text:
Why doesn't your stipend increase after your courses are complete?
A big argument I hear for why stipends are actually a great deal is because tuition is covered(often).
This makes sense for the first year or two but once courses are complete it's no longer a valid argument. Why doesn't your stipend jump in value in accordance with what tuition would normally be valued at? I personally never even used university equipment during my time as a graduate student nor did I go to campus once I completed my courses.

Hmmm. Do you provide more value to the university after course completion? Asking for a friend.

Why do you think graduate tuition ceases when you stop taking classes? It doesn’t at many places.

There are assets on campus more valuable than equipment.  One hopes.

The real answer is university accounting is made up and has little connection to reality and is designed to be as advantageous for the institution as possible with no regard to individuals.

@Buffy absolutely, you both have greater technical skills and you're spending more time on the problem you're working on.

I think you'll find that on paper, your dissertation research credits cost the same as an equivalent number of credits of regular courses.

Typically the funding for tuition waivers and the funding from the stipend come from separate pools of money. This is true of my current institution.
This arrangement makes more sense for the student. If instead we take the total amount given to the student in stipends and tuition waivers and distribute it equally across the student’s whole time in the programme, for the first couple of years the student will be in terrible financial hardship because they have to pay for tuition. I think most students would prefer a reasonable financial situation throughout the whole programme, rather than starvation wages in the beginning and a windfall at the end.

Not the case for mine.

@FourierFlux is the second part of my answer helpful for you nevertheless? That is is more helpful for the student to receive equal stipends throughout the whole course of study, than a tiny stipend in the beginning and a large stipend at the end

There may be some fundamental cultural/geographic assumptions underlying your question, I will tackle your question from the US perspective where someone enrolled in an university is a customer of a for-profit cultural industry (the university itself).

I personally never even used university equipment during my time as a
graduate student nor did I go to campus once I completed my courses.

It really depends on your specific university. Ask them. There are universities where tuition fees are higher if you are enrolled in let's say pharmacy instead of philosophy, because the expected usage of lab&co is higher.
In general, it is the same philosophical question as paying taxes for the maintenance of roads, even if you do not own a car and you only live on your privat ranch while working remotely. You pay for infrastructures that are used by you,directly or indirectly.
You may not have been to the campus, but your instructors are having their offices there, they are using the campus infrastructure (labs, libraries, servers and networks) to provide you a good service.
If you feel the cost/quality ratio is too high, leave them a feedback on Google Maps.

This still doesn't answer the question as you are getting measurably less value once your classes are done.

You still want your instructor and advisors to be top-notch even after your classes are finished. University equipment and campus infrastructures are need to perform research, as well, and they are at your disposal, you are free not to use them, but you are expected to take advantage of them.
On top of that, if you still need time to graduate after your classes are finished, it can be put in the bin "your fault, be quick". If you really don't need university infrastructure to conclude your studies, why don't you ask the dean for an exception, asking to have your final graduation much earlier?

Another way to look at this is that while you may make more or less use of what is on offer to you at different times in your degree, the tuition fee is calibrated to cover those costs amortised across the whole period of your degree. The other this to account for is that one hour of your supervisors time costs many times more than one hour of class. If a class has 20 students in it, then a one hour meeting once a week costs ~ 20x more than a one hour class. Whether or not you use the benefits offered is not the university's problem.


text:
Professor can't work on clearance projects
My advisor can work on DoD funded project but not at the level of requiring security clearance.
I want to move into working on Applied research in sensitive areas which means any one with direct ties to foreign nationals is banned. I'm also considering leaving my PhD position to work as a civilian contractor and do a PhD part time as it's way more money.
What's the best way to talk about this issue and potentially gracefully leave?

Are you in the US? If so, it is certainly an exaggeration to say that you would be denied a clearance (even a higher level one) because your thesis advisor was a foreign national. As for how to talk to your  advisor about switching to part-time, it seems like a special case of How should I phrase an important question that I need to ask a professor?

US. The restricted projects within the university foreign nationals cannot be involved in, in any way. They can't even be acknowledged(formally). This means if I wanted to work on them I would need a different advisor. Additionally if I chose to work as a civilian contractor and continue the PhD part time I would be prevented from integrating my work into PhD involving said advisor. I suspect they would want me to end the relationship completely since he still has ties to PRC university.

Oh, you meant banned from the project, not banned from your life. Got it :-)

Does this answer your question? How to tell my advisor that I am quitting my PhD and what to say to an employer about why I am leaving

Not quite the same,

Talk about the issue with whom, exactly?

You seem to have two options. I don't think that leaving your current advisor "gracefully" is an issue. If you want to work on something that they can't be involved with then just tell them that you have to find a different advisor. They will understand that much, at least.
But you have another option, I'd guess, which is to switch to more "sensitive" projects after earning your degree. There is no particular need that I can see to do it immediately if you can build some credibility with your current advisor on working DoD projects. You aren't defined for life by what you do for your dissertation.
So, if you are compelled to do this now, just find someone who can advise you and tell the current advisor why. But think long term about all your options, not just one.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Will leaving a PhD after one year or having a full PhD be better or worse for job in industry?
I am a UK student, 23 years old, and started a PhD in theoretical physics last October 2018 at a top 15-20 university (my undergrad Maths degree was at a top 5 uni where I got a First Class Honours 1:1), I have since come to realise that I do not want to pursue a career in academia but want to go into industry.
Considering that a PhD in these disciplines cannot replace work experience and to mitigate that at best, you could train programming skills and general knowledge in the area which you are going to apply to (although you would have nothing to show for it, and which would be learnt on the job anyway). Then would a full PhD in theoretical physics/pure maths (~4 years) be considered a downside in the eyes of an employer compared to a graduate with 1 year of PhD, when applying for a data science/analyst/consultant/actuary job?
Any advise, especially from STEM PhDs and PhD dropouts who later went into industry, would be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much!

Only you can evaluate your priorities. Pick one that seems to meet your goals and work toward it. Keep a bit of flexibility as you go.

@Buffy Thank you. I am swayed to drop out since a full PhD cannot make up for 3 years of experience in industry, and regardless of missed time, many companies have several more reasons to prefer a graduate to a postgraduate (work ethic, team skills, etc.). It has only been a year since graduation so I may apply for some grad jobs and reach out to my friends who have landed jobs as quants, data scientists, analysts, etc.

It depends on a lot of factors, but I will say that 3-4 years is a LONG time to spend doing a difficult task that you're not motivated for. Even people who really want to go into academia have a hard time motivating themselves to finish their dissertation.

While you do have something in mind you don't want, you are vague on what you do want. That's reasonable and normal - but you'll need to clear that up as a first job so you can decide whether a PhD is a necessity, aid, or impediment to getting what you do want. Reaching out to peers who've got something you are more interested in is a great way to start that! Just beware that the evils of the alternatives may not be so clear to you as the evil you know - one or the other can be easily inflated, and you cannot know which is which. A PhD is the least common path to most things, but not all.

@BrianH This is true, I am really searching for something that resonates with me. Time isn't on my side though as I'm going to have to compete with this years graduates for jobs, however, at least I know that I am taking control of my life.

I spent one year doing a PhD (software engineering) then dropped out, upon which I immediately started earning about 2.5x more (4x within three years) and never looked back. Mind you, this was in another country where my PhD involved a minimal amount of actual research - and a lot of utterly boring admin chores that I had to perform for my supervisors, like correcting hundreds of BSc exam papers. That made the decision much easier for me than it seems for you. :)

If you currently are married or in a long-term stable relationship, what does your significant other desire? Ask them rather than random strangers on the internet. If you are not in such a relationship but worry how they might work out in grad school and postdocs, note that many people (include a prospective future spouse) might find it an adventure to do a certain amount of relocating during the early years of their marriage. You shouldn't base career decisions on hypothetical people.

You do not want to pursue a career in academia. It is good that you have worked this out early enough to do something about it.
Was "the next step in the career" the only reason for doing your PhD? Or is it a genuine delight to you to be learning and to be looking forward to making a contribution to knowledge?

If there is no delight then if I were you I'd drop it at once. But I am not you, and that is not advice.
If there is delight then if I were you I would pursue that wholeheartedly. There is little enough delight in the world as it is and we shouldn't throw away what we have. But I am not you, and that is not advice.
If you are half way between the two - it is always possible to start a doctorate at 60. A friend of mine did. So bear that in mind.

