text:
I have a long history of suffering from power abuse, currently getting rejected research/grad applications
I am from India. I have done B.Sc and M.Sc in Physics so far.
My BSc is from one of the top colleges in India (top 10). However, the professors were very narrow-minded when it came to academia. I got intentionally screwed over and given low marks on exams as I gave answers from established books, rather than their notes. I got the evaluated papers through the Right to Information Act after a long fight and found out that I was right. Most of my answers were correct as per books and outside professors. My college professors either undermarked them or gave no marks for the right answers. I passed with a second-class B.Sc degree in Physics (48%). The college didn't cooperate and was hostile, and there was no way for improvement without a court battle.
In India for M.Sc, universities arrange nationwide entrance exams. I ranked top in many entrance exams for M.Sc in top universities but didn't get into solely because of my UG marks. I lost a year and the next year got into a relatively lower-grade university for an M.Sc.
This M.Sc was entirely coursework based. I got a 7/10 CGPA, which is considered a distinction, where the top scorer got 8. Final exams were delayed by several months due to Covid. Even during my M.Sc, I had bad experiences. Got marked lowest in some courses even after writing everything right. I know it was intentional as the professor was racist towards me due to my ethnic background in India. Even after I showed and proved that my answers were current they still gave me the lowest in class.
During my M.Sc, I took part in a scientific poster presentation at a research institution and many of the visiting foreign professors liked it. They were so interested that they even took my email ID and were in touch with me for a long time. Unfortunately during the second the organisers in the institute kicked me away. They took me to a corner and were saying filth about my background and I was taking the attention from them.
Even during M.Sc, I visited another research institute for a conference and there I helped them realize a problem and its solution for their upcoming big research lab. It was a multinational collaborative experimental project and the professors were so impressed that they offered me positions but my primary interest is in theory, so I chose not to go.
After my M.Sc, I had a hard time getting into research internships in India but got one with a professor eventually to work in theory. He gave a a lot to read: books, papers, and such. For starting work a lot of coursework is needed for this research sector. I was hopeful and worked day and night to grasp all the materials, read papers, learn coding, do calculations for the professors' papers. But as time progressed he started to defer his part of the research, not replying to emails or calls properly, delaying meetings but still insisting I to stay and that he would make some time next month, and so on. But he never did and after a few more months I realized that he's not going to ever. He even gave out no recommendations for PhD applications and when I asked, he told me that, I shouldn't have put all of my eggs in one basket.
I got depressed and even started to apply to the UK for some research masters for research experiences, as officially I don't have any, and PhD applications are complicated but not getting any luck with any university. It's been one year of searching. Most professors either do not reply to emails, universities reject citing not good academics, or professors already have students.
I have a long history of getting abused in India and am tired of fighting. I have lost five academic years so far and still staying in for a quality research position but not getting any. If anyone can give me any advice, I will highly appreciate it.

You have been accepted for experimental physics, but not for theoretical physics. Why don't you accept it? It would be an opportunity to improve your CV (after you have a couple papers published nobody cares about your grades). Besides, isn't it the case that many theoretical physicists started in some applied field? (Einstein worked in a patents office for goodness sake!)

Although it was an experimental conference, they had the calculations wrong theoretically which I pointed out. My strong suit lies in theory, I am not particularly good in forging experimental setups. Then again, that offer was during my M.Sc, years have passed after that.

First, I would recommend getting assistance with your mental health from a trusted professional. It sounds like you've been through a lot.
Second, I do not think that people will find the story of abuse at multiple levels particularly credible in a highly competitive context. Even if your story is accurate on all fronts, the problem is that you will be competing with people who received good grades at all stages and praise from their advisors. There will be applicants who have struggled at some stage but subsequently demonstrated growth and success. The job of an admissions committee is to accept the applicants that they think have the best chances to succeed, not to make the world right for someone who has suffered, so those stories will be better received than yours.
If all of your applications for further graduate study are denied and you have applied to a range of institutions with a range of selectivity, it may be time to look for employment in your field without further academic study. Most people do not obtain a PhD, and most people who obtain a PhD eventually take a job that does not require a PhD; there are too few PhD-requiring jobs out there, especially in areas like theory that either do not have or are far from having immediate financial impact for someone that has the money to pay for it.

I can't afford therapy, I have been giving tuitions to make ends meet. I don't wanna do PhD just for jobs but for research. I am still looking for some positions that may take me.I am concerned about whether should I write the reasons for my gap years. I haven't done that so far in applications.

@JAMES213 That sounds like a good reason to find a non-PhD job. I understand that you'd like to do PhD research but it sounds like you haven't been accepted anywhere. Rather than thinking about your past struggles you need to look to your future. You can apply again but I do not see anything in your descriptions here that would improve an application. If there are any academics you know personally that you trust you could ask them to help review your applications and look for areas to improve.

There are still some universities to apply, that's why I am asking for any suggestions. Unfortunately, I don't know any foreign professors to review my application. I am hoping to get some feedback here. Are you a professor?


text:
Three years gap between Master's and PhD and no article
I am a 31 year old international student. I applied for a PhD position in one of the top Australian universities. I’ll interview by Skype next week. I have a three year gap between my Master's and this PhD position.  During these three years, I applied to many universities but was rejected from all. My GPAs are both above 3.8/4.0. I don’t want to work on something related to my master project.
I don't have any article yet. I wrote one three years ago but my supervisor, who is the corresponding author, submitted it only this April. Because I need her recommendation I couldn’t do anything but politely request to submit it.
In these three years, I took the GRE and IELTS exams (the latter was expired two weeks ago). I wrote a review article which I don't think my supervisor will ever try to submit. I tried to learn Python and R programming although I can’t say I am good. I participated in the translation of a book related to my major. I am also a high school teacher of 11 years.
Australian universities care so much about articles and research background which I don’t have. I don't know what I should say about this three year gap. I love research but I live in a small town in a deprived area of my developing country and I didn’t have any chance to participate in research. I also have a commitment with the educational office to work at my home town, that’s why I didn’t leave here. (During my studies I traveled around 2000 km every week to attend the university at the capital city of my country). However, now that I think about it I at least could have learn some bioinformatics tools and write an article.
How can I explain my gap without research? I don't want them to think that I make excuses. I love the project and I don’t want to lose this opportunity.

Two questions: 1) Is there any reason that you are focused on Australian universities? Universities in other countries, such as the US, do not have so great an expectation of research experience and publications for PhD applicants; 2) Is there any reason you can’t submit your review article on your own? Was your advisor involved in writing it?

This question was asked a long time ago, but remains on the unanswered queue, so I'll try to answer it.
The OP doesn't mention what field he's in, but mentions wanting to learn R and Python, so I think it's safe to assume it's in the sciences but is not stats or computer science (because, a master's student would already know those languages). Perhaps it's bioinformatics. I'll answer from the point of view of a mathematician who has also published papers in applied statistics, biology, and epidemiology.
Generally speaking, there is not a strong expectation that you already have publications before starting your PhD. Much more important is what the admissions committee thinks about your research potential. They largely assess this based on letters of recommendation. If your master's advisor is a well-known researcher and writes a strong letter, explaining that the work you did is high quality and likely to be published, then this matters just as much as the publication itself.
Another way to show your research potential is with preprints or independent projects, e.g., implementing well-known algorithms and sharing your code on GitHub. Or the review article you mentioned. Put it online and include a link to it.
Generally speaking, the degree that prepares you to do good quality, independent research, is a PhD not master's degree. It's perfectly fine to say that your love of the subject was enriched by your master's degree, and in the three years since then you've been exploring the subject more deeply through teaching, reading, learning these programming languages, etc. There is no need to try to come up with excuses for not having published papers.
In terms of why you might have had trouble getting accepted, here are some possibilities:

There's a strong "prestige bias" at all levels of academia. A great GPA at a totally unknown school might not matter much to the admissions committee. The solution is better letters of recommendation, better GRE scores, etc.

