding of the material. I think it wouldn't work so well with larger work - like papers, larger programs, etc - though.

@tim I would have thought that in those cases, not only is plagiarism detection possible (i.e. solutions aren't just either "right" or "wrong") but probably done?

A year ago I took Compiler Design and Construction, which had heavy theory on automata and LR-grammars. I was kind of stuck in the class, so I Googled around and eventually found a student's website where he guided the reader through various problem sets, and it helped me to understand what I was missing before. I don't know if they were homework problems from his university or of his own creation, but I find that putting your knowledge online for the public domain is always a good thing, as someone who needs it is bound to stumble upon it at some point!

@OllieFord In the college which I attend, they only run plaigarism checks through particularly wordy assignments. Their upload system is very basic and as far as I am aware, most other departments have the students hand in hard copies of work, it is only the IT-based subjects using upload points.

In the final year of my undergraduate computer science programme, we were all emailed by the department reminding us that publishing homework solutions is forbidden, due to the increasing number of people either deliberately or inadvertently making theirs available through public Github repositories.
There is the argument that lecturers shouldn't be reusing homework, but a strong counter argument is that in some courses there are only a few obvious tasks to set (eg, in a database internals course implementing a merge or sorting algorithm, or in a text retrieval course implementing Pagerank). So in many cases it will be forbidden by university or departmental rules to publish solutions. Furthermore, facilitating someone else's plagiarism, by allowing them to copy your solution, is often an academic offence itself.
Publishing solutions to specific questions clearly facilitates cheating (especially in the case of easily Googleable source code), and as such I think it is unethical.
From a legal perspective, if you give the question you may be infringing on the author's copyright, but I don't know of any countries where helping other people plagiarise your work is illegal.
A thesis is generally expected to be published, and so there is likely no problem here in putting it on the internet.

Of course, once you've graduated, there's not much the university can do to stop you. Honor and conduct codes can't really extend beyond your time at the university.

@aeismail They could try revoke your degree, but I wouldn't have thought they'd go that far unless there was an aggravating factor, and the grounds would be pretty shaky. Or they might take the copyright infringement route.

I would have thought for tasks like the example ones would be easy to find via google or on github. As for plaigarism, it does go on. Students in the course I am doing at my college copy and paste Java and Html into their submitted programs and websites. The teachers do not care because the students aren't actually graded on what they can create, they are graded by how much they can write about it afterwards.

In my opinion there is nothing wrong with publishing solutions to (interesting)
questions/exercises on one's own page, given that there is no explicit policy
against doing so at your university.
I never heard of a policy forbidding publication of answers at my university
and the general approach in our group is that students may very well learn
something even from reproducing solutions of others. Specifically for physics (my
subject) there is a set of problems which come up in certain variations over
the years and by looking hard enough you'll find an answer (or at least an
outline of a solution) for almost any problem.
My personal position is that the students are old enough to get a grip on reality and
understand, that if they just copy solutions they are doing themselves a disservice
in the long run. At some point in time the missing methodology will come to bite them
in the a**.
TL;DR students should be mature enough to understand that 1:1 copying is more harmful than
usefl. We (as TA's) are not their nannies.

I got my undergrad in Computer Science and no matter what the professor asked, it's a sure bet there's a solution already posted out there somewhere. So the way I see it is that it's a bit difficult to NOT expect your solution to be posted out there.
As far as posting answers, I can't see why it would be wrong especially if it is a trick question or a unique question that made you think. I remember in school we had to make a algorithm that figures out simply xor encryption and figuring out a key based on a known word. I felt my answer was unique and I asked the professor if I could post it online. He agreed and had no issue with me doing it.
If you want to discuss something perhaps ask the teacher of that course if you can post/discuss it on a personal blog.

"it's a sure bet there's a solution already posted out there somewhere" If this wasn't the case you'd get a lot more students failing IT-based courses.

Check your school's definition of plagiarism. My university defines the following as an act of plagiarism subject to sanctions:

Remettre  ou  rendre  disponible  un  travail,  une  partie  de  celui-ci,  tel que  décrit  à l’alinéa précédent,  à un  autre  étudiant  qui  l’utilise  en  tout  ou  en  partie  sous  sa  signature;

Translated it means more or less

Submitting or making available any work, or part of such work, to another student who uses it or part of it as his own work.

If you commit an act of plagiarism at your university, I'd say it's unethical.

Clearly your university has decided to opt-out of the entire peer-reviewed publication system, since other students definitely have access to journals and conference proceedings.  Or else they are guilty of selective enforcement.

Of course proper citing is explained above in the rules. I didn't want to copy the whole thing. Also, if a student cites a solution to a homework published on the web, that is probably going to be worth 0.

But since you can't control whether the other student exercises due diligence in citations, it seems that you should assume the worst, that any work you "make available" will eventually be used improperly without citation?

There are statements like this in the U.S., too, and, as @BenVoigt suggests, there is de-facto selective enforcement, only on one side of some imagined clear "line", on one side of which is genuine scholarly work, and on the other side (supposedly) coursework. These sorts of rules are far too simple-minded for the current state-of-affairs of "information".

It's why we give clear scenarios of what is accepted and unacceptable behavior in seminars to prevent plagiarism at the start of a student's program. They're on YouTube at my school.

@BenVoigt Homework in engineering programs (Canada and the US) is often open problems (no single solution, easy to detect copies). During my undergrad in the 80s a team of students opened their computer directory to the entire class, and were later implicated in plagiarism when another team turned in exactly the same project. If you show your answer on an exam to the person sitting next to you, you're also playing with fire. I agree it's not black and white, but it's why there are plagiarism committees and lawyers to interpret every case.

I would like to think that you are telling the truth when you say you want to blog your homework because you find it interesting and you're happy with your solution. Let's say you were assigned something in a programming course and told to use recursion to solve it. And further that as a result of this assignment you "get" recursion and think it's amazing.
In that case, blogging "I finally see what all the fuss is about for recursion" is entirely appropriate. You can include some code snippets from your recursive solution, perhaps contrasting them with some iterative version as well. You might include a diagram or other illustrative aid that helped you understand what was happening, or a screen shot from the debugger showing the call stack. All of this is a good blog post about recursion that happens to have 10-20 lines of code in it, code that at some point was included in something you handed in for marks.
In contrast, blogging "CS 123 Assignment 4 (XYZ University Prof ABC)" which consists of one or two sentences of your own, if that, followed by the text of the question, with a complete zipped solution attached to the blog post - well that's an entirely different thing. It's not interesting, it's not something anyone wants to read or will learn from. It's just a way to hand out solutions to future students for the least effort possible from them and from you. It is not ethical, professional, fair, or decent.
This isn't restricted to programming, of course. If you wrote an essay about something and learned some very interesting things as you did, then a blog post that includes some excerpts from the essay and links to resources is not the same as a blog post that pastes in the question and includes the essay as either the rest of the post or an attachment. If you designed a lovely room, building, wedding announcement, dinner, playground, or album cover, sharing that design along with the thoughts that went into it, the parts you like the most, and the reactions you have collected from others is not the same as "Here's the question, here's what I did for my solution." Right?
You know which you want to do, I'm sure.

