text:
Is it okay to critique my already published paper?
After publishing a paper even with multiple proofreading and rerun the experiment, there is a feeling of "I should improve this" or "this section is so vague, I should explain more" or maybe the worst is when spotting an unintentional error in a graph or data.
Is it ethical If I make some kind of blog or extension about the paper that critique or extend my own work?
I don't want to write the extension in journal though because there is still a lot of work to be done for the next paper.
My fear is it can backfire me instead, if I show what I thought a minor error then the editor or someone read that and try to retract my paper. Or it will become a judgement of my poor work.

I do not see how there is any ethical component to this question.

I am afraid that it will be an insult to my adviser or reviewer (eg. I critique adviser work) or (eg. this journal ignores this weakness in the paper).

Surely it must be "ethical" to critique one's own work, with hindsight.
On another hand, the contemporary style absolutely does not require it, and, unless your already-published work contains serious errors, probably no one will be terribly interested in minor tweaks or improvements (especially so in the competitive peer-reviewed-publish-or-perish game).

I agree that it is ethical if it is my own work.
But the problem is, it is also my co-author and my adviser work.
Is it ethical that I made a blog that contains critics about our work?
I also agree that maybe nobody will read it anyway. But this writing will be fun. I found that before publishing, we made a lot of argument to support our claim. After the paper is already published, sometimes I found that the claim is too strong or some of the argument is dumb.
I just think that It will be a better world if any author can have a final honest comment about their research.

Yes, all-other-things-the-same, honest comments about one's own work is surely good. But it is more complicated if you have co-authors, especially if senior to you. You might want to write the thing privately, show it to them, and ask if they'd mind your making it somewhat public. This would be polite, for sure.

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


text:
Is there benefit in listing fewer degree options in MS application?
When applying to university one can choose multiple degree programmes he/she wish to apply. Usually you also list them according to your priority. For example application can be targeted to:

MS in Physics
MS in Mathematics
MS in Computer Science

But does this makes an impression for admission board that person is not really knows what he wants to study? Is this somehow beneficial if for example I would state just one option for MS in Physics and nothing else?
For me personally it makes more sense to state just one degree programme in my application, because I would not be really satisfied if I would be "forced" to continue my study in the field I am not so interested compared to my number 1 priority.
On the other hand if I do so then I would basically make my chance to get accepted 3 times less, and that baffles me. But again if I not get accepted then I can wait one year and try again with better education and recognition.

Usually you can apply to a specific MS in a department of a university. The 1 - 3 options are completly diferent fields of science.

What kind of university is this?  At my university one normally just applies to one department (though through a general university college).  I believe this is standard for research universities in the US.

@Christos, this is within one faculty(Faculty of Science). The fields are not completely different, for example particle physics, mathematical physics and data analysis is available, so you can do quite similar research, just from different angles. So the department is same one(this is by the way quite usual for EU universities).

@Kimball, this is usual practice in EU universities to file multiple applications "just because you can". In my particular case it is Finland, but this shouldn't matter, question is whether this is considered to be unprofessional and can harm your admission chance or is it OK.

Also I want to add that it is also possible to apply for example to physics department AND for business management at the same time, so yeah, this is quite weird(though I don't think many people do that kind of thing). It is nice for university to allow this, but I doubt admission board will look at such applicant and say "oh, this guy knows what he is doing!"

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to get awarded a PhD without actually doing it?
I know that I am an independent researcher and I have recently done research in a linear programming problem in my job and was able to get the same objective value within 24 hours, which IBM's Cplex was taking around 72 hours. I did something which the MS and PhD guys actually failed.
But I don't have enough time and money required to do MS or PhD. How can I help myself?
Basically the question is how to become a scientist in the field of mathematics, I mean invent or discover some formula/theory/assumption and then get the degree of Phd as an award/reward. Obviously someone would be needed as a guide who tells me the area of research, where other researchers did not succeed.

There are no shortcuts to a PhD. If money is your concern, search this site for questions regarding funding. But as the question stands it sounds like you are mostly interested in cutting corners, perhaps even in acquiring a fake PhD from a scam "university". Don't do it. Nobody will take you seriously. Also, the people whom you are asking this question here are or were working hard to obtain their degrees. They are unlikely to have much sympathy for your question. (In fact, I'm already slightly annoyed.)