Unfortunately, racism is still a force in the world. Consider casting a wider net in terms of admission to PhD programs.

Writing quality matters. In addition to trying to strengthen your research record, you could try to strengthen your writing skills, through blogging, stack exchange websites, expository writing, etc.

The acceptance and interview is about more than research alone. They also want to judge "fit" in the department, ability to work well with each other, etc. Believe in yourself and describe yourself as someone who will make positive contributions and will make the department better. Don't focus on ways you feel like you've failed or not been good enough. Focus on the positives.

The OP is right about Australian universities, though. PhDs here are funded by federal scholarships, not by teaching assistantships or the advisor’s research funding. Scholarships for international students are so fiercely competitive that most successful applicants do have good journal publications before they apply. And demonstrated research experience, not just potential, is a minimum requirement for a PhD application here.

You are demanding way too much of yourself!
Actually you are even a good step up the ladder, because you already have a paper pending. And another "in queue". That is awesome!
You do not even have to mention, that you believe, it won't get published. You have submitted. Period.
About the 3 years gap: You are a human being, you know? Of course you do some travelling or also just a phase of relaxing and restoring your empty batteries after finishing your Master.
You are not supposed to work-learn-roll-repeat all the time. There has to be times to let you breathe! Or you will burn-out in no-time.
What do you mean with 11 years of high school teacher? That is also awesome! You could also say you conducted social studies with human test subjects ;)
In any case, this is invaluable experience you have there.
Also. Be confident and just submit your application to those PhD programs you like. Don't bother thinking about an answer to this question. Let this question be asked of you. And you will see, nobody will ask this in an interview. Because either they did filter you out for some reason (does not need to be that gap) or they don't care and want to meet you. So, you are in no trouble.
Even if this question would come up, you have given a very good answer yourself in the question text. What about being honest? Just be honest. You do not need to present something if you do not have it. But you are also not supposed to devalue yourself if you do not have it! State the facts. Maybe mention your ambitions and your willingness to do research, but do not overdo it.
Don't be ashamed of yourself! That is detrimental. Be proud of that, what you have. That makes up for anything you do not have many times over.
Edit: Whoops. This question is 6 years old, but popped up in my "Newest Queue". Anyways, I hope you did well and you are happy!

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it advisable to submit multiple teaching letters for tenure-track teaching-focused jobs?
When applying for academic jobs in the US, one is often asked for at least one recommendation letter from someone who can attest to your teaching abilities.
If applying for a tenure-track teaching focused job, should one aim to have multiple teaching letters?

I am personally in mathematics. I am assuming the answers will not be too field-dependent (please correct me if I am mistaken).

If the job is teaching focused, then ideally all your letters will say you are a good teacher.

What type of institution are these jobs at (e.g., community college or SLAC)

@StrongBad: Because the OP is a postdoc who is also applying for research jobs, I am assuming she means liberal arts colleges.  Admittedly there is a continuum between liberal arts college and community college.  (Also: most research universities I know do not have tenure-track teaching only jobs.  I know of some exceptions, but only a few.)

Hm, do community colleges have tenure?

Yes, I think it is advisable, especially if you are coming from a "research track": e.g., if you attended a university rather than a liberal arts college (or especially if your undergraduate degree is outside the US); if you are currently doing a postdoc at a research university, and so forth.
The SLAC [=Small Liberal Arts College] track is its own subcommunity within the academic community.  Though many research-focused academics view the liberal arts track as being an acceptable second choice [in full disclosure: that is a rather faithful description of my own views!], the liberal arts college community does not see itself that way and is very wary of hiring academics whom they suspect (i) will not understand what a liberal arts college really is and turn out to be unhappy and/or bad at the job or (ii) will make good enough faculty members for a few years and then turn around and take a research job at their first opportunity.  If you don't have "SLAC pedigree", then liberal arts colleges will -- correctly, I believe -- view your application with the above wariness.
To get past this wariness you have to demonstrate real understanding of the SLAC track and teaching interest and credentials which are both more intensive and also different from what one is expected / asked to do as a typical university PhD student / university postdoc.  Teaching calc I/II/III every year, getting really good evaluations, and maybe eventually winning a teaching award is not a recipe for success on the liberal arts track.  Whereas many research faculty teach calculus, graduate courses in their specialty, and advanced undergraduate class related to their specialty when they get around to it [again, this describes me pretty well], at SLACs faculty get called upon to teach a much broader course load, often including things that a larger university may not even be housed in the same department (CS, statistics, mathematical biology...).  A good candidate for a SLAC will have a broader teaching experience.
Many research universities nowadays have some "broadening" alternative teaching choices for students and junior faculty interested in this kind of career.  At my department all PhD students start teaching precalculus and then go on to teach calculus.  They can also be involved in a Writing Intensive Program (WIP) and teach elementary education / math for future math teachers courses.  If you are coming from such a place and want to make a good SLAC candidate, nailing your calculus teaching and having teaching experience -- and possibly even additional coursework / mentorship / administrative experience / volunteer work -- in less traditional teaching opportunities is somewhere between extremely helpful and mandatory.  The best way to be convincing in the breadth of your teaching success and skill is to have multiple people write letters about the different aspects of it.  So...yes, two teaching letters sounds wise.
Added: Any additional teaching letters you get should not come at the expense of research letters!  As I wrote in an answer to a related question by the same OP: don't be afraid to send along 1-2 more letters than the application specifies.

It is less clear to me. I've had my own PhD students be rejected by SLACs because, supposedly, the person was "not interested-enough in research"... as was supposedly demonstrated by their writing up extensive teaching-related documents for the application (as encouraged by me). That is, some SLACs have (counter-intuitively) unofficially declared themselves "research institutions", have a newly-discovered (unofficial) disdain for "teaching", and may reject job applicants who don't play along. I have no good advice on how to detect this systematically.

@paul: Thanks for your comment.  I don't really know what to make of it.  I know that the very top SLACs are now quite serious about research.  But disdain for teaching at a liberal arts college...that's puzzling.

@paulgarrett I think that observation has the making of a great question.

Almost every type of institution offers tenure track teaching only positions, including SLACs, technical institutes, community colleges and even some R1 type research universities. I am not sure there is a universal answer.

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


text:
Is it usual to use endowed chairs to support deans' administrative duties, rather than faculty's academic work?
Our law school has (soon to be had) an endowed professorship that was awarded (on a 5-year rotating basis) to a faculty member with an outstanding record of research and scholarship, consistent with the traditional role of endowed professorships and chairs. The money in the endowed fund has grown sufficiently to transform it from a "professorship" into the law school's very first endowed "chair." At the very same meeting that the faculty was informed of this positive development, we were also informed by the University's chief development officer that this new and first chair would be awarded to the dean, not to increase his salary but to augment his administrative line of funds for travel, fundraising, etc.--a move consistent with our university's persistent shift of more and more resources away from faculty and to administration. The endowed professorship--awarded to a faculty member--will expire as soon as the current holder's remaining term ends in two years.
The CDO maintained that it was usual to award the first chair to deans and not to faculty members, a statement that members of the faculty found to be ludicrous.
Is it usual anywhere else for chairs to be used more often for administrative support of the dean rather than to recognize, encourage, and support faculty academic research and scholarship?