This is more of a political issue than an ethical one and is also related to Intellectual Property management. If your work is code related to open source software (such as GNU/LINUX) or to open source hardware, you should definitely post it. On the other hand, if you institution is a private corporation, it is generally not advisable to do so, even if it does not strictly infringe the organization's policy on IP. It is also a good idea to check against your teacher, advisor or managers whether they might have an issue with it or not. For instance: some teachers might object if their course's syllabi does not change often and they put a lot of effort in building it and keeping it private (f. i: for evaluation purposes), while other might encourage you to do so for the greater good of the classroom. I'd say that it depends mostly on the discipline and environment rather than on the length of your work. While the trend towards Open Access is more prevalent everyday at the dawn of the Internet Era, it is still not prevalent in some areas and institutions, and is definitily less encouraged in the private sector. One must also bear in mind that your work will be subject to public scrutiny and that it at times might be plagiarized by unscrupuled individuals. If you choose to do so, please always adequately mention and refer properly other people's work whose shoulders you are climbing onto. Not only because it is ethical and more useful to do so, but because showing adequate respect to others' work will make yours' less prone to eventual abuse.

Just a quick observation: a good copyright lawyer might be able to argue that homework answers are a Derivative Work, which would put you at risk of being sued if you publish without permission from whoever owns the copyright on the assignment material. I doubt most schools would exercise that right under normal conditions, but that's up to them, not you, and they've already got lawyers on staff.

This has actually been tested at my university.  The university lawyers concluded that (1) the copyright for any code written by students for a programming assignment is owned by the students, and (2) the copyright for any code written by the instructors for a programming assignment is owned by the instructors.  So in principle, a student publishing a homework submission that builds on a skeleton provided by the instructors would be a derivative work, but it's up to the instructor, not the university, to enforce their copyright.

That's one set of lawyers. The next set and the judge may decide differently. Pick you battles, and consider getting permission even if you don't think you need it.

I wait at least a week after the due date before posting my work online, so to ensure that the students handing in late do not access my work in a last minute rush to complete the work. In the event that somebody does copy your work, a long period between the due date and the online post will help to prevent confusion about who created the work. If there is a query by the university, you need to be able to prove that your work was handed in before the other person. Additionally, you may be able to prove that the work you posted online was your work, and that the other person copied it from your website.

From our recently updated Academic Honesty policy (or perhaps to be implemented int the near future:

6) Unauthorized Distribution or Publication of Course-‐-‐‐Related
  Materials The sharing of course materials on an individual level for
  educational purposes (e.g., working with groups or with a tutor) is
  permitted, provided that it has not been prohibited by the professor.
  Students may not publish, distribute, or sell-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
  electronically or otherwise-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐any course materials that
  the instructor has developed in any course of instruction in the
  University (e.g., presentation slides, lecture aids, video or audio
  recordings of lectures, and exams) without the explicit permission of
  the instructor. The sharing or distribution of course materials for
  purposes of giving or gaining unfair advantage in a course is
  prohibited. Students must further respect the requirements of
  copyright protection for materials that are made available for
  instructional purposes.

Thus, such action would be an academic honestly violation at our institution, and can result in punishments from a warning all the way to separation.
Violation or not, at best you are publishing derivative work that you are not entitled to be publishing.  It is unethical behavior.

I don't think that any course material as described would actually cover the answers to homework questions (which is what I mostly meant in my question; questions can be paraphrased or just left out completely in some cases). I also don't think that answers to a question are derivative work of the question, but I'm not a lawyer, so if you can expand on that, I could be convinced that I'm wrong.

At our university, you would be required to sign an agreement on day 1 that says that you understand that we consider such an act to be a violation of academic honesty.  After that day, if you do it, and get caught, it would not be treated as a copyright violation -- it would be treated as an academic honesty violation.  Your signed statement would be produced at your hearing, and a disciplinary action would be determined.  No legal questions, no lawyers, just the signed statement showing that you knew this was a violation.


text:
What's a "methodological approach" for research (Master's thesis)?
I'm going to apply for a Master's program. Although I'm not going to change my general field of study, I'm going to change my 'track' (from Information Technology to Geoinformatics).
In the application form of the aforementioned Master's program, I've been asked to specify my area of interest and state a research topic for my Master's thesis and describe my methodological approach. I honestly have no idea how to fill this part, how can I choose an area of interest and more importantly a topic for my thesis when I haven't even started the studies? Besides, can someone please kindly tell me what the part about the "methodological approach" means? (Is it talking about choosing one approach between Qualitative, Quantitave, etc. approaches? If so, is it enough to just write down the name and add no details?)

How you plan to tackle the topic: Topic: "Home-made delicious mashed potatoes." Methodology: "Purchase ingredients, study available recipes, and then repeatedly make and taste test until I can consider it delicious."

I’m not super familiar with the specific field you’re researching, but I would say that there are three general approaches to methodology in the IT space: quantitative/scientific, qualitative, and artefact-oriented. Each of these general approaches, in turn, would have specific methodologies encompassed within them (for instance the Design Science Research Methodology within artefact-oriented research).
With quantitative/scientific, you’re starting off with one or more hypotheses, gathering numerical data, and then using that data to perform statistical analyses to try to disprove your hypotheses.
With a qualitative approach, you’re taking an exploratory approach to gather categorical data, usually from humans, and then examining it to see if you can spot any patterns within it, without performing any statistical analysis. This might take the form of examining user behaviour interacting with a computer program, or analysis of the contents of social media posts.
With an artefact-oriented approach, you’re looking at a problem and existing methods of solving it, designing a new method that you think might be better (or applying a method from a different area to the problem), building an implementation of this new method, and then evaluating its performance.

A methodological approach may refer to way in which a researcher intends to carry out his/her research from the specified or known methods in a discipline

You can't really choose your topic definitively until you have "mastered" the related material, but you can give a strong, well-informed description of what your topic might be.
A methodological approach is the approach you will take to exploring your topic. For example: "I will perform neural network simulations of the PFC and BG of a decision making agent while recording neuronal activity and behavior. I will supplement this computational approach with validation of behavioral results in humans." The approach should be carefully thought out (as the above example was not) and worded to make it sound nontrivial yet feasible within the scope of your program.

source: Stack Exchange

license: 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/

sort: votes


text:
Mentioning courses taken on coursera.org in the statement of purpose
Is it of any value to mention a course one is following on www.coursera.org, in a SOP?
For instance, if I have a Bachelor of Computer Science and want to apply for a Geoinformatics Master program, would it help my application at all to mention that I am currently following a Geoinformatics course on coursera.org to get familiar with the field?

Related: What is the value of a Coursera certificate?

I don't think it would necessarily hurt your application. However, if you have a limited number of words for your SOP, I think a better use of space would be to explain why exactly you want to obtain a degree in geoinformatics. Your Master's coursework will give you all the background (and probably more) that you need in the field, so it might be better to explain your motivation behind applying for the degree in the first place. Of course, if the Coursera course was a primary driver in your decision, that is highly relevant and should be mentioned.

The statement of purpose I have received has a list of questions, and one of them is: "Describe your computer skills", after describing all the programming languages I know, I realized that I still have a lot of space to write, so I was wondering whether that's a good place to mention a course I'm currently following on Coursera to show that I really am very motivated to start my studies in this track that is more or less new for me.

If the course fits into that section, you can mention it as another example of what is in your academic toolbox. I would be a little careful with the "I have space so I should fill it" approach though. While it is not ideal to say too little, it is also not ideal to say things that don't meaningfully add to your application. In your case, mentioning the Coursera course is likely relevant to your application, and since you have the space, go ahead and mention it.

I'm familiar with a couple of the geospatial-themed MOOCs offered by coursera. Mentioning in your statement that you're following the class would show initiative and a genuine interest in the subject (good things in grad school). However, I would emphasize on mentioning the topics or areas of GIS or geospatial computing that during the MOOC caught your attention, rather than just stating that you signed up and followed the class. If you completed the MOOC and earned a statement of accomplishment, I'd certainly mention it as well.
P.S. I'm currently in academia and working as a geospatial professional.