But here at last is some genuine advice. It comes in two stages.

Take a total and irrevocable decision to abandon all your academic pretensions and go straight for business. No second thoughts, no looking back, that is what you are going to do.

Live with that decision for a week. But do it seriously. Remember that you are not trying to decide, you have decided. That is the key.

Take a total and irrevocable decision to complete your PhD and only go into business after that. As before: no second thoughts, no looking back.

Live with that decision for a week.

The reason why this exercise in self-deception works so well is that it frees all the important parts of your psyche to engage with a definite and unambiguous future and not some sort of vague undecided limbo. And they are able to tell you what you feel.
At the end of those two weeks, look back on how you felt. When did you have regrets over what you had decided, and what were they? When did the choice feel righter? In which week were you most looking forward to life?

Many people, including myself, would find the proposed self-deception impossible. There is a difference between making an irrevocable decision and pretending to make an irrevocable decision. I don't think that I could banish all knowledge of the pretense, but knowledge of the pretense contradicts the supposed irrevocable nature of the "decisions" you suggest.

First things first, figure out how useful a PhD is going to be. Without knowing this you can't make an informed decision.
Go to your local jobs portal and search for jobs that require a PhD in theoretical physics vs. those that only require an Honors degree. How much more attractive are those jobs? Are they more attractive at all? How much better-paying are they? Can you imagine doing those jobs? It's natural that jobs that require PhDs will have a more difficult job scope. You'll be asked to do things that you wouldn't be tasked with - at least initially - if you only have an Honors degree. That also means you'll be paid more (again, at least initially).
Once you've assessed that, then you can make an informed decision. For example you might get reach a conclusion that if you leave now, you'll earn $X/year, while if you finish, it'll cost you two more years as a PhD student but you can earn $2X/year upon graduating. That's a 100% increase, and likely means that if money is the only thing that matters to you, you should finish. Alternatively, you might find that although you'll only earn $1.1X/year after graduating, the job scope for Honors holders is dull and uninteresting. In that case you might want to finish as well.
One more thing: talk to your former classmates - the people who did undergraduate studies with you but didn't go on to PhD studies. What are they doing now? How much do they earn? Do they work in places that also employ PhD graduates, and if so, what do those PhD graduates do that they don't?
If you have the answers to all these questions, you'll be able to make a decision much more comfortably.

Can a theoretical physics or pure maths PhD ever be useful in the industry? I don't think there are any jobs that require theoretical physics/pure maths PhDs only and not also take in graduates. I have heard from so many PhDs that a PhD is only a negative when applying to jobs in the private sector unless your PhD directly involves work that that job requires, because you have spent 4+ years on a subject which has nothing to do with the job you are applying to and have 4+ years working in an academic environment so will be used to that way of thinking.

@ThomasGibbons do you think, or do you know? Have you looked at the job advertisements? Making a major life-changing decision based on hearsay is very dangerous!

Having interviewed (on both sides of the desk) for most of the positions you list (albeit in the US), I should maybe answer.
A PhD will be useful. Most of these jobs will prefer a PhD, or at least give you credit for years spent pursuing a PhD. Many people start their career and say they will go back to get a PhD, but this rarely happens.
Physics is a good PhD to have. "Physicists and Physicians" are notorious for having very low unemployment rates (compared to biologists or chemists). But, physics is a big place. If you are doing data analysis on the computer, it should be easy to continually learn new skills (even having awesome Python and BASH skills is a good start). Other subfields might be less useful.
So, I would lean toward finishing. But of course, there are several factors that I don't know about:

whether your advisor is supportive about letting you do your research in ways that develop marketable skills
whether your advisor is likely to let you graduate on time
whether you are still interested in your research
your family and personal situation

I’m not sure that 4 years in academia beat 4 years in industry. Speaking with people in industry, a lot prefer the latter.

Depends on the industry. In my (R&D) experience, the PhD is valuable.

@cag51 I have heard from many that a theoretical physics or pure maths PhD can only be beneficial when applying to academic positions, if you're applying in the private sector then the difference between you and a fresh graduate is that you're older, more specialised in a narrow field, used to solitary work, and expecting a higher pay. Further,my PhD is not at a top uni like my undergrad Masters degree is so I would be competing against top 5 PhDs. The reason why private sector hires PhDs is simply because of the surplus number available, but grad student+4 years will always earn more than PhD

@cag51 Further, the experience gained during a PhD has little to nothing to do with real industry experience in the job you are applying to, so PhDs who decide not to go into academia are competing with graduates for graduate entry-level jobs.

What you have "heard from many" does not match my experience or those of the people I know. Of course, your mileage may vary; things vary by location and field, and I am just some guy on the internet. But I'm not sure what the point of asking the question is if you already (think you) know the answer....

If you’re going for R&D then sure, but if you’re doing software development 4 years’ experience in software vs theoretical physics...

If you get your PhD, you will live with the achievement the rest of your life.  If you stop it now, you will live knowing you never finished it.  2 years more in a working life of 40 years is nothing!  Besides, everyone has a basic degree, so a PhD is one way of standing out from the other seagulls.  Perhaps you just need a break.  Go hiking for a few weeks; come back fresh and renewed and finish the PhD with more zeal than you can muster right now.  A PhD does not force you into an academic career.

In addition to Martin’s very comprehensive answer on 'larger-scale decision-making‘, I would like shift the perspective towards the process instead of the result. I claim that you can have a successful career in the industry with and without a PhD. So:
What is it that you would like to spend the next 3 years of your life on?
Is it a PhD project and a thesis - or a job in the industry?
Back then, this question was all I needed to make my decision. I had decided for the PhD position, although I was quite confident that I will not persue a career in academia, because that was what I wanted to do at that time. My PhD project was successful, I had a very good time and gained valuable experience (more on a personal than on a professional level, though).

Did the PhD and then straight into industry for much the same reasons.
Personally, do not regret getting the Th. Phys. knowledge.
Your PhD is always narrow, but you do learn a lot more and this stays with you.
The PhD did give some help careerwise. How much kudos it brings is culturally specific. US values it more than UK more that Australia.
How much it helps in problem solving is very hard to prove either way, but a story you can tell when job hunting.
Incomplete degrees do not look good on CV.
But getting out earlier because of a change of plan is way better than something that looks like a failure to complete. Lost count of the number of people that are in that situation I have come across. All have a story and lets just say it cannot always be the supervisor's fault.
So, make very sure that if you stay on, you finish it.
See if you can get a Masters instead.
Also, if you do stick it out, build some useful skills on the way.
Learn to program, machine learning, financial maths or whatever suits. There is enough overlap with the physics that it should not impede you.

I quit a PhD after wasting more than three years on it... like you I realised that I wasn't going into academia early on in the PhD but was planning to go into industry where the PhD would not only be relevant but necessary to getting a decent job.
So I stuck to it when it wasn't going well and wasn't enjoyable way longer than was reasonable. But eventually I quit, changed direction and went into a career where a PhD was not only un-necessary but of no value. Do I regret giving up? Very very rarely. Do I regret having started it? Rarely. Do I regret not listening to the voice that said I should have given up much sooner as soon as I realised that it wasn't enjoyable and it implied that my career plans at that time were not going to be enjoyable? YES!
Do your research... decide what career you want to go into instead of academia, find out if a PhD would be of any benefit to you in such a career and make an informed decision. Don't rush into it. By all means start applying for jobs now... you are not committing yourself to take any of them... and discuss with some of your interviewers the value of a PhD to them - you might make those interviews a throwaway and right off your immediate chances of a job with them, but you have time to throw a few interviews to get a feel for the industry.
And remember, by the time you've been working in your chosen industry for a few years, having a PhD or not will become fairly unimportant because it will be historic. I've been working for 35 years and a PhD had never been relevant to my career

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


text:
Interview with potential supervisor for graduate program. Should I keep contacting other potential professors?
I applied for winter 2020 entry. The applications open in September but I was recommended to contact potential supervisors ahead of time. I emailed my CV, transcript and quick background about myself to few potential supervisors and landed an interview with one. I went to the interview and we discussed the research endeavours and my research proposal. The 45 minutes interview seemed positive and the prof mentioned me to email him when applications open. He said he will be a potential supervisor. Acceptance into the program is conditional upon securing a supervisor. Should I continuing contacting other profs or assume my prof is secured based upon the interview? I am worried if by the time applications open another potential grad might catch his attention and take my spot. Thanks in advance.