Depends on the terms of the endowment, I expect, and the needs of the school...

I wonder what the endowment's donor would think about this...

To synthesize both @keshlam and Nate Eldredge, is there legal recourse in the terms of the endowment itself?  Even if not, is the entity that created the endowment still living?  Perhaps they or their heirs or executors or whatever would be very interested in hearing about how their substantial gift is now being used in a way quite differently than it has been up to now.  I guarantee that the university probably cares about ten times as much about what a donor thinks than what you think.  (At least you ought to be able to get a spoof movie out of it called "Terms of Endowment").

I only know how these things work in the natural sciences at R1 institutions, so my experiences might not be helpful for your institution.
However, at my university, both the current and former deans of natural sciences were given endowed chairs when they arrived: the (former) dean Daniel Carson (see here) is the Schlumberger Chair of Advanced Studies and Research and Professor of BioSciences, and the current dean Peter Rossky (see here) is the Harry C. & Olga K. Wiess Chair of Chemistry.  As you can see from his webpage, Carson continued to run a lab and churn out great research while dean (he finished his position in the spring of 2014), and I expect that the same will be true for Rossky (he just arrived and doesn't have much of a web presence at Rice, but here is his former webpage).  So it is not necessarily nefarious -- to hire really top-notch scientists into administrative positions, you have to offer them things.
But of course I have no idea what is going on at your university, and it could very well be a power play by the administration.

I have never heard of using an endowed chair to support administrative duties of a dean, but then again, I have never heard of a rotating endowed chair before. Many donors stipulate terms as to what their donations can be used for. It may be that some endowed chairs exist explicitly for supporting deans administrative duties, but I would think this is quite rare. While I would assume that your law school is not breaking any laws, they may be bending them. I would ask the CDO (whatever that is) for some evidence to back up their claim. You could probably gather evidence from within your university and other comparable universities to back up your belief that it is uncommon.

No.  What you're seeing is an example of academic politics.  An attempt to grab truth before anyone else can argue against it.
Many people who attempt such reptilian measures tend to "double-down" whenever they are questioned.  Just persist and you'll see that they back off.
Then take charge.  This is the kind of stuff that makes academia look ridiculous.

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


text:
Going back to university after suspension, how do I move past the shame?
I was suspended for 1 year from my university for copying an assignment from an online source. There were several extenuating circumstances but I won't go into them as they are irrelevant, I did cheat and I do deserve the punishment I was given - that is not the question.
After I found out my sentence, I found it very hard to attend classes relating to that department, or to look professors or my deans and advisors in the face and carry out conversations with them. The professor who's class I cheated in is one I was hoping to talk to as she is in the same area that I hope to go into one day and I really enjoyed her class, teaching methods, and enthusiasm for the subject. I also am extremely saddened by the fact that since I'm a fourth year, this means all my peers will be graduating and will have left by the time I come back and I'm finding it hard to cope with the thought of being without them for the rest of my undergraduate career.
My question is how do I cope with the stress and shame I am feeling and how do I get over that so that I can return to the academic environment in 1 year? Can I ever approach that professor again, or should I avoid her? I'm asking this here because I'd like the opinions of those who are on the other side of this.

Many good answers already, but regarding stress, shame, sadness, and so on, please consider talking to the university's counseling services.

I don't understand this "suspend a student" concept. What were you supposed to do in that year? Busing tables, herding sheep in the mountains?

The university suspended you, which is a signal that it is still willing to have you as a student after serving your suspension.  (If it wasn't, you'd have been expelled.)  Therefore, upon your return, this professor (and every other professor) has the same professional obligations towards you that she would to any other student: to accept you in her classes, to treat you with courtesy and respect, to help you learn the material, to grade you fairly based on your work and the standards of the course.  It is possible that your assignments may face extra scrutiny for plagiarism, but hopefully that is irrelevant as you're not going to do it again.
It's possible that relations may be strained between you, but I think this may be more on your side than hers.  Speaking for myself, I certainly find it disappointing when a student cheats, but it's not as if I'm going to declare a personal vendetta against them and seethe with fury every time I pass them in the hall.  That would be unprofessional, and not worth the emotional energy anyway.  We go through the disciplinary process, I hope that they learn their lesson, and it's back to business as usual.  If they are able to turn things around and show genuine interest in and dedication to their studies, for me that's ultimately uplifting.
So if you want to take her class at a later date, by all means do so.  You might find it helpful to talk with her first: express your regret over the incident, as well as your continued interest in your subject and in completing your degree.  I think it's very likely this will help clear the air for both of you.  It would be wise for you to be extra diligent about quotations, citing sources, etc, and to consult your professor if you have the slightest question about any such issues.
Maybe she won't invite you to dinner, and she probably won't be the best person to write you a letter of recommendation.  (Even if you get to be on better terms, which I hope you will, she might still feel it's her duty to mention the cheating incident in any letter she writes, which is probably not good for you.)  But I don't see any reason you can't have the same basic educational experience as any other student.

This. Facing a professor after copying an assignment is awkward. But on the grand scale of things, it's much less awkward and more forgivable than, say, making unwanted sexual advances on a teacher, falsifying research results and publishing them with your advisor's name on them, or stealing expensive equipment from the lab.

@ff524: Now, that said, at least at an average US university, a year suspension would be a very severe punishment for simple plagiarism.  (More common would be something like a bad grade in the class and probation.)  So this makes me wonder if there were previous incidents or other aggravating circumstances that the asker hasn't mentioned.  That wouldn't change the overall theme of my answer, but it would muddy the waters somewhat.

Adjunct faculty/instructor point of view here. My recommendation to you: replace your "shame" with work and achievement you can be proud of!
Put that time you aren't spending with your already-graduated friends to academic use. Attend all your classes (unless you're contagious). Be on time with your attendance and assignments. Pay attention and ask questions. Go to your professors'/instructors' office hours even if you are sure you know what's going on in class -- especially those professors aware of the suspension. Maybe bring along an assignment you're working on to confirm you're on the right track -- and conveniently prove that it's really you who is doing it.
As you're a fourth-year student, you should occasionally (or often) be able to exceed the requirements for an assignment. Just don't make it harder to grade your work... an extra citation or three (that you actually understand and use) in a research paper; really good comments in your computer code should be fine. Even just emailed questions can go a long way to demonstrate your engagement and effort. (There are bad questions: "What is the answer to #7" is probably an example of a bad question.)
I agree with other posters (especially Nate) who say that the professors/instructors will mostly forgive your mistake. Expect that your work will be looked at more carefully, at least for a while.
There are few things I find more annoying than students "sharing" work. I can't let it slide morally and it wastes a lot of my time making sure my suspicion is correct before I more forward with it. So, I don't want to read your letter about the past; that's just more wasted time. Until I see different behavior, it's just more B.S. (not meaning Bachelor's of Science) that was quite possibly written by a helicopter parent and shows more effort that was put into the assignment that caused the problem anyway. Actions speak louder than words.
In the end, I don't remember who cheated; I do remember students who excelled in their work. (Edit: Or at least, I try to; I'm actually pretty bad with names and faces :-( )

To err is human. There is no need to condemn yourself. I am glad you understood your mistake and I am sure that you learnt the lesson.
I think that you can just directly talk to the professor(and the advisor) explaining that you regret and you understood your mistake (of course this method strongly depends on your professor's personality). Just make the situation clear and leave it behind because what hapened, happened. Act. Concentrate on the future and direct all your energy to prove that you are strong and wise. I am sure the professor will understand and encourage you (they are all wise and mature people and they understand that bad things happen and people might need another chance).
Concerning the peers,  if you have some friends in your class, this is a good test for them because friends should support you in hardships. If they are just classmates, then don't warry, you will have good classmates again.
p.s. Just look at this as a life test you have to overcome. Don't cheat, deal with it.