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


text:
Writing the GPA in the application form, even though the studies have not finished yet
In the application form of the master's program that I'm applying for, I'm obligated to write my GPA, and I cannot leave it blank, as the form cannot be submitted in that case. I still have one more semester to complete my Bachelor's degree studies.
What do you suggest to write in the field? Should I simply write my GPA, or should I add any phrases afterwards such as: 4.9 out of 5 (5 semesters)

I would write your current GPA, and not an estimated one. The GPA would be the same as what your transcript would say if you obtained one the instant you submitted. Other than that, you can call the office and verify.

Write your current GPA, and just say: "Current GPA: N.N" if the field allows you to add text and not just a number.  It is the current truth, and the people who are reading it will understand that it cannot reflect classes that you have not yet taken.


text:
What are acceptable "relationships with referees"?
I am applying for a job and need to give referees, and their relationship with me. I am not sure how to phrase things. My referees are:

A colleague in my department I publish with
A previous boss in another university I still publish with
Senior people in my field who I have not published with (yet)

None of those things seem formal enough! Is there standard phrases I should be using?

Perhaps:

Colleague from current university and active collaborator
Former employer and active collaborator
Respected senior colleague from same field

Thanks, those are some good suggestions! Seeing as this question perhaps doesn't have a single correct answer, I will just wait a while to see if anyone else replies.


text:
"Internal" license for group software?
I have a question about the use and attribution of internal software tools.
We have a model in our group that is very popular and has formed the basis of many student projects and publications.  It was written about five years ago and has been published as a book chapter, but not a journal paper.  The model exists primarily as source code; there is no compiled version per se although there is a user interface tool that generates new source based on the template of the original model.  As a result, new work tends to involve a mix of the original code and further modifications as appropriate for the study in question.
At the moment, we don't want to release the underlying model as open-source.  Is there an appropriate license that people would recommend to clarify these usage principles?  The original model author now has a looser affiliation with our university and so it may become difficult to ask his opinion on a case-by-case basis.

The first thing to find out is if the code belongs to its author(s) or to the university. Who is "we"?

Technically it's owned by the university.  In practice they are primarily concerned about when IP leaves the university for the wider world and are less interested in the rules and etiquette of sharing within research groups.

The authorship/citation issue is already addressed in this question, so I'm going to remove it from this post

Thanks @ff524 - I hadn't seen that post but it does indeed answer the citation question.

Software developed by multiple parties under university funding is implicitly covered by the copyright of the university.  The attitude towards intellectual property ownership varies by university, so you should search to find out your situation.
A few universities are very liberal about intellectual property.  See https://uwaterloo.ca/research/waterloo-commercialization-office-watco/intellectual-property .  Other universities are more traditional, see http://www.research.utoronto.ca/faculty-and-staff/inventions-commercialization-and-entrepreneurship/invention-disclosure/ .  An invention leads towards a patent.  Software development (and publication) lead towards a copyright.
From this point on, you might have to consult a lawyer, but here's some intuitions that may help (but could be wrong).
Practically, if the source code has been published in a book, the copyright may have been transferred from the university to the publisher.  If the code was rewritten and then put under an open source license, with attribution to the original sources, this could be considered a new work.  With copyright, the analogy is relatively clear in the academic world.  It's okay to cite the source, or use snippets as "fair use", but copying the whole text outright would be plagiarism.
If the university is not interested in commercializing the software, there may already be a process in place to have it reassigned under an open source license.  The MIT license may be the simplest to implement.  The Apache license and LGPL 2.1 licenses are also popular.

Copyright and software licenses are different beasts. Even very permissive licenses like the MIT license retain full copyright for the author.


text:
FAFSA for US PhD (hard sciences — physics) students?
I have a question regarding filling out the FAFSA or not as a incoming PhD student.
What is the benefit of filling out the FAFSA if you are a(n) (incoming) PhD student? In the US (at least in physics), PhDs are (to the best of my knowledge) fully funded — full tuition waiver + a "decent" TA stipend initially and then an RA later. And so I'm a bit confused if I should fill out the FAFSA at all.
Is it a case of "you might as well," since it could end up supplying me additional funds to supplement the TA stipend (which is usually less than RA stipend)? Could the additional funds go to unforeseen student fees and such? Or is it simply not needed as my tuition will be fully waived and I will be getting paid?
For reference, from a graduate school's website:

Types of Financial Aid
A variety of aid is available for all income levels, including various types of student educational loans (Graduate and Professional Student Loans, Short-Term and Emergency Loans), grants, and Work-Study funding. Contact your graduate program regarding the availability of work-study funding.
Apply for Financial Aid
All students interested in educational loans are required to apply for financial aid via the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) or the California Dream Act Application. Both applications are free. Whether or not students think they are eligible, we encourage you to apply for financial aid each year. You may apply for financial aid before you have been admitted.

You should check with your department; they may prefer or require you to fill it out even if you don't want loans. When I was at the Univ. of California, they required us to fill it out every year -- I do not know the details, but they got rebates if we qualified for certain grants. If we forgot to fill it out, the department would punish us by not covering certain fees (which cost a few grand a year).

First off, while many PhD students in many degree programs in the U.S. receive TA and RA positions, these are hardly universal. Many students, especially those who are foreign-born or in the humanities, are responsible for paying their own way.
You need to complete the FAFSA if you want to be eligible for student loans, which could help bridge the cost of your living expenses if your TA/RA stipend isn't large enough. For some universities, it can also unlock the door for scholarships or other funding that may cover things your TA/RA does not. It's not uncommon for TAs/RAs to still have to pay several hundred or even thousand dollars per semester in fees.
If you're a first-year PhD student, I'd suggest completing the FAFSA and see if it yields anything beneficial. After the first year, you can decide if you want to keep filing or skip it.

Thank you very much! I edited the question to include the fact that I am asking specifically in regards to physics, which (to my knowledge) is nearly always fully funded — i.e. full tuition waiver + a "decent" TA stipend before achieving an RA position later.

"Fully funded" might not always mean what you think it does- it's not uncommon for random fees to have to be paid out of your stipend.  For many students (especially those with children) the stipend might not be enough funding- taking out loans is sometimes necessary.

Can we add that for US students, FAFSA primarily opens you up to scholarships, (un)/subsidized federal loans and Pell grants, but Pell grants only apply up to your first Bachelor's degree.

What is the benefit of filling out the FAFSA if you are a(n) (incoming) PhD student? In the US, PhDs are fully funded

That's not universally true, see e.g. this. Even when it is, fully funded doesn't necessarily imply that the money you receive is enough to cover living costs. I believe the FAFSA application is required for certain need-based loans, and some federal grants that may be available to specific types graduate programs. You should be able to tell from your offer letter what level of funding you're promised.
Google reveals that the grad school website you've posted excerpts from likely is UC Davis'. It appears that they offer some merit- and need-based university and departmental fellowships, for which they require a FAFSA application. You might want to check with university staff (e.g. your department's graduate coordinator) if it's worthwhile to apply for these or not.

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


text:
Master's thesis on uninteresting topic not really related to my background
I have started a master thesis in applied mathematics with the aim of studying a paper of my supervisor. This paper uses some "basic" results of a theory (semi algebraic geometry i.e. SAG) that is new for me. While I have no doubt that this theory is interesting, I have two problems:

My background is in analysis (functional and convex analysis, optimization) and probability, not this subject. I found it strange to not capitalize on my prior knowledge.

I know that SAG has been used by my supervisor as a tool for studying subject A (the main subject of interest of my supervisor) and I have, since I am studying through this paper, a little interest for subject A and not much interest for SAG.