Are you only applying to a single program and asking about contacting more professors at that institution? Or do you mean at other institutions?

The professor said to put him down as a potential supervisor on the application. And said to contact him when i submitted the full application.

You already said that in your question, it doesn't answer mine.

Sorry, I am new to this site. I applied to three programs. 2/3 requires acceptance and then securing a prof based on the application.

You should continue contacting and interviewing possible professors until you have an official offer of admission that you have accepted, especially at other institutions.
It seems like this professor is most likely willing to take you as a student, but only if you are accepted to that program (which likely does not depend only on that professor's opinion), and only if nothing else comes up including an applicant they like better, unexpected personal circumstances, changing financial situation in the lab, etc.
As you say, acceptance to the program is conditional on having a supervisor: that means it is necessary for admission but not sufficient. The professor has only granted you permission to identify them as a potential supervisor on your application, this is not an offer or promise of admission.

It is unwise to assume anything. Keep all options open until you formally accept an offer. Even a simple misunderstanding can leave you stranded.
But following user Bryan Krause's question, don't give the impression that you are uninterested or conflicted about the original contact. And don't give the impression that you're already committed. Stay flexible. Celebrate at the signing.

Yes, you are correct. It is a tedious process finding a supervisor with my lack of research background. But, I will keep trying.

I agree with Bryan Krause. You keep contacting and interviewing until you get an official acceptance to the program. Just because the professor likes you and you two "clicked", it does not mean that they will be able to take you. It could be that some weird departmental politics may prevent them from taking students this cycle. This very issue happened to me this last cycle.
One potential adviser, who I had clicked with and had very overlapping interests with mine, informed me after the selection process began that they were lower on the level of their priority than they had expected, and as a result would not be able to take me. It was unfortunate, but it was not unexpected and reasonable.
It could also be that you are definitely a favorite of them, but not enough of the department to receive an offer. The professor may also have you as a favorite, but not THE favorite. Professors recognize that the application process can be long and tedious and it is in the interest of applicants to apply to multiple programs. Even if all goes according to plan, your advisor will most likely not take offense with you having contacted and applied with other people. At the same time, you may regret not continuing to contact people if you just stopped with them.
Stay excited, but keep your options open.


text:
Is there a way to improve my grade after graduation?
I graduated around 3 years ago with a degree, from a Russell Group university, in Mathematics. I had some mental health issues in my final term which essentially bombed my grade. Since I had no previously reported issues with anxiety, my extenuating circumstances were denied, (despite me having a panic attack in the middle of an exam and going to A&E since I thought I had some sort of food poisoning.)
Luckily, I was on track for a high 2:2/ low 2:1 so I did still pass my degree overall and obviously this was around 3 years ago and I have been doing well in my career etc. so this isn’t about how to find a job with this grade.
I don’t like having this grade and I know I can do better and I was just wondering: does anyone knows a way that I can increase my grade (post graduation)?
I’m working full time and don’t want to go back to university full time, but I’m open to taking night classes/extra courses. I wouldn’t mind taking something more related to the work I’m doing now rather than mathematics, but most of the courses I’d be interested in are closely related to my original degree. (e.g. coding, cyber security, finance)
Living and working in London

To update anyone who is reading this in the future and was feeling the same as me - pretty bummed about my grade. I have received a job offer recently for an incredible position. The position usually would require a 2:2 or higher, but due to my 3+ years of experience in industry they offered the job (not just as basic pay but with an experience and skills bonus). To everyone who answered, thank-you! - You were all right and it's not something I need.

Where do you live? Are there part time master's degree courses available in your area?

You graduated - the course is done, there's nothing that can be changed about your results. That's not to say you can't go on to further study in night classes and/or online courses, for professional development.

@Patricia London, so quite a lot. I was also wondering about the Open University

@Emma I did wonder that, but I have heard that if I then went on to take a masters it would help

@Bee The Master's would be a separate degree, though. It wouldn't change your undergrad result, but may help your CV be looked at more favourably in job or further degree applications. For example, a 2.2 at undergrad and a distinction (or merit) at Master's-level are looked on more favourably than a 2.2 alone.

What is 2.2/2.1?

@user111388 Undergraduate degree classifications/grades in the UK. In order from highest to lowest, the classifications are first, 2.1, 2.2, third, pass, fail. I think a 2.2 is equivalent to a C-average in the US system, although I am happy to be corrected if wrong there.

Probably not, but ask the university.

Why is this question being downvoted? Even if the answer is no, that doesn't mean it's a bad question.

As well as Open University, check out online courses such as from Coursera. Taking this with accreditation (and some can be from highly reputable institutions), will both directly demonstrate what you are capable of and look good to an employer. In areas such as you note, ongoing education is highly valued by employers.

What are you looking for when trying to change those grades? When you think of the answer, are there other people involved?

You don't quite explain why you need a better grade. You state that you have a satisfactory career now, which I'm reading as you are not impeded by your grades. If so, then following that argument, you'd want a better grade for personal satisfaction. If that is the case, why don't you retake the same exam (if available) alone at home to demonstrate to yourself that you can score a 100? Why would you be dependent on the validation of others?

@user3209815 To be honest, I get embarresed when people ask me what grade I got at uni. I know I shouldn't care what they think but whether it's friends or prospective employers, I don't want to make my excuses, no matter how valid.

@Bee Do a lot of people ask that? What an odd thing to ask somebody once you’ve left school. — Either way I sympathise, I’m still salty about the merely-OK grade of my master’s thesis, given the amount of work I put in, the results I got, and how poorly the grade was justified, citing circumstances outside my control. But regardless of feelings, it’s water under the bridge.

@Konrad Unfortunately so, but I do tend to come across a lot of young people (20-25) with a similar level of education (i.e. graduates). I don't think it's malicious, I think people tend to just assume I did really well at uni, especially when we are discussing maths, which I do a lot because it's my passion!

@Bee if I was a young person and met someone who's doing well professionally and they tell me their grades in university were sub-optimal, that would make me realize that perhaps there are other things in life beyond grades. This might be a good point of conversation, rather than something to be embarrassed about.

@behacad, I do understand that and I don't think anyone is actually judging me harshly for it, but that doesn't stop me being ashamed of it

"I get embarresed when people ask me what grade I got at uni."  Your answer should be "Good enough to get a good job."

@Bee People will stop asking as you get older, your best bet is really just to wait it out or figure out a dismissive/deflecting answer like RonJohn suggests

I will correct myself in my comment above, as I've just stumbled on a better source than my vague recollection - a UK 2.2 classification is (according to the Fulbright Commission) equivalent to a B-average or 3.0 GPA in the US system. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_undergraduate_degree_classification

In view of the update: glad to hear things have worked out, and I hope other people who might be in similar situations will take some encouragement from this.

@yemon thanks! I hope so too - hence the update :)

There's nothing you can do to change your grade on a completed degree.  What you can do is do well in your job so that no one cares about your old grades, which it sounds like you've done.  So congrats on that!  The real issue here isn't your grades, it's that you're still feeling a lot of anxiety about your college experience.  I'd suggest talking to a therapist about that.  You can't change your grade, but you can better understand the feelings you're having about your college experience, and you can change how you think about those grades.  I wish you all the best.

I'm with Noah's answer in a way that if you're not looking for a material gain from changing you grades – like career or academia –, then there might be something about your feelings that you may want to pay attention to. Although therapy could help you, you may get the answers by asking yourself questions like: what am I looking for when trying to change those grades? Are there other ways to fulfill that feeling?

Let's say, for example, you wanted to prove to yourself that you're smart enough to get that A+, even if nobody saw those new grades. Sure, you can do night classes and get the results. But perhaps, taking on other more advanced intellectual projects that are also useful in the long run could help you fulfill that feeling too. Maybe you could be teaching that subject to college kids – like a tutor.

@Noah, thanks for the supportive answer. I think your answer gives the best advise so I will accept now the recommend 24 hours has passed. It's a shame the answer is no, but everyone is right that I need to let it go and move on :)

@Bee: I'm glad you found the answer helpful.  It's really normal to want to change things in the past that you regret, and my experience with that kind of anxiety is that you can't just "let it go and move on" by willing it hard enough, because the feeling won't just go away by ignoring it.  You're better off understanding that feeling and finding things other than changing the past which will help you with why you're having those feelings.