Unless the professor is aware of and condones whatever extenuating circumstances led you to cheat in her course, I think that your misconduct has "cut off" that bridge for you. Someone whose class you've cheated in is likely not going to be willing to help you out in any meaningful way—at least not without a sincere attempt at contrition. (Even then, it may be a case of "forgive, but never forget.")

Seconding: meaningful demonstration of contrition is an absolute prerequisite... to even begin to regain trust. Keyword: "trust". Many of us make mistakes, and have to re-establish trust. This is a known, and problemmatical, procedure... but sadly-often necessary. Better to avoid the problem in the first place... , but mature people know that good people can do dumb/bad things...

I strongly disagree.  If a student cheats in my class, I'll be all for punishment.  But if afterwards the student wants to work on regaining trust, I won't hold a grudge.

I also disagree.  For me it was far worse when one of my students had clearly copied part of his assignment (that wasn't even for credit!) and wouldn't admit to it.  If the student admits to doing something wrong and is sorry about it, I would definitely be just as much prepared to help them as any other student.

I am assuming that you've been sent down this year.
To expand a bit on Paul Garrett's comment to aeismail's answer, you should write a letter to the professor. This letter should be contrite, apologetic, and demonstrate that you've learned your lesson. You might discuss how you plan to remedy what caused the problem and how you would handle it differently during your year off.
This contradicts the previous sentence but: Do NOT even refer to the 'extenuating' circumstances. Whatever it was, you should have raised that with the professor or the department before the cheating took place. But you've learned that now, right?
You should write similar letters to the chairman/head of the department (don't send the same letter) and your advisor with the same information. Discuss how you want to start fresh next year and have a stellar year.
Think about how they've been affected as well. They had to deal with a distasteful situation, punish a (hopefully!) promising student, and so on.
For a non-Academia example that might be enlightening, if you read science fiction at all, check out Miles Vorkosigan's apology (via a letter) in Lois McMaster Bujold's A Civil Campaign.

I don't think it's good advice to send letters to all these people. The case has been ruled, OP should simply move on, go to class, and be a honest student from now on.

"Do NOT even refer to the 'extenuating' circumstances." Agreed! It would sound like you didn't learn your lesson and were trying to weasel out of your punishment. Whether it's a good idea to write letters of apology, which could reopen old wounds, is debatable. If there's anyone you didn't get a chance to apologize to the first time around, you could consider it; otherwise just move on.

I apologize for sounding a bit non-academic.
You need to forgive yourself, and realize you have become a different person because of this incident. Until you do this for yourself, you cannot expect anyone else to do it for you. People make mistakes. Learn, and move on. You can still make a difference tomorrow - unless you dwell on yesterday.
The Catholic church recognizes that people can turn away from past mistakes and start afresh in what they call "the sacrament of reconciliation". This requires that you a) be sorry (contrition), b) say you are sorry (confession), and c) make up for it (satisfaction). There is simplicity and wisdom in that. Even if you are not religious, it's worth contemplating.
Make peace with yourself. Until you do, you cannot return, even if the University lets you.
As an aside - a year away from your friends is a really big punishment; it can also provide an opportunity. Do make the most of it. If you can't find a job, do some volunteering; maybe join an international aid organization, and go abroad to help people less fortunate than you. Turn this episode into something constructive - so that when you look back on the year, you realize you turned something bad into something good. That will help with the healing.

A minor comment on requirement (a) for reconciliation, "feel sorry": The word "feel" may not be optimal here, because it sounds as if an emotion is central.  What is really important is rather a conscious act of the will, resolving to avoid future sin.  In other words, being sorry is more important than feeling sorry.

@andreasblass - you are right that was not an optimal choice of words. Thanks for pointing it out.

Show genuine remorse over your mistake, sure, but rather than feeling ashamed of being suspended for a year, be proud of yourself for going back after said year and not giving up. A lot of people would use this situation as an excuse (not a reason, it's an excuse) to not return. The fact that you're asking how to deal with the future shame means that you're not even considering the alternative; you're going back. That takes strength, and you should be proud.

Years ago I took a final exam for a student who I was tutoring (we became friends during our tutoring sessions.). I hid in the bathroom; he snuck the exam out to me; I completed it and he turned it in. It was a Calculus test.
He was caught and suspended for a semester. I personally went in to the university to explain our actions, explain why I did it and to lend my support for him and to ask them for lenient punishment on him. The school administrators were appreciative of this and I think it was reflected.
In any case, he was out for the semester. Then, he went back again, finished school, and went on to grad school and his career. All said and done, very little if any harm done.
Life goes on. Sometimes people cheat, sometimes they plagiarize, we all do it to some extent in our lives, not a huge deal as far as I'm concerned if you don't do it often and you learn something about yourself in the process.

This is a "me too", not an answer to the question.

Sure it's an answer. It's a formula for moving past the shame: life goes on, it's not a big deal.

Were you affiliated with the University? Were you also punished?

It would probably help to reduce your shame if you made a simple apology to those who you feel you owe one. Just say that you are sorry for what happened that year and that you are eager to continue your studies and finish for real this time.


text:
How much are local (same state or country) applicants favored in PhD admissions?
How protectionistic are PhD admissions?
Here, protectionism means to favor residents of the country (or state) the university is in, as far as PhD admissions are concerned. Usually, protectionism arises due to funding restrictions or other burdens of a financial nature (e.g. tuition waivers).
But how much of a disadvantage are foreign students at, when it comes to PhD admissions?
I understand that the answer differs from a country to another, and from an institution to another within the same country. And even different fields within the same institution have different standards, so please pay attention to context when providing answers.

Basically, admissions decisions follow from two main issues:

government policies regarding funding and immigration
the available pool of applicants

For instance, recent policies in California made it very difficult for the University of California system to enroll international graduate students. This was not the result of internal decisions, but rather something imposed upon them by the government. Similarly, a visa embargo applied to a particular country would make it impossible for a university to bring in students from that country.
Other than that, I think most graduate admissions groups are looking for the best available talent, rather than having a specific quota of domestic or international students. They might do some recruiting domestically if they're not getting enough domestic candidates (compared to any "targets" they might have), but I don't think they're going to admit domestic candidates that are unqualified just because they're domestic.

can you please share some info about policies in California?

From the Berkeley ChemE website: "Unfortunately, recent changes in the University of California budget make it difficult for this department to accept students who are not citizens or permanent residents of the United States." This amounts to state policy, since the state government determines the budget and spending rules for the UC system.

Strange, I'm not aware of policy changes hurting the math department's ability to accept international applicants (although I don't work there so I might just not know).  The restrictions that FAQ lists don't seem all that onerous.  I wonder whether ChemE had previously been admitting some applicants with very low TOEFL scores (because they were supported by grants and didn't need to teach), but policy changes ruled that out, while math students were always expected to teach and thus always had additional restrictions.  But that's just a guess.

What about out-of-state domestics then? One would think that tuition waivers would cost the same for out-of-state domestics as it would cost for internationals...

@user12169: I think the issue might be that international students might never be able to qualify for the waivers, while US students could after some period of time.