Subject A is encompassed in a subject B and I have explicitly said to my supervisor that I am mostly interested in the mathematics generated by subject B and I was willing to discover new area of mathematics. I did not mentioned related to the math studied in my master because it was a kind of "obvious" for me.
I try to see this master thesis as a "job" that I must do well but I cannot stop to think that it would be better to go on a subject in line with my background in order to be able to use all my knowledge and maybe do better, especially given the fact that I would like, if possible, to pursue a PhD.
Is this situation normal?

Would you clarify a few of the differences between B and A?

The universal answer of this forum also applies to this question: Talk to your adviser. They may have a good reason for wanting you to study the paper, or perhaps they assigned it to you for lack of knowledge what it is you really are interested in (perhaps because you did not voice your opinion at the time). Questions of direction are common in adviser-student relationships; they can be resolved but only if both sides talk to each other; the fact that you ask us instead of your adviser suggests that you don't talk to them enough -- that's the problem you need to fix.

In addition to the as stated "talk to your advisor". I will suggest you let go of "your background" for now. I too often see undergraduates coming in to a PhD or MSc fixated on the idea that they are already entrenched in a topic just because they had some level of exposure during their undergraduate. You are still a student and still learning. Don't think of a masters as a necessary continuation or a position that must leverage your undergraduate, but rather as an opportunity to expand your skill sets and overall research scope. When you finish your masters, your background will become more diverse, rather than more hyperfocused.

You have not told us how it was decided that reading this paper would be the start of your master's project.
If your situation permits, have a conversation with your supervisor about what you want from this work and what work they are comfortable directing. You can let them know (politely) why this particular paper does not seem to suit you.


text:
Preprint services for environmental and earth sciences?
Is there a good, reputable preprint service that is used in the environmental and earth sciences, and considered acceptable by the major publishers? Many journals specifically state that it is okay to submit a paper that has been uploaded to arXiv and I would like to take advantage of that, however I am not in a field covered by arXiv.
[I'm aware of the similar question, Preprint services other than arXiv (for other fields), but it is fairly old and there are no answers relevant to my field]

I just found the following article (open access version) published in 2013 which lists 7 repositories for the earth sciences:

CEDA Repository
Earth-prints Repository
Institution Aquatic Commons
Organic Eprints
AgEcon Search
Open Knowledge Environment of the Caribbean
antbase.org

I haven't checked the actuality of this list.

Since this question was first asked, two repositories that are not in the answer above should be mentioned:
Earth Arxiv, run by the Open Science Framework, and the Earth and Space Science Open Archive ESSOAr, which co-run by the American Geophysical Union.


text:
Why do PhDs become homeless?
There is a concept circling in the air that

doing a Ph.D. is a waste of time
a Ph.D. is worthless
and more

But, today, the following comment caught my attention:

I am asking this question, coz, I am venturing into a Ph.D., but these types of news are making me demotivated.
Does this have anything to do with academia or simply bad life-decisions?

People become homeless for all kinds of different reasons.  If you're concerned about job prospects, I would suggest looking at actual data and statistics, not tweets.

Getting a PhD does not mean one now has the right to live in luxury. One still needs to get a job, be financially prudent, be a good worker, and so on. Fail any of these and one could easily end up homeless.

PhDs are less likely to be homeless than similar people without PhDs.

@AnonymousPhysicist, hmm... that is inspiring. :)

I voted to close. “Why do PhDs. become homeless?” Is a loaded question, like “have you stopped beating your wife?” The tweet you are quoting also contains a separate fallacy, the “no true Scotsman” (arbitrarily defining “countries that value education” to exclude countries where people with college degrees bag groceries in order to conclude that the US doesn’t value education). Maybe twitter isn’t the best source of information to draw life conclusions from...

Reasons for homelessness depend on the country - som countries do not have effect social support systems (such as USA evidently), whereas others do, which has a major effect on what are the likely reasons for homelessness. I suggest specifying a country of interest.

Apparently it is easier in the USA for professionals to become homeless than in other developed countries. However, having a PhD and living in your car for a couple of weeks does not imply a "failed life" associated with consistently homeless people that often struggle with addiction, mental health issues and lack of a high school level education.

Perhaps this question is better suited for skeptics.stackexchange

Chemistry Ph.D.s living in their cars wold surprise me.  French Literature Ph.D.s living in their cars, not as much.

They do not "become homeless". This is a myth.
It's as simple as that. Or at least the implied softer statement that a person with a PhD is somehow more at risk of unemployment than other groups of people. Obviously, there is bound to be some unemployment even in that group, just by chance; unfortunate accidents can happen to anyone. But on the whole, a PhD is protective against unemployment, and for many reasons other than the simple topic studied (e.g. a boatload of transferable skills, for one, opening far more doors than their narrow topic of specialization might imply).
Your question is an example of the Bulverist Fallacy, i.e. presenting a loaded argument of the form "A is true. Why is A true?". Any attempt at answering this question that jumps straight into "Why" is fallacious to the extent that it has not addressed whether A is in fact true or not.
As for your specific question, the answer is that it simply is not the case. People with PhDs are far less likely to be unemployed than people without one.
https://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2016/05/employment-crisis-new-phds-illusion

Now, if and when they are in the minority of people who do end up unemployed for whatever reason, Buffy has an excellent answer on the kinds of reasons that might lead to that. But it's worth nothing that you might as well have asked "Why are there so many unemployed green aliens on earth"? The answer would have been equally valid. In that it's mostly not, simply because the premise is largely untrue in the first place.

Here's another source, also comparing average earning potential for various tiers of education: https://smartasset.com/retirement/the-average-salary-by-education-level

"... at least the implied softer statement that a person with a Ph.D. is somehow more at risk of unemployment than other groups of people." --- people often imply that.

@user366312 people often imply all sorts of things that are simply not true. I will say the following though. The "PhD experience" is not a standardised thing. It's like any other investment. Do it well, and you'll be better for it. Do it badly, and it might backfire. It is not impossible to approach a PhD by focusing on a singular super-specialised aspect which nobody realistically cares about after graduation, leaving you effectively unskilled. For the most part, however, a well-rounded PhD will give you lots of experience and is generally valued by employers.

@user366312 also, there is some degree of truth that investing in a PhD often comes at a cost of lost wages for the time you're undertaking one, which can be significant. Which is why people who do them often have reasons other than maximizing lifetime earning potential. Having said that, if you really want to put your PhD to work in that capacity, go into consultancy firms straight after your PhD (where people hired are almost exclusively PhDs) and earn ludicrous salaries there which can more than make up for that gap. I have friends who have done just that. Not my thing.

In reality, few PdDs wind up homeless. A few do, and at certain times more do. But, in general, it shouldn't be a concern for someone wanting to study for a doctorate. But occasionally...
There are a lot of factors. The general state of a nation's economy at the time you finish can have a lot to do with it. When I finished (1970's) there were almost no jobs for mathematicians. We had landed on the moon and all money for science suddenly dried up for several years. I was lucky to stay in academia at all, and many PhDs at the time were pumping gas, etc. It cleared up in a few (several) years.
Some people get a doctorate not intending to use it for anything but the love of knowledge. Some turn out to be writers.
Ted Kaczynski (the Unabomber) was evading capture by the police.
Lots of reasons.
At the current moment there is a glut of doctoral graduates relative to the market for those skills in many fields. Academia in general graduates more PhDs in a given year than there are positions open in academia. So the system depends on jobs being available elsewhere. Sometimes that is true and sometimes not.
A lot of people take jobs below what their skills and education would require, such as teaching school with a doctorate.
And, as to bad life decisions, it is impossible to say. Having a job shouldn't be your highest lifetime goal, actually. Moreover, because of the length of time it takes to earn a doctorate the economy and the demand for your skills can change drastically before you finish. This is what happened to me. When I started grad school everyone would predict a bright future for a mathematician. When I finished, not so much. Nothing, really. I looked into becoming an actuary, for example. And, I switched fields to CS to become more employable in the short term.
But, I'm glad things are better in Kenya. Here (US) politicians have decided to drastically decrease funding for education at all levels. The feeling among some of them is that it is up to you, not society, to see to your education. This is a great way to assure that the population gets dumber and dumber and poorer and poorer over time. I have an opposite view that an educated populace is a national resource that shouldn't be compromised. Silly me.