Ricardo's comment suggests some of the kinds of things you might do which might help you (and would certainly help some people in your situation), but you'd get suggestions more tailored to you if you spoke about your feelings in more detail with someone.

The grades in your first degree cease to matter as soon as you can establish some success in a subsequent career, as you seem to have done.
If it really bugs you that your degree class was lower than you think you were capable of, then by all means take an Open University degree to prove that you can do better. A close friend of mine who has never accepted his second class degree, 40 years ago (despite a subsequent PhD!), has now accumulated no fewer than three first class Open University degrees.
But don't expect employers to be particularly interested in your undergraduate degree class once you have a few years work experience under your belt.

I'm not sure that last paragraph is true.  I got a 2.2 (in 1980), and about 10 years ago (certainly less than 20 years ago) a recruitment agency said "Hmmm" when I pointed this out.  Apparently the fact it was from Cambridge balanced the low grade out (which is daft).

@MartinBonner interesting. A recruitment agency is not quite the same thing as an employer, and I did not say that no employer would be interested in a long past degree result. When I was an employer, I certainly wasn't, and, earlier in my career when I was a partner in a big four accountancy firm that prided itself on recruiting only the best and brightest, my boss could boast of a solid double 3rd (from Cambridge, as it happens)

@Martin generally the calibre of my uni does balance out the grade, but I think you're right that a lot of recruiters want to tick boxes no matter what. The same was true getting on grad schemes. That's why I went for small companies that hand select

I doubt that anything you can do now will change the past. But you can prepare for your future if you figure out what you want it to be.
The old grades will stand, but if your future includes study and another degree you can work there to improve your prospects.
Your past will be evaluated differently by different people and for different situations. No one can control that. But if you have an acceptable explanation you can move on, generally speaking. Your past isn't an immutable indicator of your future. But your path forward may be a bit twisty, depending on your goals.
Once you have a goal in mind, it would be good to talk to someone knowledgeable about it for advice in moving forward.
And note that most people evaluate recent work as more relevant than older. So, once you establish that you can succeed, you can move past the older experience.

I feel your frustration. I was aiming for the highest honours rank for the University-entrance examination in my country and, due to extreme stress during the examination period, I almost miss the high honours. Not that it really matters, but it bothered me and stressed me for a long time, and friends teasing me didn't help.
A grade is just a picture of your abilities in a given subject on a given day. And not a fully accurate picture either since the professor has to choose a sample of problems to try to represent the whole subject. Because of extenuating circumstances, you couldn't perform at your full capacities during these examinations. In short, your grades does not represent your skills and knowledge.
That's sad but you cannot change it. What you can change is what you think of yourself. Instead of telling yourself "I got poor grades and despite of it, I was fortunate enough to be offered a good job.", say

(Despite of extenuating circumstances), I was able to graduate, and I landed a good job where I can show I am skilled in my subject.

You can repeat the above sentence (or another one that motivates you more) whenever you feel down. You can tell that to people when they ask about university. It is the truth and by repeating it, you will slowly convince yourself of it. Remember that many people, in similar circumstances that you faced, may have failed their examinations and dropped from university.
Ultimately, if this is a too heavy weight to carry, you should seek help from a specialist.

Taladris, have you read the user's own update to their question?

If you're in your career now it will eventually get to a point where your experience and past employers matter more than your University grades. What matters isthat you HAVE that degree. It's a bummer, i know, but it is not the end of the World.
Good luck!


text:
Development of IoT device for an MS Electrical Engineering thesis
Is it a good idea to design and develop an Internet of things (IoT) device instead of investigation of a theoretical research problem for an MS Electrical Engineering thesis?
Majority of the MS Electrical and Computer Engineering theses investigate a current research problem and usually involve simulations to report results. So, there is a level of novelty in that it is a current research problem. However, design and development of an IoT device, may not involve that level of newness or novelty. The IoT device under question is a new device with sufficient complexity but has already been designed and developed somewhere else. On the other hand, it is a practical implementation and not a mere simulation. So, how would you recommend an MS student going for this type of thesis? How would the examiners look at this type of thesis?

It's best to ask your supervisor about this.

I'd get out of the mindset of describing the attributes that some solution for some problem should have, and identify a problem you might find fun to attempt to solve.
Once you have the problem to be solved, you can engineer the solution to meet the requirements.  Problems exist everywhere, if you only look for them.  Find something that's your "itch" you've been meaning to "scratch" and then build a plan around that.
Once you have some of a plan, you might realize that it's a bad choice.  If so, do it again with a different plan.  In short time, you'll have two or three backup plans in addition to the one plan you'll want to promote.

Decades of software engineering is speaking here.  At least more in the early days, we would often get broad sweeping directives to "get into this" or "do something with that" with vague directions on what the "something" to be accomplished was.  In reality, you can't build anything that's not described enough in detail to know if you built it.  The only way out is to find a real problem, and then start mocking a solution, and then see if your solution sensibly has the characteristics you want.


text:
Elsevier's confusing guide for authors
I am trying to submit a manuscript to an Elsevier journal Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews (RSER) and found the author guidelines most confusing. For example, under author guidelines, it is said that

Use of word processing software

It is important that the file be saved in the native format of the
word processor used. The text should be in single-column format. Keep
the layout of the text as simple as possible. Most formatting codes
will be removed and replaced on processing the article. In particular,
do not use the word processor's options to justify text or to
hyphenate words.

Then it recommends

to use the latest Elsevier article class to prepare your manuscript
and BibTeX to generate your bibliography.

Now, there are two classes and templates available for Latex: cas-dc and cas-sc, one for the double column and one for the single column. Now I am confused,
(a) Which template to use for the submission? Single column cas-sc or double column cas-dc? The author instructions or the user guide for the templates does not guide when to use which template.
(b) The aforementioned instructions are for the source file? Latex source file is already in the single column format.
(c) What should be the layout of the output PDF? Single column or double column? The journal publishes article in the double column format!
(d) Should the PDF files have justified text or ragged right? Latex templates provided by Elsevier produce PDF files with justified text.
I will be thankful if someone can help me out with this. The confusing author guidelines can be found here.

Some journals do review process on the single column, and after acceptance they transform it to double column.
Templates are not designed only for one journal. So, sometimes you can see different templates while downloading their zip file. (for example 3 or more of the Elsevier journals refer to one file, and the others refer to the second one.)

Yes, I understand that. Elsevier guide for authors is almost the same for all its journals. However, it is the most confusing. What I am interested in is answers to my queries (a) to (d) in my post.

I think its better to be written in single col format. But it is not that important, don't worry, If you select the wrong template, they tell you after submission. Usually it doesn't endanger the review process. You can even send email and ask them beforehand.

@m123 I think that would be a fine answer.

I think the two sections are best understood if you consider the first as instructions for authors not using LaTeX and the second for LaTeX users.

At the stage of submission it usually doesn't matter. If your paper is accepted, they might ask you to reformat it (or do it themselves).

If a specific publishing company's instructions are unclear I'd recommend contacting the company. Let them clear up their mess!

As a LaTeX user, I'd use the cas-sc class, because the paragraph about "word processing  software" (which is mostly irrelevant to me) requests single-column format. But I don't think they'd object if you used cas-dc, since it's included in their recommendation for LaTeX. I personally would not use BibTeX, because of bad experiences with it, but if you haven't had such experiences, go ahead and use it.

@AndreasBlass I'm curious, what do you use instead of BibTeX?

I back up the answer of @sleepy. In my experience as editor, 60% of people who submit ignore the author guidelines anyway, and upon acceptance they are then more clearly asked what they need to do.

There are a number of valuable comments with very good advice. Yet there is no answer to the question I posted. I am happy to have some sound advice. I am also a bit relieved to know that I am probably not the only one who is confused and could not make sense of Elsevier's guide. Otherwise, there would have been an answer by now.

@astronat I just write out the references myself, in the main LaTeX file.