In the UK, in STEM areas without industry funding (where I have most experience), funding restrictions typically meant there are at least 10 places restricted to home (or in some cases EU) students for every place open to students of all nationalities.

I think I would really need to see a source to believe this. Especially preferring UK citizens over other EU nationalities seems pretty clearly in conflict with EU  law. (and that max. every 11th graduate student in the UK is international seems hardly believable to me, from the samples I know)

@xLeitix Policies in the UK do, in practice, tend to treat UK and EU students differently. The EPSRC studentship eligibility policy requires UK and EU applicants to have been 'ordinarily resident' in the UK for at least 3 years prior to the start of the grant to be able to obtain a stipend. While I do know UK citizens that are unable to obtain funding through such restrictions, this obviously impacts non-UK citizens much more strongly, and it is protectionistic in a slightly looser term than as used by the OP.

@xLetix: there are certainly more than 9% non-EU graduate students in the UK, but most of them have money from their own governments.  I suspect that Ian is referring to students funded from UK sources.

In Germany, PhD positions are often awarded individually by the Professors. So if you know your Professor well, you have an extremely higher likelihood of getting a PhD with him.
However, if you have really outstanding talent/grades, you can still beat these personal relationships, only it is very much harder.

This isn't quite the same thing—this is comparing "domestic" to "international" (or equivalently in-state versus out-of-state).


text:
Why doesn't the university give past final exams' answers?
My professors usually give solutions for part term tests. But it seems that, they never gave any solutions for the past final exams in any courses I've taken.
Does anyone has the same experience? Or does anyone know why it's like this? I personally believe that students could use past exam's answers to prepare for their own exams.
Edited: Wow, it's amazing that so many people shared their opinion here. I'd just like to clarify my question here cuz I see my question mislead few people, my apologize. Say, I am taking some course this year, and the professor would usually post some pasts term tests with answers and the past exams from previous years(with no answers, or sometimes they just post a link to the library website, where answer-free version of past exams can be found) on the course web-page.

Even if they agree with you that distributing solutions would be educationally valuable (which not everyone would), professors have a finite amount of time, and creating solutions would take time that could potentially be spent on something more valuable.

I give answers and detailed comments on non-finals because I feel the students can learn from that. For the final, I'm happy to give detailed answers to any student who comes by my office after the final to pick up their exam, but I haven't had a student do that yet. (Or even email me to find out answers) Why take the time if no one is interested?

This depends on the institution & department and potentially the instructor/course.
The last two institutions I have been at (UK) have provided solutions to past exams. One only odd numbered years, the other all years.
I'm sceptical about the value of providing solutions to past exams for studying purposes. From my experience the temptation to look at the solutions instead of struggling through the questions is often irresistible for students, especially those who are struggling. This leads to the false impression of knowing how to solve the problems. Of course past exam solutions can be used effectively to study, for example by only using the solutions to check answers after completing the entire exam as practice. But I have rarely seen students do this.
Developing appropriate exam questions is difficult so instructors may also want to recycle past questions and therefore not provide past exams (questions or answers).

By experience, I would say that looking at solutions can teach how to properly approach a problem and also how to solve any new instance of the same kind.

I've heard the problem of students being spoiled by the solutions mentioned quite a few times by my lecturers. One had an interesting approach: she did not hand out solutions, but offered to provide feedback on the students' solution if they hand it in neatly. I'm not sure how well that went, but it's an interesting approach that seems to solve the dilemma of giving students material they would use incorrectly, probably at the cost of some time for the lecturer (although I'm not sure how much time).

@PatrickTrentin, Yes certainly, solutions can be used to study in this way. But exam questions/solutions are not intended for this purpose. Pedagogical examples in lectures/textbooks are. I've seen many students work on exam questions and when they get stuck they have a quick 'peek' at the solution to get them over the tricky part then move on. The problem is the learning happens in the struggling not the peeking at the solution.

@mg4w Throwing a child into water may teach him how to swim, or make him drown. Showing a child another person swimming first, can go a long way in keeping the toddler alive. That was my point, and that is also why I have always shared the solutions to the past exams when teaching a course.

@PatrickTrentin A question written (especially as part of a series of questions) for students to exercise methods and techniques and progress with is different to a question written for a final exam.

But exam questions/solutions are not intended for this purpose. — More accurately, final exam questions/solutions are not intended for this purpose.  At least in classes like mine, which have midterm exams and a cumulative final exam, the midterm exam solutions definitely are intended for that purpose, just as homework solutions are.  (But then if you're used to writing pedagogically helpful solutions, why not write them for the final as well?)

Well I think the differences of opinion here probably answer the question of why sometimes solutions are provided and sometimes they are not. Perhaps it would be useful to have an answer why some instructors provide solutions.

@mg4w some instructors do provide solutions to their practice questions as those are designed to take students through the processes / methods explained in the course. Final exam questions are not always designed for the same effect or reasons.

Just to clarify, the OP is asking about providing solutions to past final exams for the purposes of studying from (for future exams). Of course it does make sense for the instructor to use past exams/midterms/quizzes etc and their solutions as part of the planned teaching process. But I'm sceptical of the educational value of simply providing a database of past exams & solutions to students. Naturally others can/do feel differently about this.

People can do very stupid things, and students are even less developed than the typical person.  I've seen students memorize answers, and then simply plop them down... it's just absurd what people will end up doing if you gave them "answers".

@mg4w I am right now not a lecturer, but I am mentoring juniors and "the learning happens in the struggling" seems to be a very archaic notion. I tell 'my' juniors to never struggle for more than 15 minutes, because it's just a waste of time and come ask for help instead (it's more efficient to spend that same time on more exercises or work than struggling on a single one). And this approach I have taken from a 4 month educational program which in my experience backs up all their decisions with actual pedagogic research.

Are there any scientific studies that would support this viewpoint? I'm reluctant to put much stock in a purely anecdotal answer. My own anecdote: it's difficult to benefit from struggling through a question if you have no confirmation that you have succeeded afterwards.

@DavidMulder, certainly that is a good approach. I think you are misinterpreting my answer. I'm not suggesting that students struggle to no end with no help and no way to check if they are correct. I'm saying that providing the answers at the outset provides the temptation to take a shortcut and just copy the answer believing they know how to do it. What should happen is what you say, they should try and get help if they don't succeed, or at least revise the relevant material. I think this is unlikely to happen if they have the answers at hand.

@AdamWilliams, a scientific study showing what? That students will use the answers as a shortcut if they are provided? I'm not aware of such a study, this is just what I have observed. I'm not suggesting that students have no confirmation of success. There are many ways of accomplishing this without providing the solutions. For example, they could ask their TA/Instructor. It also depends on the subject and question, sometimes it's obvious if the answer is correct. Equally, just because an answer doesn't match the provided solution doesn't necessarily mean its incorrect.

@mg4w In a flipped classroom (the methodology used by the educational program I was earlier referring to) it's possible to always have a human at hand during exercises, but in classical academic education the student will be at home and the only thing preventing long struggling seems some type of access to answers. Ideally maybe a system could be developed limiting the number of answers that can be viewed, but not sure that would ever be worth the trouble. I personally suspect the argument (cont.)

that '"struggling through the questions" is good' is more a case of after-the-fact rationalization by teachers who prefer not investing the time to create unique exams each time. (Of course there will be those who copy this argument from experienced educators without 'laziness' actually being their personal reason)

@DavidMulder I completely disagree, but I also think that this depends quite a bit on the field. I do believe that both in undergraduate and graduate studies I did learned most from the problems on which I spent hours and hours finally solving, but again this may be specific to mathematics. I also believe that in mathematics, it is important to discover that certain things cannot work in certain situations. I know that there is a point where one needs to stop and go see the instructor, which depends highly on the class (maybe the 15 minutes you mention for introductory first year classes...