Postscript: I didn't interpret the question as "Why do so many...". I don't see that implication anywhere in the original post.

why don't these homeless PhDs move to other countries for job?

Lots of reasons for that too. Some do, of course.

@user366312 How do you move to other countries (and in some cases, show that you have enough money to even get a visa) when you can't afford a place to live?

@user366312 I moved repeatedly from academic job to academic job, twice across the Atlantic. I can confirm that it's a very expensive endeavor and not something to be done lightly if you have barely enough money to feed yourself (thankfully I had some savings to help me in the transition, but it's very much a situation where high expenses now yield a financial benefit in the long term).

There is the point of actual expertise, too. At least in my country, too many PhD's don't have a sliver of real-world experience. Most of the technical jobs that could use a PhD are taken by people that did graduate while working on the field already. This is super evident on STEM fields.

For the Unabomber, very talented at first, but taking up an academic road might have drove him to go crazy... I heard most of its targets where other academics... so also supports the claim a PhD drives you crazy/mentally-ill, which might highly correlate with being homeless.

@StefanH for n=1 levels of "supports", perhaps...

@StefanH or that "crazy" people can still get a PhD.

To add another perspective to this, there are two important factors that make people start a PhD, not least of which is a misconception about their likelihood of success.
The glut in PhD candidates is partially fueled by faculty members misrepresenting one's prospects post graduation. Doing a PhD in the hopes of securing a position in an R1 faculty position is, statistically speaking, a (very) risky prospect - lots of good people competing for very few positions.
Of course, faculty members who are already in these positions suffer from observation bias, and see their road to these positions as straightforward, whereas it is in fact far from it. I don't think that faculty members who encourage people to enter grad school are being malicious: they genuinely believe that their success can be replicated with hard work and determination; this is often not enough to succeed (there's a tremendous amount of luck, and qualities like creativity that are hard to teach). School recruitment of course has no interest in telling you otherwise - they want to keep those enrollment numbers high, thus you may get very skewed signals.
One might say that even after graduation students are still (weakly) more employable than they were before studies. This is probably true (you probably won't become homeless!), however, you are not factoring in lost wages, job experience, and losing what are probably your best years career development wise.
As an example, some people (in CS and related disciplines) start their PhD under the false impression that it will improve their chances of securing a software engineering job. As I cover in this answer, you stand to lose roughly $500k++ (probably more) by simply entering the PhD program. While you won't end up being homeless (probably) if you graduate with a CS PhD, losing out on this amount of money in sunk costs/lost wages is something that most graduate students don't even consider when entering the program (at least not the ones I had a chance to interact with).
This is not counting time spent doing a postdoc, or adjunct teaching. Both positions pay peanuts (I think in some disciplines you're better off financially by flipping burgers), and that's again time and wages lost.
To conclude, people tend to romanticize academia, and overestimate their chances of succeeding after graduation. This tends to lead to them making poor choices, and unfortunately, faculty members/recruiters often enough are not helping them understand what they're getting into.

You might want to specify the country in your answer. USA based on the currency, I guess.

This is a very short term view of the earning potential of a PhD. Most sources and statistics you read will tell you that a PhD effectively doubles your earning potential. You might as well discourage people from going into medicine because the first year rotation isn't paid highly enough.

This is a very bleak picture you have painted.

@TasosPapastylianou From your own source: "You might think that Americans with a doctorate would earn more than those with a professional degree, but in fact they earn less.", which makes sense - PhD studies are not vocational. Plus you're not factoring in lost time doing a PhD. Telling people to do a PhD for the money, at least in CS/math, is misleading them. I don't know about other disciplines.

@user366312 I don't mean to be bleak! I'm saying that from a purely financial perspective, PhD studies are not necessarily a good idea. There are other non-financial reasons to do it - which I think are very valid (I already referenced some in my previous answer). Those are the reasons I did mine!

Also, medical studies are by and large vocational, so not really a fair comparison here.

@Spark not sure why that contradicts anything. The "professional degrees" compared to here are things like specialised doctorates. And the difference in projected earnings are trivial: $89,960 vs $84,396 annually. As opposed to $59,124 for Bachelor's students. I believe your argument here isn't why traditional "Doctor of Philosophy" students are more likely to be homeless than people with "Doctor of Engineering" or "Doctor of Medicine" students. It's whether such a specialised degree is worth it in the first place compared to going straight to work with your Bachelors. And the answer is yes.

@TasosPapastylianou there are several studies on this topic, and the answer you offer is far from the consensus.
https://medium.economist.com/why-doing-a-phd-is-often-a-waste-of-time-349206f9addb
see also: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63568/is-a-phd-economically-still-worth-doing

@Spark as for the "financial reasons", that's exactly the point. This is similar to that argument that says women pay financially for their choice to have babies, when in fact, when you look at the numbers, this only seems to be the case in the first 2-3 years, but when looked at over a 10-year old period there is usually no difference in earnings from people without babies. If you're claiming that "in the first 2-3 years after your PhD your earnings will be lower than someone who started work when you started your PhD", then you're absolutely right. But 10 years later the PhD earns double.

Again, I'm sorry - but what you're saying is not backed up by facts, certainly not in CS, probably not in STEM, and in the humanities I'm not familiar.

Both articles you sent refer to PhDs with regard to becoming an academic. This is an altogether different question. I see people often berate their PhD because they ended up not going into academia, completely ignoring how the PhD helped their carers obtain new heights compared to if they hadn't.

@Spark it doesn't have to be. All I need to do is point out that your premise isn't necessarily true or based on facts either. It's your opinion. My own personal experience is that all the companies that I would be interested in applying, my PhD has made me extremely more desirable. Remaining in academia (for now) is my own personal choice. I am sure there are many people like me who sacrifice obscene profits for what they perceive to be for the betterment of society, and I'm sure this skews earning figures in general. But that is very different to saying a PhD dooms you to financial ruin.

The Economist article discusses the economic prospects in length, citing sources that contradict your claims. Not sure what you mean. In any case - we can also stop here and disagree, that's fine :)


text:
Can someone work part-time elsewhere and also full-time as PhD student (in Germany and Poland)?
Can a full-time Ph.D. student legally work in a private company, and draw the stipend from the university and the salary from the job at the same time?
I am interested to know the regulations of Germany and Poland.

I very doubt it. At least in my country, Italy, this would not be possible, and I suspect that also Germany and Poland may have similar regulations.

@MassimoOrtolano, so, in order to become a Ph.D. student, you must first accept poverty? What if I don't accept the stipend from the uni?

@user366312: I don't know about Poland but in Germany your income as a PhD candidate is not a "stipend" it is a salary and it is well above a poverty level (albeit low compared to what you can earn as a high performing graduate).

I agree that in Poland, as far as I know, the PhD salary is low (afaik around 400 €/month, at least a few years ago), even considering the low cost of living in that country, but in Germany a PhD salary is far from the level of poverty.

@MassimoOrtolano, Now it is PLN 2300/month.

It is (almost) the same number in Germany, but in euros ;)

Please don’t change so substantially the question once it has already received answers. Having both perspectives is not bad anyway.