Different fields have different conventions. I am a mathematician, and my advice reflects what I know about publishing conventions in that field. So please take this advice with a grain of salt.
This said: Echoing the comments of m123, sleepy, and Lewian, I would advise you to ignore Elsevier's guidelines entirely. Submit your document in any format which looks attractive, is normal for your field, and is convenient for you to prepare.
You can worry about their guidelines once your paper is accepted, and maybe not even then. My own opinion is that if Elsevier charges $4,034.00 for an annual subscription to this journal, then perhaps they can afford to employ staff to do their own formatting work.


text:
How can I remove myself from a project I'm unable to complete?
I'm in my first lab and while working on my main project the opportunity came up to help another senior researcher with theirs. It seemed like simple tasks at first, but I'm now convinced that this will take way too long to figure out and it is taking significant time away from my main project. How do I proceed?
TL;DR: Bit off more than I can chew, how do I amicably inform my supervisors without seeming too incompetent?

I suggest that you just tell your supervisor and the other researcher that you are finding it difficult to give the other project adequate time and effort given your main and more important tasks.
It is fair to say that you underestimated the effort involved, but then, others probably did the same. Treat it as a problem to be solved.
You don't need to actually remove yourself or make a demand, but just state the facts as they are and ask for advice. Perhaps the advice will be that you drop it or otherwise refuse your effort on it.
But you also don't need to accept conditions that are unreasonable, so make sure the conversation ends in some consensus. Then, you only need to "upset" people as a last resort.


text:
Can I use a part of figure in my published paper to supplementary information of new paper?
I'm researched some material and I want to write two paper to other journals. Can I use a part of figure of first paper to supplementary information of second paper? For example, electrical properties of three samples in a figure of first paper, can I use figure of one sample to supplementary information of second paper? Is it OK to reuse figure with different scale range to supplementary information or main article?

If you think of it as reusing an old figure you avoid self plagiarism simply by citing the original. Perhaps the citation includes "Adapted from...".
But, in changing the scale you might also think of it as a new figure, even if it has the same "shape". Does it convey new information or just restate the old information. You might want to cite the old anyway, just to make things easier for readers needing to go to the old paper.
But, you have an additional issue. If you gave up copyright to the publisher of the old article, you probably need to obtain permission to use the figure in any case (unless it is truly "new"). I doubt that any reputable publisher would deny you permission, but you need to ask to reuse even your own work if you don't hold copyright to it (US perspective - laws vary).


text:
Re-applying to the PhD Program after Illness
I started in a combinded MS/PhD program and was on the PhD track, but for mental and physical health reasons I had to switch to the MS track. I had not yet made it to the research part of the program, so I don't have an adviser.
I really want to get my PhD, and the (then) graduate director in my department told me when I made the switch that I'd be able to apply to rejoin the PhD program after getting my Master's. I'm getting my Master's in the spring, so I'm working on the application now. I just don't quite know what to do with the essay.
The essay is supposed to be about my research interests, career goals, and reasons for choosing the program. I think my health issues will be sort of an elephant in the room if I don't say something about them, but I'm worried that saying too much will make me look like a weaker candidate than I am. I've had these health issues for most of my life and will continue to have them for the foreseeable future, but they're more under control now than they were a year and a half ago when I made the switch.
How much is too much to reveal about this whole situation? How much is too much of my essay to spend on it? Is there any way to spin this situation in a positive (or at least neutral) way?
(I wasn't sure how much detail to include in this question, but I'm happy to go into more detail if it would help.)

This is relevant: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/122576/100323

I'll slightly replicate my answer to this question: mention this, but don't be too melodramatic. You have dealt with an illness that was out of your hands and got a handle on it. This is not something that a reasonable admissions committee will see as a point against you, but be sure that they understand you are not looking to get accepted because of your illness. It is also might be illegal to discriminate against you because of illness, depending on its nature and the country you're in.
Good luck!

I'm in the US, so it would be illegal to discriminate against me based on real or perceived disabilities or illnesses. That doesn't mean it can't happen, though.


text:
Using Fiverr for proofreading/editing essays
I have written my Statement of Purpose all by myself. Now, I am planning to use Fiverr to proofread the essay since I come from a country where English is not widely spoken.

Does it count as academic fraud? Has any University
 taken action against students who have used online
 proofreading websites in the past?
Can the seller use my essay to write other essays? If yes, will it lead to
plagiarism
Would you personally recommend using Fiverr?

Not going into details of the site/service mentioned, but having someone proofread the SoP is ok (even if you are paying them to do so).

Also, "Does it count as academic fraud? Is there any way the university can find out?" makes it look as a very shady question, almost like, "is it illegal? can I get away with it?"

On the possibility of the proofreader stealing your SoP, there are a few people who plain out put their SoP online after/during their PhD, and even if someone would then copy their SoP the plagiarism would be on the one who copied not the author. Also, the dishonesty facilitation will be on the proofreader who passes along your SoP not on you.

Answering your questions:
1-Does it count as academic fraud? Has any University taken action against students who have used online proofreading websites in the past?
No. fraud is intentional deception to secure unlawful gain. Proofreading is not a problem. In fact, many universities and event governments demand professional translation and proofreading for important papers and/or tramits if they are in a language different than the official one.  The thing is that proofreading is done after you already wrote your work, so it is still your work. The problem is when you use a service to write the work itself.
2-Can the seller use my essay to write other essays? If yes, will it lead to plagiarism
Yes and no. Yes because they can indeed grab the text and paste it in a new doc, which would be indeed plagiarism on their part and fault.If you publish it first then you are protected by author's rights. And No because an essay has a personal way of writing and it's on a very specific topic, which makes it hard to use directly without it being obvious.
3-Would you personally recommend using Fiverr?
Yes. If you are just proofreading. But do check the qualifications of the people offering the service first. Being native to a language does not mean people are aware of the language and it's rule, which is specially common for monolinguals. Also check with some editorial agency to contrast prices, not to mention that any of these agencies can give you written proof that it isnt/wont be used for other works. I understand the price for this is a concern, more so for a mere essay, so I can suggest you check a language teacher/school. They can proofread too, possible at a a decent price, and they will understand better what you meant to say in your original language.


text:
Should I switch my math master’s programme for better grades, thesis opportunities, and a stronger shot at a PhD?
I am currently pursuing a master's degree in mathematics at one of the top two institutes in India. The coursework here is very fast-paced. Many of us who joined this programme are encountering these subjects for the first time, whereas the rest of the batch consists of students who completed their bachelor's degrees at the same institute and are already familiar with the material. As a result, the instructors often assume a level of prior knowledge that we do not possess. It's really hard to score. Further, we don't have an opportunity to retake the exams to improve our grades.
To do a master's thesis, we need to get a grade above a certain threshold. However, it appears that often students struggle to meet this requirement and some even fail their first year. Many a times, students end up with poor grades and no thesis.
For context, the courses here are more advanced compared to those at other institutes in India. In most other places,it's relatively easy to get a good grade and often mandatory to do a thesis. Consequently, in raw numbers, students from other institutes tend to have better grades than those from my institute, putting us at a disadvantage.
All of this has led me to question whether studying here is beneficial, especially if it negatively impacts my prospects for pursuing a PhD at a reputable institution.

Are you intending to stay in India for the doctorate?

I am interested in pursuing a PhD abroad. (US/Canada/Australia/Europe)

Keep in mind that the harder program might make you more likely to succeed at your PhD if you do get in.

If you are aiming for a PhD from a good university in the US, you need a degree with good grades from a good university.  Admissions committees are very aware that it is much easier to get good grades from some lesser universities (whether in the US(*) or in some other country), to the extent that degrees from lesser universities may be disregarded unless you have exceptional recommendation letters.
Admissions in the US are done by the subjective judgements of a committee of professors.  The committee will not use a formula.  Quite frequently the committee will include (or at least consult) professors originally from India who are quite knowledgeable about which degrees are meaningful and which are barely worth the paper they are written on.  Getting a masters from a lesser university, even with better grades and a thesis, will actually decrease your chances.  (I have seen masters theses from lesser universities that are at the level of a course project I did as a third year undergraduate.  Needless to say, they did not impress me.)
(*) Note before anyone panics - by a lesser university I mean Northwest Southeast South Dakota State University at Hoople, not the University of Alabama, which though not MIT is a perfectly good and serious university.

+1 for the Hoople reference

Thank you for your answer. The other universities I’m referring to are indeed good, but my institute operates at a different level. To give you context, some of my peers in the programme are math olympiad winners and among the best minds in the country. We cover all the core courses that students at other universities would complete in their programme during our first year itself. While I’m confident that I’ll gain a deep understanding of mathematics here, I’m concerned that the lack of high grades might become a problem later on.