...but much longer for more advanced classes.... As for coming for help, I am always willing to help the students with any question as long as they show me that they tried something. But I also run into students which "worked two hours on a question" (and I quote one here) but didn't even know the definition for what he was trying to prove...Struggling through the questions can mean a lot of different things, and can mean different things in different courses/fields.

Going back on topic, my strategy is the following: in introductory classes, I post a past exam about a couple of weeks before the exam and I post the solutions only 1-2 days before the exam. This way I give the students plenty of opportunities to solve the exam by themselves. I do this for Midterms and Finals. Even so I get often questions from students which are trying to understand my solutions line by line, which in my opinion is not helping them at all. And every now and then I get a student regurgitate word by word a solution from the past exam for a problem which is completely unrelated.

@NickS The 15 minute mark might not be the correct time limit for each field, but the point is not that afterwards the student gets the answer, just that after the 'time limit' the instructor can confirm that 'hey, you're going in the right direction' or 'hey, go check this and this chapter' or maybe 'it looks like you have made a mistake somewhere, try to restart from this point'. And I can indeed imagine that in a non-flipped classroom or higher level context the system would have to adapt.The point is mostly that 'working through more problems' beats the education value of 'being stuck'.

@DavidMulder "Struggling through the questions" is not the same as "being stucked", at least not in my opinion.  Struggling through the question means, in my opinion, the student trying various approaches and seeing what it works and what it doesn't. A student staring at a problem without having any idea about how to approach it is not struggling through it.

Most professors do not like to give out the solutions to exams (and the exams by themselves) because they do not want students to create collections of past exam questions. This is for two reasons:

Some questions might be re-used later. This is not only laziness but
there are usually a limited number of meaningful and unambiguous
questions that can be asked.
Professors want to stop students form
    just learning past questions by heart and they want students to focus on the actual
    content.

If there's a short least of reasonable questions, and students can answer them all, what's the issue?

@paulgarrett: The issue is not that there's a short list of reasonable questions, the issue is that there's a short list of reasonable questions that can be solved in a few minutes during a one-hour exam.

@Galendo, "... solvable in a few minutes during a one-hour exam" would be part of "reasonable" in this context, I think.

@paulgarrett it's also the fact that the goal technically is not to pass the exam, but to learn and apply the contents of the topic. This will not be achieved, when student simply memorize every answer, as many would(and that will hurt them later on, when understanding the topic is needed and not the specific answer to a specific question - it might be the same question, but you do not recognize it).

They don ‘t give out those solutions as they use the questions in future exams.
If they handed out those solutions then that question bank is not longer useful.
Writing suitable questions to the correct level takes time.
They are well within their rights not to provide the solutions to those final exam questions. Those exam questions may not be officially available either.
They have provided practice questions with solutions for your benefit throughout the course.
Also, being able to solve questions without having a pre-prepared solution to refer to is a skill you need to develop.

There are student groups that collect questions and share/sells them. The obstruction is not really working.

@kelalaka true, but for my final exam questions they have to rely on memory as they don’t have access to them, but they do have access to plenty of practise problems. And the students leave for holiday after the finals and when they come back they have forgotten the exact questions...

I remember that there were people waiting outside of the exam rooms to collect from the most fresh memories. And, some people are very good at remembering the questions.

There is a very prosaic answer that somehow hasn't been mentioned yet. The partial exam happens during the term, when the professor is dedicating a lot of time to teaching and wants to help their current students learn. The final exam happens at the end of the term, when the professor is done teaching and typically wants to spend time on something else.

I think we all new what "final" meant in terms of "final exam"...

@SolarMike: Amusing anecdote: I have had community college students who actually did not know that. "Professor, what will we do after the final exam?"

@DanielR.Collins I had a student express surprise the other day that they had a final exam at all - even though I made it clear at the start of the course (we are now over halfway..) - playing on the phone no doubt...

In addition to some of the good reasons already given in other answers, here is another idea:
The instructor is trying to help current students improve in the course. Solutions to in-term tests can do this, especially if later course material builds on earlier, or if there is a cumulative final exam. However, the final exam is the end, and no further improvement in the course is possible.

I think this totally depends on the course or more importantly, the advisor. I've had courses where the final exams of previous years were discussed in the next years so that students learn from them.
As for why that can be the case, well, maybe the advisor intends to use similar questions and that's why they prefer not to reveal them (again, this comes from personal experience)

When I was teaching — I am now retired — I often posted old final exams, sometimes with answers. I wanted the students to use them to check their understanding, to answer the question themselves then compare their answer to mine. I tried not to put questions on exams after they had been webbed, because I didn't want the students to simply try to memorize the answers.

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


text:
When to apply for postdoc positions if papers will be submitted to journals after submitting the PhD thesis?
My field of study is Computational mechanics and branch is mechanical engineering. I will be submitting my thesis in September.  Subsequently, I will be submitting my 3 manuscripts to journals for publishing. At this moment, I have just one paper published. So, I was wondering what should be the correct time to apply for post doctoral positions in the US?
I also have an offer of continuing a small (7-12 months) postdoc position in my PhD lab till I get my pending papers published and get a position somewhere else. Also, I will get to work on a new project that would help me learn and implement a new numerical methodology. This will help me to expand the scope of my research interests (would make study of different length scales possible), which might help me to secure a better position.
What should I do? My mind says to stay with my advisor's offer and make my CV strong. Will that be a good choice?

Start applying for postdocs about six months before you would like to start the job.  You need six months because most of your applications will fail.  Once you succeed, it takes several months to complete a contract and organize your move.  If you need a visa, it could take much longer.
In my opinion, a postdoc in your PhD lab harms your record because it indicates you were unable to get a position elsewhere.  Fair or not, it is simply traditional to move for your postdoc.
Submit your papers as soon as you can.

My advisor has been busy for quite sometime now and has not been able to get the manuscripts correction going. That's why I don't have publications till now. However, I believe that I can get few of them going by September this year. My advisor is suggesting that I delay my defense as long as I can (December being the deadline for graduating this year), so that I can apply for positions in the meantime and move on once I get something somewhere. Does this sound like a fair idea?

@Quosta I have heard this before.  It is good for your advisor if you keep working for low pay.  If you need until December to improve your work or not, I cannot tell you - that is your advisor's job.  You should encourage your advisor to act as quickly as possible, though.


text:
What to do if my advisor insists on early attendance?
I have a genuine problem in waking up early in the morning. My advisor prefers to walk in my office whenever he wanted to. Lately, he started to complain to me about not showing up in the morning. Even the way to
 he used to come to my office has changed, he started to open the door without knocking and then the first thing he checks my computer screen.
I tried to tell him that about my difficulties and suggested scheduling meetings instead. He told me these are the rules of the institution and I have to follow them.
Long story short, I started to come early in the morning but I can barely get anything done.

Update 1: I reviewed the contract, it explicitly mentioned that working time starts no later than 9am. My contract is with an institution not the university directly.
Update 2 : I consulted a doctor and I have been diagnosed with depression. Besides the medication that was prescribed to me, I was asked to take a rest from the school.
Thank you, everyone, for sharing your thoughts.

Use a screensaver with a password.

Arriving at a particular time is one of the rules of the institution? According to whom?