@MassimoOrtolano, this link doesn't say anything about my raised point.

That link says that a PhD student should “comply with common law and the regulations in force at the University”, so there can be something else in the law or in other regulations.

@JackAidley: "in Germany your income as a PhD candidate is not a 'stipend' it is a salary" Well, this depends. Technically, the status as a PhD candidate in Germany is not directly related to the question how the candidate is funded. Various options for funding include (i) salary from a "Landesstelle", (ii) salary from a grant, (iii) a scholarship from one of various public or private foundations, or (iv) to work in the private sector (potentially on a part time position) and use your spare time to do your PhD.

@user366312: There is a lot of information about funding of PhD positions in Germany in this answer (under the point "Position").

@user366312 The answer will depend on whether you get a stipend, or a salary through the university.

@JochenGlueck Fair enough, I stand corrected: all the PhDs I've known in Germany have been salaried. I'd assumed it was the norm.

No. In many German contracts, it is explicitly mentioned that you are either not allowed to work anywhere else, or you need permission from your full-time PhD employer to work somewhere else. You can try to request but it will very likely not work.
Reasons:

PhD is a full-time job.
Read 1.

If you get a PhD position in Germany, you will very likely get a reasonable amount to support your livelihood. It is, I've heard many times, the opposite in Poland. I do not know the legal issues in Poland, but I suspect it must be possible to work. Otherwise, how else are so many students surviving from the money they get from the state?

While not necessarily accepting poverty, it seems students in Germany must instead accept slavery.   While I certainly prefer my students focus on their graduate degree (and I make sure their have a stipend above poverty), I legally have no say in what they do outside their reasonable hours of work.

@ZeroTheHero: "it seems students in Germany must instead accept slavery": I've heard this quite often, but I have difficulties to fully understand this claim. As a PhD student in Germany you are indeed quite strongly dependent on your advisor. However, considering the countlessly many questions by desparate PhD students on Academia StackExchange I doubt that this is so much better in other places in the world (although I would indeed be happy to be false here).

@quantum "that you are either not allowed to work anywhere else" - I find this hard to believe, at least for TVL/TVöD (i.e. public service) contracts: I thought in public service you are entitled to a side job of up to 8h. Are there states where the rules are different? Or where PhD students have different type of public service contracts?

@ZeroTheHero There are typically common rules for all people hired by the state about working on the side. So PhD students are typically not treated any different. Then, the claim that they cannot work on the side is typically not correct (see my comment above), but it is true that there is a limit on the number of hours (less so on the salary), with the typical idea being that working more than a certain numbers of hours per week (48h or so) is not beneficial.

@JochenGlueck I know the German system sufficiently well to know that one need not work outside normal hours.  I just find it incredible that you cannot legally do so.  Afterall, if you want to work -say - as a bartender in the evenings and this doesn’t affect your academic progress, why should this be illegal or why should your advisor have any say in this?

… I should add that I believe in NA too many students spend too much time working outside university to make ends meet, but that’s a slightly different issue.

@user151413: It seems that the 48 hours limit per week does not only apply to people employed by a public institution, but generally for most employees in Germany, no matter whether they work in the public or in the private sector (though there are some exceptions). See for instance here (in German).

TVöD only decides the monthly enumeration of pay, and does not dictate what the employer can put as a condition in the contract. The money a PhD student gets is for their work done as given by the supervisor. This does not need be PhD relevant (if you have a bad advisor). You are supposed to work on your PhD outside these hours. That is why the restrictions (my guess). My answer does not cover what happens if no explicit restriction exists in the contract. I am inclined to believe it is possible (and not possible if you are a foreigner).

@quantum The restrictions are for paid jobs, and I don't think there is a way around this in the public sector, at least if you are employed on a full-time position: You must inform your employer of your side job (or ask for permission, if there might be COIs), and you cannot work more than a certain number of hours. (There's also a softer limit on how much you can make.)

@ZeroTheHero: you are right. If the PhD student is employee, there is the 48 h/wk general limit - but I'd be surprised about a PhD contracts specifying more than 40 h/wk. Which would leave 8 h/wk, for which the student like any other employee has the right to get approval by their employer (subject to general rules like non-compete etc.). A scholarship contract may specify that the holder cannot have additional employment (more than x h/wk). I'd expect that such restrictions still need to be proportionate (low scholarship  => must allow more side-job).


text:
What should I do now to go ahead and restart my aspirations to become an appropriate candidate for a Ph.D. program?
According to Dr. Daniel G. Amen, each person has his personal definition of success. Therefore, you can't argue with anyone regarding their personal definition of success. My personal definition of success is to have a Ph.D. in CS and become a teacher in a university. To me, not having a Ph.D. is like living as an incomplete human being. I have become so obsessed with the idea of having a Ph.D. that I have already sacrificed various things for this ambition, and I am prepared to sacrifice more.
Now, for me the problem has been, due to my undiagnosed clinical depression and, apparently, insufficient math background, I dropped out of two Masters in CS programs from two different EU universities. Now, I am taking the medication regularly, and in a stable situation.
I never wrote a thesis before, and don't have any publications.
What should I do now to go ahead and restart my aspirations to become an appropriate candidate for a Ph.D. program?

Do I need to go return and complete my MSc degree in order to get accepted into a Ph.D. program?
If I must go back to an MSc degree, would a 1-year MSc suffice given that the MSc programs I dropped were of 2 years in length?

A comment by Peter caught my eye:

obviously, I can't tell with certainty because I don't know OP but mental health issues, an obsession with completing a degree just for the sake of the title, and subpar math skills are not a promising combination.

I would like to reply this.
Firstly, if I were not stuck with my health issue and math skills, I wouldn't have come to academia.SE, and probably would be answering this type of question for others. academia.SE is here to give suggestions.
Secondly, I am having my medication regularly, and I am having good health now. That is why I am thinking about restarting my journey.
Thirdly, I have been studying college and graduate-level mathematics for the last three months. I have been improving. Probably, I will sit for the GRE Math subject test at the end of this year.
Fourthly, yesterday, I have received a national scholarship from an EU-country to work on a research project. So, I think, I still have something in me.
Fifthly and finally, read Napoleon Bonaparte's story about Line of Fate. This is probably a fictional story, but you get the idea.

This may be closed as a duplicate so I won't provide a full answer. I'll just note that, in the US, a masters is not required for entry to most PhD programs. There is a lot of completion, however.

Does this answer your question? How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in the US, particularly for weak or borderline students?

I do not believe that wiki covers the OP's situation (though a good answer here would likely be a good addition to the wiki).

I don’t understand what you have said about living without a PhD is living as an incomplete human being. The question becomes “Why is it living as an incomplete human being?” Because of the status that having a PhD provides? (Other ways to get status.) Because of the knowledge it entails? (Other ways to gain knowledge.) Passion is not enough, you need passion + rationale to make this course worth it (IMHO).

Frankly, the goal of getting a PhD to become a college teacher in the US is a recipe for poverty. Please look at publications such as The Chronicle of Higher Education to understand the US job market. Getting a PhD as a vanity project (which it sounds to be for you) is fine if you are independently wealthy.

@Dawn, “Why is it living as an incomplete human being? --- this is my personal definition of success. According to Dr. Daniel G. Amen, each person has his personal definition of success. Therefore, you can't argue with me regarding this.

@Buffy assuming the OP want to pursue a PhD in the EU, a masters is basically a requirement. Would US Universities accept PhD candidates with an EU bachelor only? I would have thought they don't since EU bachelors are often just three year degrees.
From a technical point the answer seems to clearly be: yes, you need an MS and no, it might as well be 1 or 1.5 years in length (for instance, ETH Zürich or Oxbridge offer short MS programs and those are certainly good enough to prepare you for a PhD).
Should OP do a PhD? Almost definitely not, given their motivation to do so.