@Ranreljam: In general, I am not impressed with education in India - there is too much rote learning and not enough emphasis on developing creativity and problem solving skills.  I'm worried the other universities are actually not good.

@AlexanderWoo I agree with you, and many people I know suggested that pursuing a PhD outside India is beneficial (if I have a choice), as it gives us a different perspective on how we do mathematics.

Getting masters from a top institute in India, even with somewhat low grades, does not reflect negatively on your chances to get enrolled for Ph.D. In fact, most top research institutes in India give preference to students who did their masters degree from an institute of similar repute during Ph.D. admissions. So, if you are aiming for Ph.D., then it is in your best interests to continue your masters from a top/reputed institute.

You seem to be looking at advanced courses which cover topics not covered elsewhere and high standards as a negative.  I would advise you to turn this thinking around and try to see this as a positive opportunity.  When you graduate from this programme you will be at a distinct advantage over your peers from other programmes that are not as rigorous.  As you seem to wish to do a PhD, remember that just getting into a PhD programme isn't the end goal, instead you want to be able to build a successful research career.  For this you need both a broad and deep knowledge base in your field, so seize all the opportunities you have along your path to get this - make that your goal and the grades/diplomas etc will mostly come along with it.


text:
Ask permission to publish article based on work from a different school?
I want to publish an article based on my master's from a previous school. I am now in a phd program at a new school. Do I need to ask my new supervisor for permission to publish the article? The master's was in political science, and my new discipline is history.
Unfortunately, my old school will not put any master's thesis into ProQuest so my only hope of sharing the results is by publishing an article.
From reading other posts, I gather that I use my new school as my affiliation but mention where the work was done.

You could also put your thesis up on some kind of repository, I don't know if there is an appropriate *XiV.

If your work is your's alone and you don't need co-authors then you can publish as you like. If it was funded by the university you should acknowledge that. If others are validly co-authors they need to be included in the paper and in the decision.
Your new supervisor isn't involved and need not be asked, but might have advice.
Affiliation is a bit tricker. My opinion is that it is your new school. Some would say that it should be the old one, especially if the funding issue arises. If the article is new but based on the masters thesis then almost certainly be the current school.
There might be some places that claim IP for all work done there. In such a case a lawyer might need consulting or an IP office at the old school.
Some fields, but not likely political science, also have security considerations that require lawyers and such.

For quite a number of journals, the affiliation issue is actually answered (to some extent, and to the limit of understanding of 'majority of the work') in the author guidelines  or publisher editorial policies (see e.g. https://www.springer.com/us/editorial-policies/authorship-principles?srsltid=AfmBOoqifczZ6Pt7s_xer-bFaezRuxNBHiYD2fJm8_yPoU6OMYrjkPi8#toc-49266 or https://www.nature.com/ncomms/submit/how-to-submit. )


text:
Letter of Recommendation for PhD Application from Instructor with Master Degree
I am going to apply for PhD programs in the U.S. I graduated many years ago, and now I have been taking advanced maths courses online in the U.S from a very reputable university to prepare for my study. I did well in my class and fortunately, the instructor, who is a Msc holder and has been instructing advanced courses for many years, was willing to write me a good LOR. However, someone told me that it is more appropriate to have letters from PhD holders when applying for PhD programs.
I really appreciate having a letter from the instructor, who can speak for my readiness in mathematical background, so I hope it works out. I wonder what everyone's take is on my circumstances: will it be a fine if my letter is from a Msc holder?

If you are applying to competitive graduate programs, you want people writing your letters to be able to say "based on my experience mentoring graduate students, I think tofu would be the best graduate student ever". Readiness in mathematical background/"tofu did well in my class" only gets you to the bare minimum entry qualification. Everyone that applies needs to have completed all the mathematical prerequisites at a high level to even be considered. Assuming a competitive program, you're not admitted because you meet the qualifications, you're admitted because you are one of the best N applicants that application season.
So, I'd go a step beyond Buffy's answer: it's not just that you want your letter writers to have experience doing research, you want your letter writers to have experience knowing what it takes to be a successful PhD student in research, which ideally means supervising PhD students in research.
If you have no one else to write you letters, you have to go with what you have, but "fine" is not going to play well when other applicants have letters that are "great" or "excellent".

Continuing this logic, ideally your letter writer should also be from the same institution to which you are applying, the same age as the target PI, exact same subfield, etc. But we know that skills can transfer over these boundaries. OP shouldn't skip out on a strong letter of reference by overthinking narrow academic credentials. (And while I can't speak for OP's case, in private industry/R&D, it is not uncommon for someone with a master's degree to supervise PhD graduates in research. I've done it.)

What matters here is not the formal qualification of the referee, but what they can say about your ability at research.
A LOR from a PhD that simply states "This person did well in my class" is much less illuminating than a reference from - say - a research technician without an advanced degree who can praise your initiative at problem solving in a lab.
Of course it's better to have someone say good things about your classes than not, but doing well in courses is unlikely to be a differentiating factor for admission in a competitive program.

The real value of letter of reference for a PhD program is not necessarily about ability to research or lab acumen. It is bigger than that. A strong letter will tell the committee, if, in the expert (and experienced) opinion of the letter writer, that the prospective student is likely to succeed in the graduate PROGRAM (as a whole, research, classes, seminars, etc). This is where a letter from someone who has been involved in being a graduate advisor, and actively involved as faculty in a doctoral program is key. Many people with great hands in the lab still fail out of the PhD program.

Given that a PhD program is about publishable research and a master's degree holder might not have a lot of experience with that, yes, it is better to get letters from PhD holders. There are exceptions, of course, and some people can have that research experience without an advanced degree.
So, I can't say that your letter will be "fine". But you can only use what you have. A truly good letter, will honestly and accurately attest to your likelihood of success in a doctoral program and beyond. That implies both recent knowledge of you and your accomplishments, but also some knowledge of what that entails. Such letters are especially important in the US.
If this letter is one of three with the others more "appropriate" but equally strong, then there should be few issues.
However, the case will be judged by a few individuals and such a letter won't be the only consideration. So, you learn by making application. And, don't apply to only a narrow range of institutions. Cast a broad net.

As a caveat, I've known multiple researchers with only a masters degree who are widely published and well known in their fields. That includes one about 20 years younger than me, so it isn't just an 'old days' occurrence.


text:
How detailed should a research plan be in an assistant professor application?
When drafting a research plan for an assistant professor application, I’m struggling to find the right balance between providing enough detail and protecting my ideas. If the plan is too broad—similar to a literature review or like a research overview on a professor’s webpage—it may come across as unconvincing. However, if I include too many specifics, I worry about the risk of revealing key ideas.
Unlike grant applications, which are typically reviewed by a specialized panel, faculty applications are submitted to multiple institutions and reviewed by a broader audience. This makes the process feel riskier because even a high-level description could potentially give away important concepts—much like how the core of a paper can sometimes be inferred just from its title.
How can I strike the right balance between demonstrating the strength and innovation of my research while protecting my ideas? Should the approach be more similar to the way professors present their research on their webpages, or does a faculty application demand more technical detail?

If you don't trust the people at the places you apply to, why bother? Or do you imagine that places post job advertisements in order to steal the ideas of applicants?

@Buffy - that is rare but not unheard of.

Ok, I hope you don't mind if I'm a bit blunt.
Relax. Your ideas are not as important as you think - neither for other people nor for your career.
I'm serious.
Most professors have a lot more ideas than they have time to implement. They simply don't have time to take your ideas. And they have research agendas that don't fit precisely those ideas that they happen to see in some job application.
But just in case, what happens in the event that somebody actually does take one of your ideas and implements them on their own?
Then you're quite lucky. You intend to become a professor, so you have a lot more ideas than time to implement anyway (see the first sentence of the previous paragraph). So somebody saved you some time that you can spend on another idea from your list.
And even better: As they took your idea, it means that they are doing research that is closely related to yours. They will cite your papers. Use your results. Create opportunities for future collaborations. Increase the relevance of your research agenda. Convince other people that the topic is important (and that, hence, goverment money should be spent on it). Allow you to write sentences like "recently there is been a lot of interest in topic X". Allow you to claim in front of hiring committees that you're working in a highly active field. All of this means impact. That's the best thing you can achieve with your research and all you had to give for it was an idea, which you most likely have many more of. I call that a bargain.
And what about the credit? They implemented the idea, so don't they get the credit for the results? Yes, they do. And you get the credit for the other results - those that you had time to obtain because you did not pursue this specific idea since they did. You typically can't anticipate in detail which project will have better results or more impact, so it's kind of pointless to muse about things like "would I have achieved more if I had instead pursued the ideas that my colleagues took?"
So I suggest not to be very protective of your ideas. You will anyway build a huge backlog of ideas which are all very interesting and which you plan to pursue "at some point in the future". I ensure you, I'm the master of "surely going to implement this idea next summer" - and yet most of those ideas have been on my list for many summers and still no time to do it. It's the same for most people I know.
So focus on actually implementing ideas - don't try to hide or protect the ones that you plan to implement somewhen in the future.
Good luck!