Sounds like a control freak. I imagine his concern is you are not putting in the required number of hours. When would you leave if you came in late?

@ElizabethHenning I am afraid he is legally correct. It's considered a full time job.

@ASimpleAlgorithm I feel that he assumed that I am careless and he did not want that to go unchecked. I usually spend 9 hours since my arrival.

@ASquare Sure, but are there really set times specified by the institution? If he gets to decide what your work hours are, why does he need you to come in mornings? Wouldn't he rather you were productive than sleep-deprived?

What does your contract say about working hours? Full time job does not imply any fixed hours afaik... I have flexible working hours despite working a full time job, it's common here (at least in Germany)

I am so sorry for your situation - I doubt there's much you can do even if there is no official working hours; you have to comply with your advisers (objectively) reasonable requests - and unfortunately society does not accept "not a morning person" as reasonable (despite all the research done on it). Most places I've worked insisted on being there during "core hours" (e.g. 11am-3pm or similar), so anybody can catch anybody they need, which I find reasonable, but I still don't know how I'll manage a faculty position if I even manage to get one and need to be there at 9am.

@penelope If your university schedule lectures early in the morning, if you are the professor, you have to manage to go there on time. For instance, I frequently have lectures scheduled at 8:30 am and, no, I cannot ask for a more comfortable schedule (and given the morning traffic, since I commute, to avoid being late, I tend to arrive at 7:30-8). If you want a certain job, you adapt to the required conditions or you leave.

@MassimoOrtolano I understand that you can't be late for your fixed obligations, and that this is true for any job. I guess it would have been more factual to say "I'm still dreading the schedule shift I will need to manage if I ever get a faculty position" or even "I still don't have a clear picture of how I'll manage and I know it is going to be difficult for me." rather than "I still don't know how I'll manage it". Not knowing exactly how I will adapt, or dreading that change (which I do), is different from not accepting that I have to adapt or refusing to follow the rules (which I don't).

@MassimoOrtolano Really don't want to sound rude or confrontational, but I am quite surprised that my comment made you write such a stern and strict comment about "You have to be on time for your job obligations, even if they are early. You can not ask to make it more comfortable. If you can not adapt, you have to leave." I never even hinted at having a habit of being late for morning events - was just mentioning that I (passionately) dislike them. I think disliking one aspect of your job should not be a reason to suggest that you are not suited for that job and should leave.

Schools typically do give "normal working hours" for staff, and often consider postdocs as staff. The school typically also will denote the advisor as supervisor meaning they do have the power to set your working hours (within reason and laws).

@penelope Sorry, when it comes to work schedule, I frequently react sternly because it's a problem I had with a lot of PhD students, and many comments that usually arrive here with this type of questions reflect too much the very narrow view of fields like mathematics or computer science, where a PhD student can work with a relatively free schedule, but not that of other fields where the coordination with colleagues is much more essential. Not too mention industry, where actually the majority of PhD students will end up anyway.

@penelope At my school there is no problem asking for later times for your courses. Especially if you are willing to be flexible in other ways. I wouldn't bring it up during the interviews, of course. And indeed I'd wait until after tenure to let them know you'd prefer to sleep till noon everyday. But academia is nothing if not vastly more flexible than a "real job". Certainly the scheduling isn't the part you  should dread. Also staying awake to deliver a lecture is vastly easier than staying awake while listening to one.

@ASimpleAlgorithm Out of curiosity, how many students does your school have overall?

Let me make a remark after your update: regardless of contracts, it's fundamental when you start to work in a new place to understand and adapt to the work culture of the place. If you see that every time you arrive, everyone else is already at work... well ;-)

As a fellow night owl, I feel your pain. Normally I would suggest concisely explaining your difficulties and suggesting a work-around to your advisor, but it sounds like you've already done that. Sadly, your advisor does have the right to set working hours, so you have no real recourse other than finding a different advisor.
The situation might be different if you have a medical diagnosis/disability -- but I don't think "night owl" will qualify, since waking up early is not harmful to your health (not sure about French law though). What I've done in similar situations is to use melatonin to fall asleep early and caffeine pills to wake up -- probably not the healthiest solution long-term, but it does the trick for me.

Thank you, I never thought about taking sleep bills. May I ask about how do you feel when you wake up after taking melatonin?

I can't tell any difference by morning, it's out of my system by then (so long as you sleep for more than a few hours). OTOH, even if I've had "enough" sleep, I'm still not wakeful in the morning (hence the caffeine pills).

Taking medication to meet an advisor's expectations... What a time to be alive...

I didn't recommend it, I said that's what I do....though "show up at 9 AM" is hardly an unreasonable or unusual expectation.

While "night owl" might not be a medical disability, do you by chance have severe trouble sleeping, such as insomnia? I had a friend during my PhD in your situation, and the biggest problem for her is that sometimes she would not even fall asleep before morning, and then had to wake up in an hour to meet the schedule expectations. So you have similar problems, that could potentially be officially diagnosed as a medical condition. But - I feel you - I was the first runner up for the (joke & sarcastic) prize of "Early Bird" in my lab - lost to a friend who was late for lunch more often than me.

Sadly, your advisor does have the right to set working hours - Why is this?  Also, if it possibly is a medical issue, @ASquare should consult with a medical professional.

@Kimball Because in some countries a PhD student is considered an employee and the advisor is the "boss", who can also fire you if your working hours don't meet their expectations.

@MassimoOrtolano I understand this may be true in some situations, but I don't understand why it is necessarily true in the OP's situation, as this answer seems to assert.

It's the professor's lab and the professor's research funds, they can impose whatever rules they want, so long as it doesn't contradict the law or university policy. I seriously doubt "show up at 9 AM" would be overturned upon appeal to a dean or judge, even if the working hours could easily be shifted three hours later (could be different if OP has a medical diagnosis, or if they want him to show up at 3 AM and work 19-hour days, but no indication that is the case here).

@penelope It could be the case since no matter who I try to correct my schedule I just can't fell asleep

"your advisor does have the right to set working hours". To clarify: no they don't. The working hours are set by your institutions and probably spelled out in your contract. Your advisor can insist on your observance of these hours, but they can't impose hours of their own choosing.

This does not seem like a "clarification" but rather "completely disagreeing" -- consider posting an answer that justifies your viewpoint. As I said, professors' policies cannot "contradict the law or university policy," so if university policy does specify working hours, then we don't disagree. In my experience, however, such policies are not typical because requirements are so diverse. For example, it is reasonable to expect astronomers to work at night, or to schedule extra meetings before an important deadline.

He told me these are the rules of the institution and I have to follow them.

I've done my PhD and two postdocs in three different universities in France and I've never heard of such rules. On the contrary, my experience is that the standard in academia working hours is whatever works for you.
The problem is to avoid a confrontation with your advisor, as you probably don't want to have a bad relation with them. You could try a slowdown strategy (grève du zèle): you abide by their rules but you follow all the rules, that is working no more than the legal 35 hours a week, not answering emails or doing anything outside working hours, etc. Hopefully after a few weeks of this your advisor will realize that it's better to let you decide yourself how to organize your working time.
I'd say that's the French way to deal with it... sorry for the stereotype ;)

Or, you will create an even worse relationship between you and your advisor, who may then proceed to not let you graduate.

I don't see why, somebody who insists on you applying the rules can't honestly blame you later for doing so.

@Erwan You're using logic, but this isn't a question of logic (even in France). This is an issue of control, which is fundamentally emotional.

I am carrying out my work in an institution not a university. As @penelope pointed out this might make things wors.