Nothing like cutting corners, I am basically looking for a platform where I can keep submitting my research works and also keep on getting directions and if I do something great, I get awarded with a PhD.

Possible duplicate of is it possible to complete a PhD in Industrial Engineering without any coursework? (US/Europe)

@DeepakMishra you mean you want to make the research, write papers and every requirement for phd but without an institute? In my country this is called individual phd studies or something like that. No fundings are provided for such a research, but when you fulfill the requirements of a phd, you can submit your dissertation to a doctoral school and may obtain the phd degree. Fundings can be given by companies though, even through universities, but in that case case you have to follow their needs. Otherwise, I doubt you can get money as a standalone person a priori for your research.

@BalazsToth yes something like individual phd with some direction.

See PhD by published work

How is this unclear? OP wants to get awarded a PhD without actually doing it, which is a well-defined goal. It might be an impossible goal, but it's still well-defined and so not unclear. Voting to reopen.

that's funny, too many downvotes, comments and now question is on hold, Am I insecuring a lot of people?

Welcome to Academia.SE! This question displays some naïveté about academia. When combined with a rather poor question title, it looks as if you're trolling the community, hence the downvotes.

Thanks @eykanal, actually that's not true, I just want to do something equivalent to a PhD independently and I don't want to pay for it, I actually want to earn from it. Usually with the employer, I do earn but I lose the royalty/credit/copyright of it.

It is well known that you can obtain a PhD just by submitting a thesis, in many countries. Japan is perhaps most famous for them. But then you need to pay for a review fee (because someone actually has to take their time to review it): say, at least ~50000 JPY, but in most countries more than that (would be more like 5000 EUR). You just can't make money from doing independent research, sorry: you need to be employed to do research in order to get paid.

@xuq01 Actually you should have. I want a platform which allows us to do that (drop out from the school but still be able to do the independent research). I am not saying that every independent research deserves money, but if your research is used by someone, you should be able to ask rent of it.

@DeepakMishra It sounds as though you want all the benefits of being in a university - somebody advising you, going over your work, etc - without paying for it.

I am going to assume that you are planning to continue doing research and are attempting to "convert" that published work into a PhD.
First off, do not fall for the trap of giving your money to a diploma mill. You will waste your own money and time and end up with a worthless degree.
The second challenge you will face is that virtually all PhD-granting institutions have what is known as a residency requirement: you must spend some time, typically at least one year, on the campus of the university as part of the degree program There often is not a requirement as to when this must take place: it could be at the beginning or end of the process or sometime in between, nor must it necessarily be contiguous. However, it is often phrased in the form of "X semesters," which does place some constraints.
So you need to look for a university which will accommodate such a plan (not many would allow you to work completely independently), and will allow you to work as little as possible on-site. Or perhaps you can find an employer who can support your research ambitions—many will allow and even financially support employees to obtain advanced degrees (particularly master's).

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


text:
How to deal with anxiety and depression after being kicked out of PhD program?
I was kicked out of a programming-oriented PhD program at the end of last summer because I failed one of two qualifying exams; the department is keeping me on assistantship for a semester while I finish a master's thesis (which I've done).
Now over the past few months, I have developed a strong depression and even feel suicidal. I feel that I've been given many great opportunities and squandered them.  Applying to jobs in my field didn’t work out either due to lack of interest from the prospective employer or the employer getting a negative impression from my interview.
I've had many jobs throughout my life, and without exception I have struggled and usually failed due to extreme anxiety.  Honestly, I don't even know if I would want a job even if I was offered one, because I feel that I would waste the employer's time and cause myself greater suffering, and ultimately fail.
How can I deal with these issues?
EDIT:  Thank you all for your kind advice and support; for any of those interested, I'm on a more even keel now than I was when I wrote this question, and I have taken steps toward mental recuperation.
I should also say that I won't be checking in on this question anymore, so any further comments are unlikely to reach me.
Thanks.

It sounds like you're going through a really hard time. I'd really like to help you, but unfortunately, we're not well-equipped to do so here. Your best option is probably to call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. People are on call there to talk to people struggling with the same kind of issues you are, regardless of location. US: +1-800-273-8255. If calling's not good, they can chat with you live online. Just go to this site, and you can talk with someone online from 10PM-6AM UTC:

If you are not in the US, here is also a list of numbers in other countries: http://suicidepreventionlifeline.org/GetHelp/LifelineChat.aspx

Answers in comments and presumably obsolete comments have been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment.