Thanks for your answer. Maybe that depends on the field. In my field, from my observations of publications, most professors have no more than 5 important ideas published probably in their entire career. It is from rumor and happens to me (not necessarily important ones). The outcome of idea may be expected. It can be problematic in an early career.

@user207447: where are you applying for jobs?  In my field, it's true that most professors in India might have no more than 5 publishable ideas in their careers (and professors in Nigeria even fewer), but it's not true at research universities in the US or Europe.  (This isn't because Indians are somehow worse at research, but because US/Europe have better working conditions and therefore attract the Indian researchers who are good enough to have more than 5 ideas.)

@AlexanderWoo Thanks for your comment. To clarify, I meant important ideas. There are ways to be productive. But, filling a research plan with mediocre stuff doesn't make for a compelling application. I'd prefer not to discuss specific locations.

@user207447: While I don't know your field, I doubt that there are many fields where you can anticipate that an idea will turn out be important before implementing a considerable part of it. Regarding the research plan: I am under the impression that you're putting too much value on individual ideas here, too. The point about a research plan is to show an agenda or a big picture of what you're after. This is more than just an accumulation of key ideas.

The fantasy of being faculty with the reality don't match up. You soon find out many of your brilliant ideas are either wrong, can't be done in the environment you work in (infrastructure, student background and training, etc...), have previously been done, or you just get scooped by someone who did it better, or did it worse and undercuts you as you are working on them.

Going way back to my days on the job market, the only time I was scooped was when I interviewed for a job in Europe at a top global institution. All five candidates interviewed at the same time and we were all able to see the others' presentations (I'm told this is more common in the EU, it certainly is not in the US). I ended up in a different position in the US which was my choice of destination. Four years later I checked out of curiosity as to how the candidate who took the job was doing, and what do you know, their first and only publication is on one of the projects I proposed (their proposal had nothing to do with mine, not even conceptually overlapping as this was an "open" position).
This was an idea I had long abandoned in favor of a different program which better aligned with the job I took. I was happy to see it got published (in a top journal no less), but frankly did find it quite pathetic that they had to resort to taking my ideas.... but I never did it, so who cares, ideas are cheap and if you don't do them someone will at some point.
Otherwise, I've never been scooped by existing faculty at any place I have interviewed. When I was being poached and interviewed at other places, faculty interested in my work simply struck up collaborations.
Now as I sit on lots of hiring committees, what do I want to see in terms of detail, and why do I want to see it? I want to see that you can communicate your ideas clearly enough to make me confident that you can write a research proposal and be competitive for funding. I also want to see enough detail that I can ascertain as to whether or not our institution has the proposed infrastructure needed to support your work. i.e. will you compete for funding, and will you thrive in this environment?

Good story and good advice. I wonder how long it took the other person to pick up on your idea.


text:
Should I change thesis topic?
I'm a student in the technical field A in a European university. I'm currently doing a master thesis in a field that's notoriously at the interface of subjects A and B, I haven't officially started the thesis time yet, but I've been doing preliminary work for about a month and a half and there is verbal agreement with my supervisor that I'm doing it.
The more I delve into the thesis and the more I realize that, while being at the interface, the topic is mostly subject B, with very little subject A.
While I don't hate subject B, I've come to realize that I'm not really interested in it, and I'm finding working on this thesis rather demotivating.
I still could technically leave the thesis, although I suspect it won't make me look good in the eyes of my supervisor, since I already told them that I intended to go through with it and I've had multiple occasions to leave by now.
On the one hand, I still like other aspects of the interface between A and B, doing A with a B perspective instead of the other way around (which I'm doing right now) is still a possibility for me, hence I don't think it would be wise to break ties with my supervisor and their group. I feel that if I leave the thesis I'm just going to look bad, lose potential references and just restrict my possibilities for the future. The group is quite important in the subject and the master thesis admission process is pretty selective, and I don't have any other readily available alternatives. From this perspective, it seems better to soldier through this thesis and do it well in order to have good references. I've been told that it's not at all uncommon to do a PhD in a different subfield than your master thesis. And who knows, maybe interesting elements of subject A (or even B) might come up along the way, though that seems unlikely to me right now.
On the other hand, I fear that committing to a thesis in a subject I'm not passionate about will prevent me from doing a good job. I fear that I'll just survive through it doing the bare minimum and end up with a mediocre thesis and mediocre references in a subject I don't really enjoy, making it much more difficult to both stay in this subject or switch. Beginning a thesis I do not enjoy, while I have still time to leave, feels somehow like lying to my supervisor, and starting a project alreading looking forward to end it is not a good looking prospect.
Even if I do manage to write a good thesis, I fear its strong element of subject B will make it more difficult for me to be considered for subject A positions.
Also I would like to stay at the same university after my Master's, and I think the chances of that would be made better by doing a thesis on a subject I like, which could be continued in a PhD.
I guess I'm demotivated and looking for advice from experienced researchers on what of the concerns I listed are sound, and what, if any, am I exaggerating.

This is certainly a question you need to explore with your supervisor. What they would accept or recommend is certainly important.
What an experienced researcher would do is one of the following, maybe both. First, they would be likely to consult with colleagues (not unlike your supervisor) and explore viable alternatives.
But, assuming that they have a secure appointment, such as tenure, they would do whatever most appealed to them. Of course, wisdom would suggest they keep their options open.
But you don't have the luxury of a secure appointment. Your supervisor's advice is needed and should probably be followed. They will also have advice on the probably effect on your career, if any.

Actually, I think you may be suffering from a common ailment: Buyer's Remorse. For most such situations, the feeling of regret goes away in time. If you are making progress toward a better future, you are probably doing the right thing. Don't let emotions get in the way of progress (easy to say, of course).

Hi, thank you for your answer. I fear that being open on this with my supervisor is a point of no return. Why should they continue to supervise me after they learn I'm really not interested in the topic, should I decide to stick with it?

Don't present it that way. It is an exploration of alternatives, with a preference for a different direction.

I feel this would have been acceptable maybe a month ago. In the beginning I mentioned I was worried about the lack of subject A, but I stupidly dropped it hoping the situation would solve itself. How common is it in your experience for a master student to change their mind this far into the thesis?

Six weeks doesn't seem long to me. I can't answer the question about "how common" it is, but lots of research trials don't go anywhere and the researcher has to redirect efforts. I worked on three problems in sequence for my doctorate. Only the third was fruitful.

I doubt it's an instance of buyer's remorse. I genuinly expected a different thesis topic, and in large part it was due to my poor research on the topic before applying.

I've personally encountered this problem before, albeit in one of projects for my engineering PhD (which I haven't completed so take this with a grain of salt).
What worked for me was to actively poke around the current topic and try to find a new direction which has a reasonable connection with the original thesis topic while still being appealing to me. It was important to have a concrete proposal about what the alternative is, what steps are to be taken and what the final outcome is going to be, ideally with some preliminary results.
This may come across as patronizing but in my case, I discovered a spectrum of interesting research topics that are becoming fruitful. My advisor was happy to see that I was taking the initiative to pursue new directions, and to be honest my advisor wasn't sure about how exactly to approach the problem either (which seem to be pretty common in my field).