@Peter Should OP do a PhD? Almost definitely not, given their motivation to do so. How can you cast judgement?

@user2768 I'm not judging, and I definitely won't or can't stop them it just seems to clearly not be a good idea.

@Peter, in the EU a bachelors is much more specialized than in the US. Most of the US bachelors is in general education not in the specialization (major). I think there is not too much difference in preparation for a US doctoral program which includes coursework in the specialization at the beginning.

@Peter it just seems to clearly not be a good idea: Why is that?

@user2768: This should probably be moved to chat and obviously I can't tell with certainty because I don't know OP but mental health issues, an obsession with completing a degree just for the sake of the title and subpar math skills are not a promising combination.

Your post does not explain the broader motivation for your goal to complete a PhD program, and it also sounds like you have some problems that are going to make that an arduous (and possibly unsuccessful) journey.  Candidature in a PhD program is often difficult and stressful even for the most elite students with no accompanying clinical depression.  For that reason, I recommend you take a moment to reflect on whether you really need to complete a PhD in your field in order to achieve your broader life goals, and whether this period of your life is the appropriate time to do that.  Nevertheless, I will take the premise of your question as given, and try to give some basic advice on how to achieve your goal.
As with the acheivement of any goal where you have already made failed attempts, it is important to identify the impediments that are presently preventing success, and then overcome those impediments.  Your post identifies two impediments to your success: (1) depression; and (2) insufficient maths background.  I will leave it primarily to medical people to assist you with the first, but I will just mention that you might find some wisdom and assistance in reading some of the philosophy of the Stoics (particularly Epictetus and maybe also Seneca the Younger).  As to your insufficient math background, the simplest way to improve this is to undertake revision on all your previous mathematics courses, with particular attention to the mathematics you encountered in your previous MSc program.
You mention that you do not have any academic publications, and I think it is premature to attempt this.  However, once you have learned some more of the base material in your field you could start out by trying to publish small posts about it on relevant websites.  Since you are already using StackExchange, once you learn some more mathematics you could attempt to answer some questions on Math.SE or CS.SE.  Another possible activity here is to write some blog posts explaining the mathematics you have learned to other students at your level.  These are all "publications" in a minor sense (though not academic publications), and they are a reasonable way to practice making public posts about mathematics that can be subjected to critical feedback from experts.
In these circumstances, where you are already struggling, I think it would be beneficial to complete your MSc program before attempting entry to a PhD program.  The main reason for this is to give you an opportunity to complete postgraduate level coursework and improve your skills (including your math skills) up to a level that would make you competitive for entry into a PhD program.  A secondary reason is that you may then obtain some ideas for possible research projects (and supervisors) that you could pursue as a first attempt at academic publication.
To finish, I will just make two last points.  It is possible for weak students to improve and later be competitive students for higher-degree programs.  That is usually a long and difficult process, but it is certainly possible for a student with sufficient diligence and commitment.  Having said this, it is also important to ensure that you are setting reasonable life goals that are actually going to lead you where you want to go.  Some students (and I am certainly not saying you are in this category) look at the PhD program as a kind of elite social-proof and they pursue it as an end in itself, rather than taking a realistic view of what it will actually add to (and subtract from) their career or life.  Take some time to reflect on your broader life goals and consider what you really need to be successful in your life.  Good luck.

I think it would be beneficial to complete your MSc program before attempting entry to a Ph.D. program. --- I agree. But, my real query was: would I actually be an underdog as a Ph.D. applicant if I don't complete this MSc?

The main reason for this is to give you an opportunity to complete postgraduate level coursework and improve your skills (including your math skills) --- Isn't the GRE Subject Test enough for that?

what it will actually add to (and subtract from) their career or life. --- the way I see it is, a Ph.D. degree is a kind of life insurance. A Ph.D. gives a lot of flexibility in choice in life.  If you can't find a job in the industry, you can be in academia and vice versa. If you can't find a tenured position, you can be a part-timer. However, life will continue. The chance of becoming homeless reduces drastically. This is especially true for me. Being a patient of depression, I am at risk of being kicked out of the industry.

@user366312: Based on the information you've given, it sounds like your present academic record is unlikely to be very competitive for entry to a PhD program.  So yes, I think you would be an underdog.  The GRE is a test, rather than coursework, so while it tests your skills, it is not the same as doing a course.

I suppose the PhD does give some flexibility, but seeing academia as a backup to industry positions is pretty misguided. Usually it is the reverse. Plus part time academics make poverty wages most places. If the main goal is to have an industry career and have some stability, then look at pursuing industry jobs where you can also have a second freelance income.

I agree with what Dawn says here.  Moreover, any motivation for undertaking a PhD other than genuine passion for the subject matter is likely to constitute a pretty thin support for four years of full-time study.  Unless a student is passionate about research in their field, a PhD program is a bad idea.

@Dawn, If the main goal is to have an industry career and have some stability --- what if my main goal is to become a teacher?

In the US, if your main goal is to become a teacher (say HS), you should get a Masters in teaching. If your main  goal is to teach at the college level, a PhD might get you there, but it is very financially insecure. College teaching wages are often below those of HS teachers.

Several years salary in the bank is also very helpful for stability, and something you won't get during a PhD program.

@Ben, My bachelor's is from the 2000s. What if I enroll in Bachelors in CS again?

Since you have already completed your Bachelors, the next educational step in that field would be the Masters program.  I see little value in re-enrolling in a degree you have already completed (and I'm not sure they'd even let you in) so the Masters program would seem to me to be the better option.

Something to consider (I wanted to leave a comment but am too new to be able to), the Math GRE subject test is VERY hard.  I know people who came from top undergraduate math programs and said it was very hard and did not do well.  If you are able to do well on the GRE Math Subject test, I would assume you have enough of a math background to do a CS degree (since the test is for Math Graduate School).  However, if your math background is not strong enough for a CS PhD, it is probably not strong enough for the Math Subject Test either.  To put things in further perspective students who come have technical industrial engineering backgrounds can do the math needed in CS without a problem but not necessarily the math needed for Math graduate school.
The being said having a MS is always a way to fill some doubts an admissions committee  may have about your candidancy (and take some time to build your skillset).  Getting a MSc can only help your case, and if you have the money, applying 2 years in a row won't hurt.  It is very hard to start a PhD program when you don't have an adequate background that happened to me and I ended up adding a year to my PhD to take "remedial" courses, but some programs can't absorb that cost and you will be dismissed from the program. Not to mention the stress that comes with being completely overwhelmed.  Have you thought of applying to PhD programs and then checking the box that you are willing to be considered for MS programs as well.  Then you can have full information about your options.  Also, if you enroll in a MS with a thesis option you can start building your research career and potentially stay with the same advisor for your PhD (ultimately graduating faster). These are all options that will allow you to hit the ground running instead of starting from behind.

I know a professor who wants me to do a master's thesis under his supervision, not a master's degree. Would that be good enough to complete a master's thesis without completing the entire 2 years degree?

If you do a MS Thesis w/o a MS, it is just independent research. Many professors won't do this b/c it is risky. There is no guarentee you'll do the work & nothing keeping you from bailing when the next better opportuntiy comes. Also, if you do a MS w/ thesis you will normally get funding which will offset some of the cost for your MS. What is your hesitation to getting the MS? As I said in my post you're most likely going to pay for those years anyway, either the additional time to degree in the PhD (which carries more stress and less flexibility change schools after 2 yrs) or in the MS.

@user366312 Some universities offer a Master of Philosophy degree that's a Masters-level research degree. Working on a thesis like that might qualify, though you'd need to talk to the university to find out.