@JeffE Before talking about emotions, you may want to read the update to the OP.

@MassimoOrtolano And why do you think that clause is in the contract?

@JeffE As I just wrote in chat, I'm frequently puzzled here by the lack of understanding of how certain tasks require a coordination that doesn't allow you to choose your own working schedule but requires you to adapt to a group schedule, whether you like it or not. This narrow view is certainly due to the fact that most of the users here are theorists (mathematicians, computer scientists etc.), but from experienced users (like you), I would expect a broader view.

@MassimoOrtolano But in those situations, the boss wouldn't just say "Show up early because those are the rules", but rather "Key steps in the the experiment need to be done a certain schedule." or "Critical tasks like [examples] require everyone on the team to have the same schedule." Riiight?  I'm well aware that such circumstances exist, but my default association with "my way or the highway" is not "they have a good reason" but "they're a control freak".

@JeffE From a PhD student, one may expect the maturity to understand independently whether they should respect a certain schedule, and may react badly when such an expectation is not met.I don't, and I usually try to explain things (almost) nicely to my students, but I can imagine that someone can react harshly, especially if the schedule is written in the contract.

@MassimoOrtolano I think you are missing the main point that is my coginitive abililty decreases if I enforce certain sleep schedule, I  will hardly make any progress. It's not something I have control over but it seems some people can't grasp this.  I am working alone and there is no consistency in my advisors random check up, so I have to be on alert all day long rather having fixed time for meeting then off to sleep.

@ASquare I've been suffering from insomnia my whole life and even though I can manage the lack of sleep well, I know what it means to work sleep-deprived. For your advisor to have such a reaction, I think that there's more to the story than what's told in your post. For instance, he may get in trouble with the institution if he allows you to arrive late; or he may think that you've not been productive enough anyway even when you were arriving late. I think that at this point, you should have a very frank conversation with your advisor to understand where the core problem is.

There are lots of jobs where you have designated hours. One of the nice things about grad school is a bit more freedom on hours (at the cost of drastically lower pay).  But my advice is to just start working normal hours.
You CAN do this.  Start going to be bed earlier (take a hot bath to help).  Also start exercising in the late afternoon, early evening (before dinner, before getting diverted to TV or Internet).  A little bit of physical tiredness helps with making it easier to get to sleep.

It's not that easy. Most of us owls, I'm fairly sure, are not just larks with a shifted schedule. We need the night hours to get things done that we are unable to force ourselves to do during the day (e.g., because they are painful and anti-rewarding and we procrastinate them whenever we believe we have enough time left). If you take our night hours away, these things will just not get done, even if it will probably be better for our health. This holds for exercise in particular: I leave the hardest stuff to be done after exercising; but after exercising I'm so tired that I just drop to bed.

I say this as an owl myself.  However, if you were in the military standing a watch or doing some high paid shift work job, you would make the hours work.  So adapt and overcome.  No rest for the wicked.

People adapt at the cost of effectiveness (ask the students in my 9AM class). Standing a watch doesn't count, as 98% of the work is idling (and for the remaining 2%, humans have probably evolved for short-notice short-term mobilization).

@darijgrinberg, Let's be honest, the students who aren't paying attention in your 9 AM class have probably just been up half the night... I was a student and a night owl too during my studies, but that simply had to change when I started my first proper job. Not saying that the change is fun or easy, but doable.

@fgysin: I wasn't talking about the students being half asleep (though many of them are, too...). People in academia inhabit very different places on the tradeoff space between self-discipline and creativity.

I'm currently working at my third postdoc, which is a collaboration between a company and a university, and I am based at the company.
I am required to keep the company's hours; they do have flexi-time, but considering the core hours are between 9am and 4pm, it's not that handy. When I started, I decided to work 8am to 4pm, to avoid a busy and stressful commute.
This was a bit of a change from my previous postdoc, and I've found the best way to implement it is by sticking to a schedule - wake up at the same time, catch the same bus to and from work, leave at the same time. Not massively exciting, perhaps, but it's working for now.
I do feel this sort of schedule is, to some extent, a detriment to creativity and efficiency, but thems the rules.

The advisor of my first postdoc also demanded this... The point is, if he doesn't respect your needs and instills this torture from you just because he can, he is probably unhappy about something else, thinks you are lazy, or just is a dick. And you torturing yourself is just not worth it. Better leave. I so much wish I left that first postdoc boss ...

I am not sure that leaving now is the best course of action


text:
Major field of study and its specializations in the USA
I am not a resident of the USA and I am not familiar with the system and the hierarchy of fields of studies and specializations.
I have several questions:

Computer Science is a Major Field of Study, right? Are Software Engineering and Computer Graphics its specializations? Or what are they?
Universities have several schools/departments. Each offers Bachelor's, Master's, PhD's programs. But these programs are called just like Master of Computer Science, for example, and there is no clarification in which specialization I can get this Master of Science degree. In my country I can apply for a Master's program, and It has a specialization, like Master of Computer Science with Software Engineering specialization, or Master of Computer Science with Information Security specialization. Why there is no such clarification? Or do I apply for a program and then select a specialization which determines the courses I will study?
Is there a complete list of fields of studies and their specializations? There is a Management specialization, how can I learn is it related to Economics field of study or Business?
Are there official codes for specializations common among all the USA universities? So I can search which universities offer this specialization, for example, Corporate Finances with code 130007? Or where can I find this information?

There are really too many questions here. Let me note, however, that there is no national US system of higher education. Universities are free to make their own decisions on many of your questions. The US federal government tends to keep statistics, however.

As @Buffy said, there is no national standardization of academic programs in the US.  However, the US Department of Education has created a taxonomy of academic programs that it uses for statistics and that are also used for some other purposes (such as determining eligibility for extended Optional Practical Training for non-resident students.)  See https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cipcode/Default.aspx?y=55

The goal of undergraduate education in the US (at prestigious, "4-year" schools) is to get a broad foundation in the "liberal arts." Students will choose their majors and maybe even a specialization within that major, but only a small fraction of their efforts go into advanced, specialized knowledge. Most of their efforts go toward "foundational" skills within their general area, and even "general education" requirements that have nothing to do with their long-term plans.
So, getting the degree with the exact specialization you're interested in is not so critical. Most students will have simply a "BS in Computer Science" or Computer Engineering, which will allow them to apply for jobs in dozens of computer-related skills. Specialized knowledge is usually obtained through internships or participating in undergraduate research (or on the job after graduation).
Note also that things vary by school -- different degrees, specializations, organizations, etc. all vary. You would do well to choose a school (e.g., University of [State]") and study their system -- there is certainly a way to become, say, a software engineer with a degree from that school. You should also consider whether that school will admit you, and how you will pay for it.
There are also "technical schools" and community colleges that focus more on useful skills. These tend to be cheaper and faster, and can be a better fit for someone with narrow interests and a well-defined career path. These have a rather poor reputation among academics, however, partially because they are not at all selective (most admit everyone who applies).

So If I want to get a Master's degree, I just need to find universities which offer a Master of Computer Science program and apply to it, right? I mean I don't need to check if that university actually offers some Software Engineering or Information Security specialization, because that is not the point of universities to offser some specific knowledges, I only want to get a broad foundation, there is no specializations in the USA universities, right? I only can check the list of courses which a university offers on its Master's program to see what I actually will study, correct?

Every master's degree is a little different -- some might be better choices than others. But yes, to become, say, a software engineer, a master's in computer science from a well-known school is likely sufficient even without any additional specialization.