As a professor, I could tell you about how I would feel in that situation.
On one hand, I would definitely avoid having a low-quality thesis work: if you feel that topic B is not your best, be honest with your supervisor and tell them. They would suggest you how to increase the "A" part of the thesis, or they would suggest you drop the thesis altogether. Both options are preferable to having to work with a student delivering "mediocre" results (your words): it's a waste of time for both parties.
On the other hand, if you feel like you could deliver good results on subject B, and you are relatively close to the end of the thesis, I would suggest trying to finish the thesis. We don't always have the luxury of working on what we like the most.
Both qualities (honesty and transparency, and commitment and resilience) would be positively evaluated.


text:
How to fall in love with reading?
I've searched the Stackexchange sites and found several potentially good places to ask this question but I have eventually chosen here as here where I personally found it best fits.
I'm an academic student and a language learner, autodidact, researcher, enthusiast and translator. Theoretically, I like philosophy, literature, culturally and mentally enriching works of writing, knowledge, books, etc and etc; but as mentioned, all just theoretically, not practically at all, and this is because of one reason, and that is I dislike reading; most of the time I just hate the idea of "what about reading that book right now" or "I must read this article on Stackexchange, it includes exactly all I need to know of a very valuable information that matters so much to me". Reading bores me way too much more than merely sitting on my a** for an hour doing just nothing. Reading makes me very nervous that, no longer than a couple of minutes after I start reading something, I start scrubbing my scalp, vibrating my legs and wonder when the time will come where I would have finished whatever I'm reading. Also, I feel that my eyes start confusing the lines sometimes, and because I wear glasses, when I'm reading off a screen, I find myself reading from above my glasses because it seems it practically comforts me more, and that is not medically good of course. I think I sometimes even get heavy breathing reading because I don't have enough patience and it seemingly makes me too nervous.
Now that's exactly what I don't need in my career and my field of study, I have so very big ambitions and dreams that require me to sit still and READ, and just read; and that obviously, I can't do.
My question is, if there's a method or a solution that somebody knows, scientific (I'm physically a very active person by nature) or practical, to solve this misery of mine and save my future?

Under-desk exerciser?

Are you asking if I am or is this a suggested solution?

It is a not-too-well-considered suggested partial solution to the physical symptoms. I've tried "reading on a treadmill/elliptical", but my body moves around too much to really be able to read. But reversing the roles, sitting in a chair so one's body is more stationary, should make reading more feasible, while still not being toooo still.

@paulgarrett -- Steven Wolfram, the creator of Mathematica, works on a treadmill. He's written posts in which he discusses at which speed he can run the treadmill before he's unable to type with any kind of accuracy. So it might be a question of speed.

@paulgarrett -- Yes, I guess I'd have the same problem you had; plus, the physical issue seems to be less of a problem than the neural/mental issue I think I'm having.

@SolarMike -- You make me feel even more guilty :D. This would be a good but very short temporary solution.

It’s about focus... that was my point...

My "solution" decades ago was literally to "take cigarette breaks". Too bad it's not good for you...

While studying for my PhD I attached a reading stand to my exercise bike. That way, in one hour I could exercise for an hour and read a couple of papers.

All of the symptoms that you describe sound like symptoms of a reading or attentional issue. My wife has a doctorate in psycholinguistics and thinks that you're describing someone who should talk to their school or university psychologist or reading counsellor.  They could give you information on how to deal with the anxiety you feel when reading and help you learn strategies to enjoy reading.
Good luck!

He should consider also to make a personality test. https://www.personalitypage.com/html/INTJ.html Many researchers I spoke with made like me the test and ended INTJ, altough only a minority have this disposition. So the test seems a good first step to spot where your abilities and interests are. I often have the impression students here are forced by themselves or parents to be successful academics, yet not really having the according mindset or asking how to make an academic career more easy (an oxymoron)

Nervousness, trouble sitting still, a near-painful reaction to a task that requires some extent of effortful direction of focus (better to do nothing than to try to focus on such a task), etc - all very much signs that it would be wise to talk with a counselor, +1 for good advice.

Interesting...Psycholinguistics has been my absolutely all the time favourite field! Thanks.

Keep a notebook and write down some thoughts about what you read.  Do it very lightly, like journaling.  Not with any expectation of taking action on the notes (although you may), but just so there is some way for you to interact with the work.
Make it very light and personal.  OK to call something a piece of shit in your private remarks.  But you can also note ideas sparked or things to bring up in other discussions--maybe circle those.  But with no big pressure that you have to run everything down to ground.  Don't write a lot.  Just short amount, so you have some pseudo-interaction.  It will be enough.
I also like the suggestion of just training yourself by gradually longer reading experiences and with more difficult texts.  You don't eat an elephant in one meal.  You don't become a champion athlete in one workout.  Need to progress and persevere.  If you do it long enough, you will come to enjoy it.  But don't expect it to be immediately entertaining.

+1 for both suggestions. I do something similar to suggestion 1, and find it helps my recall of what I've read, if I need to refer back to it later or carry on reading from that point.

Practice makes many things easier. I've always read a lot, so for me the act of reading disappears, and the information flows from the page into my brain.
I suggest gradually increasing doses. Pick a book that contains knowledge you very much want to have. Begin by reading a few pages at a time, then do something else. Gradually increase how much you read in one session.


text:
How can getting a masters hurt PhD admissions?
TL;DR:

Find myself under-qualified for PhD programs but I'm afraid getting a MS degree will hurt my chances at a better PhD program.
U.S. based.

Longer background:

I graduated with a math degree in undergrad from a top liberal arts college.
Two years after graduating, working, and reading some textbooks and taking a course in my longtime interest, I decided I want learn / research Natural Language Processing (AI).
Downside: I've only taken one CS course during undergrad. I took a deep learning / natural language processing course this summer, and am taking a Data Structures/Algorithms class right now, but still I feel woefully underqualified for PhD programs.
Pros on Masters:

It will help me shore up the missing areas in my CS education.
It will let me know if CS is something I want to do for the rest of my life.

Cons on Masters:

Certainly two years gone.
I've heard that PhD programs often don't like MS applicants -- that they're held to a much higher standard, and that PhD programs may accept undergrads instead.
MS is a different ballgame from PhD programs.
Many MS programs are "cash cow" programs.

Pros on PhD's

I've published two math papers as an undergrad, and I enjoyed that experience a lot.
Being a professor has always been a long time dream of mine, however much it may be improbable.

Cons on PhD's:

I just don't think I'll get in having taken just 1 CS course in undergrad. If I do, it likely won't be a very good program.
I'll have committed to a PhD program even though I'm sure if I want to do this or not (which I may!! But I just don't have enough exposure to know).
I don't even know if I'll be sufficiently prepared to pass my quals.

TL;DR (after the background): Ultimately, I think I want to go to a PhD program. But I'm underprepared and want to scope out more and go to a MS program. But I'm afraid it'll hurt my chances for a better PhD program later.

Don't think it does.

Where are you? Where (country or region) do you want to study? What you say about disfavoring MS students seems odd to me.

If you want a PhD get a PhD. There's plenty of fine programs. Everyone wants to do a A.I. at top tier CS program nowadays (just read this site awhile). That means you need to be realistic about your chance, plus realize that all bubbles pop. The later you hit the job market the more A.I. PhD's there will be competing with you for jobs.

2 publications is great, though it sounds like it is in a student newspaper or something? If you had enough support for two publications in a decent peer-reviewed journal, then you should have a chat with those people about your ability to do research and what best to do before a PhD...

2 publications in a peer-reviewed journal, although not great ones.

If you graduated successfully from a good math program in the US, I doubt that you are under qualified for a typical doctoral program in the US. Things might be different in other places, but in the US, the normal path to a doctorate doesn't start with and MS. In fact, the early couple of years of such a program include a lot of coursework to give you the needed breadth to enable you to begin research. But programming knowledge along with algorithmics should be fine and your math background suggests you have an analytical way of thinking that isn't too different from that of most CS students.
My suggestion would be to apply to a few doctoral programs and see what feedback you get. I doubt that what you learn in the first couple of years there will close off future options in other fields if you decide it isn't for you. But I also doubt that getting a masters will lessen your chances for later getting a doctorate at the same or a different field.
There may be a couple of universities that favor their own students for admission to doctoral programs, but that is fairly rare. Perhaps the advice you got was from someone with experience at such a place. I don't know why Princeton comes to mind, and my information is very old, but I do associate Princeton with the idea of favoring their own.
Doctoral study normally consists of two major hurdles. You need to pass some qualifying exams and you need to write an acceptable thesis. The coursework is mostly (not all) to get you ready for the exams. But an MS in field also does that part.