@TudPims, My bachelor's is from the 2000s. What if I enroll in Bachelors's in CS again?

That I can't speak to, but I feel like that will be more money and less focused than just doing the MS.

Ben's answer covers just about all the main points. Motivation and rationale are crucial considerations for undertaking a PhD. Your desire to become a teacher in your comments is an important consideration. The other concerns about your math's skills is also an important aspect that Ben raised. I worry that the level of maths skills needs to be quite advanced if you are going for the usual CS PhD rather than a pedagogically focused CS PhD.
Even in a pedagogical CS PhD, your writing skills would be also another very critical consideration that you have not seemed to have emphasised. Writing blogs and even these SE posts etc is a great way to improve and gain helpful feedback, but really consider doing academic writing courses and blogs. Since you are keen on PhD level teaching, remember there is an overemphasis of a very formal and a highly nuanced form of writing that other forms of teaching may not. Informal teaching or high school teaching would be fair less critiqued by peers or students. Your PhD thesis and publications are more likely to undergo harsh criticism especially peer reviews as well. So are you keen or motivated enough to increase your written and spoken skills to this expected level?
With respect to your two Master's attempts, do the Master's cover essential knowledge or skills that you need in CS or for a CS PhD? I suspect they do, especially since you seem to indicate that you have an insufficient maths background, so it sounds like a Masters program would be very helpful for you to gain the knowledge and to improve your written and spoken proficiency as well? Also start taking care of your mental health more so now too. Tablets are great, but also seek therapy and online help to increase the range of your strategies for when you get stressed and unwell. Your health is always worth the investment when you are well, to prepare you for the stressful times with deadlines and pressure.

Sorry, the italics is not very obvious in the app version of your comment, I was confused why you kept referring to me instead of you. Consider using quotations "" instead of italicisations when referring and quoting text.

"I suspect they do, especially since you seem to indicate that you have an insufficient maths background, so it sounds like a Masters program would be very helpful for you to gain the knowledge and to improve your written and spoken proficiency as well" --- My bachelor's is from the 2000s. What if I enroll in Bachelors in CS again?

Improving written and spoken work requires practice and not more study unfortunately. Specific and deliberate practice with more feedback with specific critique would be more helpful than more bachelor study. Feedback from a bachelor degree may not be specific and deliberate enough to improve to a PhD level for example. The knowledge component would be something else to consider.

Both of the MSc in CS programs, I enrolled in before, had 50% of courses from Bachelors. I.e. all the courses in the 1st two semesters were from Bachelors. I know that because most of my classmates were from Bachelors.

Is it just the maths component in the CS field or are there specific areas of CS that  you are behind in terms of knowledge and being able to achieve a PhD level of CS work? That would be something you should consider discussinging with other colleagues and people who know your specific situation and background further. Speaking in generics with your very complex history and background would not help as helpful for you. There are no recipes and guaranteed strategies to achieve a PhD, a nuanced and thoughtful approach tends to fare better.

Most of your classmates would have finished your Masters and maybe some would have proceeded to a PhD? They may have specific feedback and advice on how to improve your situation as well.

I just wanted to know if enrolling in a BSc in CS and completing it (rather than doing an MSc) would serve my purpose of getting acceptance in a Ph.D. program. I am asking this because doing a bachelor may serve me to fill up the gap in math more than the MSc does.

By the way,  my computer programming and algorithmic skills are top of the line as I always obtain A+ in programming related courses. I only faced problems with math-intensive courses. E.g. Optimization, Pattern Recognition, etc.

Improve your maths then. Consider doing open courses in those areas and try to do better without the pressure of deadlines and face to face interactions.

Marks such as A+ do not matter in the world of PhDs unfortunately. Consider whether your knowledge and interest are remains in the leading edge of publications and the research interest.

If its just about the qualification - you can get one of those by mail order.
What about the actual research you want to do?
What does being a successful graduate look like in the area you want to work?
What kind of capabilities do you need to succeed in that area?
I would start by thinking about what area of research you would like to specialise in and work back from there.


text:
How should one interpret a rejection on the grounds that a paper "has no added value to the existing state of the art"?
I've got a rejection for my paper that was submitted to a high impact journal;
after waiting 6 weeks instead of 4 normally it was rejected with only one referee comment 4 lines:

This study seems to be well done and the results are properly and concisely described. But, the paper is also nothing more than that...It is just the determination of some basic  properties and a comparison of the calculated and measured ones. As such, the paper presents no new insights, new methodologies, or whatsoever... Hence, it must be concluded that the current study applies current measurement protocols in a correct way, but has no added value to the existing state of the art. Therefore, although I have hardly any small remarks on the paper, it does not meet the standards of the journal.

How should one react to such a review? Submit to another journal? The paper is about new material, so I don't agree the referee about the fact it has no added value to the existing state of art!!!!

Sounds a lot like the third review from Paper rejected. Should I appeal against biased reviews? - perhaps some of those answers will be helpful to you.

The key phrase in the review is "does not meet the standards of the journal". Everything else sounds quite positive. Right paper, wrong journal. Take your work elsewhere and don't be discouraged.

Journals and conferences tend to have a particular standard for novelty. Some (especially high-impact journals) have a very high bar for novelty, and will only accept papers that have exceptionally high significance and novelty. Others have a low standard for novelty; they'll accept most original papers, as long as they are within the scope of the journal and present solid work. And of course, there is a whole range in between.
From this review, it sounds like you "overshot" a little bit; that is, your paper (as submitted) was not up to this particular journal's standards for novelty. This isn't an accusation that you didn't submit new material; it just means that it didn't contribute enough new insight, new techniques, etc. to meet this journal's standards.
For example, it may be an application of an existing technique to a well-studied problem, that didn't offer any surprising findings - new, possibly valuable, but not very novel.
Your choices are then:

If possible: Make some major improvements to your paper. Highlight the novel and impactful aspects of it. Ask others in your field to read your revised paper and give you feedback on where they think it belongs. ("What journal would you expect to see this paper published in?") If they suggest that this revised manuscript is suitable for a high-impact journal, then go ahead and submit to such a journal.
Maybe you can't do much more than you already did, or the feedback you get suggests that this work isn't suitable for a journal with high standards for novelty. In that case, find a journal that publishes papers like yours, and submit your paper there.

@djechlin in most cases, yes. But given the high payoff in case it works, it's worth considering even if the probability of success is small!


text:
How to thank a teacher in a thesis?
Given that a student wants to thank you her teacher for her assistance to her project thesis, is it polite if she writes any of this at the end of her thesis:

Thanks to your assistance, my project was done under your supervision.
You have been my project's tutor. Now it is done successfully, thank you.

Well, what I wrote was partly humor, partly serious:

"I would like to thank: Prof. [my adviser] for his advice and support
  throughout the thesis work, Prof. [] for his patience as I
  mis-implemented his design, [] for his assistance in selecting
  components, the [lab and department] for computer time, [], whose
  Masters thesis provided the format I have adopted, the manufacturers
  of [caffeinated beverages] for their stimulating ideas, E. Gary Gygax
  for giving me something to kill, and the States of Alaska and
  Confusion."

I think you're overthinking this. Any polite statement crediting those who have made a significant contribution to the project will be fine.
Suggestion: see if your school maintains copies of past theses in their library, read through a few to see what other people have done, and adopt what seems useful from those.

My thesis has an acknowledgements section in the front matter. Likely, your institutions have guidelines about the appropriate location, length, and content of acknowledgements.

Likely, but not necessarily. Ask your advisor or other professors, investigate (I've given you a pointer to a good resource), and proceed appropriately.