I have removed all follow-on conversation, as it was—and remains—off-topic. Thank you to those who flagged this as "in need of moderator intervention"... suicide ideation falls under that category, and Stack Exchange provides moderator tools to inform the proper parties about this so it can be addressed by professionals.

As the current top meta post on dealing with suicide seems to be outdated, I'm asking around for a better explanation of the process. I'll post on Meta when I get a response.

Seek clinical help! The fact that you are here means that you are someone who believes that you need the help of others and that is very respectable. The problem is that this community, with all the good people in it, is not a good place to provide the help that you can actually benefit from.
In your question, there are a few points that are important. Suicidal thoughts are always serious and must be considered seriously. Failure is not easy to bear and nobody can say that they can have a good time failing their goals but normally, people do not think of self-termination when they fail. If you are having this thought, please seek help.
Also, you mentioned that you have failed multiple times in your life before. If the number of these failures is a lot, maybe you are suffering from some underlying problem that is inflicting your performance. Conditions like anxiety (as you mentioned), depression, ADHD, ... can have a drastic negative impact on performance and the sad fact is that in many cases, people who suffer are not aware of it. If this is the case for you, look at the bright side of your situation which is the potential of finding the root cause, elimination of which can improve your life dramatically. Again this is something that can only be confirmed with the help of clinical professionals. Please seek help.
Remember that failure is hard but also remember that even Einstein failed to procure an academic position many times so it happens and it happens to everyone. As Churchill once said:

Success is the ability to go from failure to failure without losing your enthusiasm.

Give it some time and move on. That is the most important part.
I repeat myself; please consider the fact that self-termination thoughts should be considered very seriously. Based on your country of residence, conditions may differ but nevertheless, accept the fact that, in any country, there exist people who are trained to provide the type of the help that you can benefit from. Please find them.

Thank you, MxNx, for your kind words and advice.  You have no idea how meaningful they are to me; I really feel a world better after reading the words on this page.  Thank you so much.

@Bryan Ex-Academic just remember, though: feeling better is good for a while, but actively going for professional help is better!

Very much this. A long time ago I had some things go seriously wrong, making a mess of university. It took me close to 30 years to admit these things while seeking help for the problems it had heavily contributed to. And I really wish I had sought help far earlier (not that it really was available then). It would likely have prevented a lot of misery. Anti anxiety medications can help, even in just the short term while you reset yourself.

Also from Churchill: Success is not final, failure is not fatal - it is the courage to continue that counts. (p.s. I myself have depression and ADHD and have failed many times, so I'm aware that dropping a quick self-help phrase shouldn't magically sort everything out, but things like these are important to keep in mind.)

I've almost been in your shoes. I wasn't thrown out of a PhD, but I was on the verge of failing one: Having difficulty focusing on work; not making any progress on anything for more than a year; watching my colleagues advance, sometimes brilliantly, even though I did not consider myself inferior to them intellectually. Even later in life - I've felt my post-doctoral stint was semi-squandered, not having been able to put papers in places I wanted, or needed, to put them in. I also struggled, initially, to find work coming out of Academia.
And throughout some of those years I was also struggling with depression, anxiety, and the sense that that's it - I've blown my chance in life; I've let myself down, as well as the expectations of others.
... so, were you thinking I was going to tell you how I've overcome adversity and gone on to flourish and succeed? Eh. Maybe. But I don't want to sell you that. Instead, it's a matter of being able to cope with failure - which is very difficult for those of us that are used to things going our way in life.
Here's some of what I did that helped me (or didn't do initially, and regretted it later); not in order of significance:

Not-super-strenous aerobic physical exercise (walks outside, yoga, possibly jogging or other stuff). Definitely helps emotional stability and the sense that living is worth it even when you're just, you know, living. (Yes, do this even at the expense of time available for research / job search / etc.)
Keep in touch with friends and family (but with those who are supportive rather than overbearing and order you around). Try not to maneuver yourself to be alone all the time. (Yes, even at the expense of time available for research / job search / etc.)
Make a conscious effort to sleep enough hours a night (if you can help it, that is).
Get recommendations for a psychotherapist, if you can afford one, or see some kind of "social worker" if you can't. This depends on there being some sort of health care system available or you having the money.
Consult your doctor (your GP) about possibly going on anti-depressant medication. This is not an easy choice to make, since doing so feels like admitting failure, that you can't "handle it on your own"; or that it's a sort of an embarrassing crutch. But if you get professional advice to use an anti-depressant, remember that crutches help people get back up on their feet while they heal; the same may be true for you. Caveat: There are different kinds of anti-depressants; their effect is not uniform on everyone; some have adjustment periods; don't just take something without medical oversight.
Find something (or several things) to work on that's independent of being employed or in academia. It could be a social/community cause; a hobby; a free software project; some sort of construction work; etc. Even though this will not be ultimate purpose of your life, it helps to have something to look forward to and plan ahead for, rather than the major stuff that's not working out right now.

I realize some of these suggestions sound trite, or cliché; but frankly - so is your situation. What you're describing happens, with some variation, to lots of people (well, "lots" relatively to the small number of PhD candidates of course). Do some of what I've suggested, and you'll pull through, like almost all of them. Of us.
PS - I haven't given any "career-wise" advice. It's not that I think this is unimportant, I just focused on your emotional well-being in the here and now. A longer answer than mine could have been in order here.

Been there too!

I wouldn't say that taking anti-depressants is "an admission of failure and weakness". The implication being that all people who take antidepressants are failures and are weak. I would suggest rewording this section. Taking medication is a means to an end, it can provide the extra chemical boost required to get over a hurdle in life. The fact is that everyone's experience is different and a key thing for the OP to understand is that there is no universal measure of success or failure, strength or weakness. These things are relative and highly subjective.

Nothing about taking anti-depressants or any medication is an admission of failure and weakness. That's a very unhelpful statement.

@Kai: I said "feels like". Tweaked the phrasing.

@Designerpot: It certainly felt like that to me. But see edit.

All good points. Following advise like that of this post lets you set up routines that lead to more emtional stability. I'll add another point: read a book about depression and anxiety. Understand why you feel the way you do. It is not just due to external events, but also because of human psychology. You can learn the science behind it. Knowing how emotions work gives you a more flexible perspective.

@Asdf: +1, but different books will actually tell different stories based on their school of thought.

@einpoklum: Agreed. It's good to make a literature review and then compile a list of books to go through. I read 10+ books to gain perspective on my own troubles. Getting started with one was the biggest obstacle however. If he sets out to reads just one, that is already a step in the right direction.

I recently became depressed when I retired. A lot of our value can become attached to what we do.
After contemplating suicide I rang a helpline and they said to go to my doctor. My doctor referred me to a psychiatrist who gave me some pills but also referred me for psychotherapy.
Note: I'm lucky enough to live in the UK where we have the NHS.
However many Universities have free counselling services so check that out.
Psychotherapists vary enormously in ability (just like anyone else) so just because one of them isn't effective, don't take that to mean the problem is insoluble.
I was incredibly lucky in that my therapist was a good one and we tackled my problems between us, each listening to the other.
The point is that it is possible to get through hard times although sometimes the effort required can seem as much as doing a Master's!
Anyway despite a lot of c**p that happened in my life, I'm still here and feeling happier than for a long time!
Best wishes.

It sounds incredibly difficult for you! I think MxNx's answer is very good; I'd just like to re-iterate the part about seeking professional help (please do!) and compare what you're going through to my own experience.
My anxiety is, from the sound of it, much less severe than yours. But it has still had a serious influence on my life. I've had a job that I basically had to quit because it was giving me panic attacks on a daily basis. And for some time after, I've felt like I wouldn't want another job because I thought I would fail, just like you're describing.
Currently, I have a job that I very much enjoy. I still get anxious at times, but it is much less than it used to be and it doesn't affect my work. Once or twice I've felt that the strategies I use to deal with anxiety have actually helped me out in stressful situations.
What's really important is to remember that anxiety is not something rational; your worries sort of spiral out of control and things that you don't need to worry about all of a sudden become incredibly real and scary scenarios. But that's just your anxiety playing tricks on you! Many of those scenarios do not materialise or when they do, the results aren't as bad as you imagined.
You may worry there's no job out there that you will do well and even enjoy. But those are not rational worries - there are jobs out there that you will thrive in, I'm sure.
The most important thing is to learn to deal with your anxiety. A professional can help you identify what things trigger your anxiety, recognise early warning signs and can help you develop strategies to deal with anxiety.
Best of luck!

If it helps, my story was that I got my PhD in the US in 2009 right after the big crash. So lots of people applied to academic jobs. Industrial jobs were difficult too especially because I was not a citizen.
By I quirk of personal circumstances I ended up having to leave the academic track and the US as well for personal reasons. I went through intense feelings of uselessness & desperation similar to what you describe.
Now let's roll forward to 2018. I am in a lovely profession, freelancing, travelling the world and making good money for myself. My job has little to do with what I worked on during my PhD but a lot of those skills proved useful.
My advise to you is, life works out in strange ways. Don't despair and work hard at some other opportunity or industry.
A few years later your current crisis will fade and you will have had success in other ways. There's more than one ways for things to work out, the problem just is that which ways those are is often not obvious from where you are.
You rarely pick a career, very often a career will end up picking you.

"You rarely pick a career, very often a career will end up picking you." Well said;

A career won't be able to pick you if you run away from it every chance you get, though. ;)

You will need to learn to rewrite the narrative and change your attitude. Maybe you will need professional help to do this, maybe you won't. But the sign that you are on here asking about it points in the direction that you might.

You still learned what you learned on your journey.
What actually happened is that someone else failed to pass you through and someone else higher up the food chain thereafter consequently failed to acquire you.

Honestly, I don't even know if I would want a job even if I was offered one, because I feel that I would waste the employer's time and cause myself greater suffering, and ultimately fail.

Question, how old are you?. And since when to take job is optional?.  And how do you live?.
Anyways, the cure for the depression is not acceptation but a big kick in the butt.
My story, I was kicked out (bachelor), then I revived (I was re-accepted) and I finished the university as a mediocre student (it's hard to study and work at the same time). Then, I moved to another city (alone and without money), and lucky for me, I landed a job, it was a mediocre job but it was a job.  Then, I jumped from job to a job.    And now, I own a business and, the irony, now some universities paid me to train their personal, and I don't have a Ph.D.  So, Am I satisfied?, never!.
My advice, it is time to abandon your safe place.  Like some company says, NEVER SETTLE.

As an addition to finding a good therapist (which you absolutely should do right away!), you may want to consider practicing mindfulness.
I've been in a similar situation a couple of times throughout my life, with depression and suicidal thoughts eating me incessantly over what I then perceived as missed opportunities, failures and losses, and it helped me realize that all the anxiety and suffering I was experiencing were coming either from the memories of the past or the thoughts about the future. In other words, I was suffering only because my brain was telling me to suffer, replaying the same distorted scenes over and over again.
Mindfulness helped me realize that right here, right now, I was absolutely fine (and so are you!), and that no matter where I was or what I did, there would always be things around me to cherish.
As far as the books on the subject matter are concerned, Peace Is Every Step was the gateway for me, but there are many other great options.

There are many excellent and comprehensive answers given. I just want to add one point.
It seems like the real source of your problems is your anxiety/depression. Those conditions do respond to treatment, and you deserve to get help to live a happy life.  Hundreds of studies show that therapies like CBT, DBT, medications, and others work. People can be cured and live life more fully than they ever believed possible.
I don't know you, and I don't know your circumstances. If you can get competent professional help, that's wonderful. However, you might be among the many people who cannot get access to competent professional help due to finances, location, scheduling, or various technical matters.
If so, there is still help available. If you have an internet connection and a Smartphone, you already have access to help. Here is a non-exhaustive list of resources that may help:

Mind Over Mood has books, worksheets, a website, podcast
The free apps WYSA and YOUPER both use AI to provide personalized therapy. You text the app and it listens and responds using various excercises to help you.
BetterHelp.com provides online therapy along with discounts based on need

If you can get access to competent professional help, that would be idea. But if not, there are still many resources that can make a little bit of positive difference.
If you are really struggling, especially with suicidal thoughts, and you are not currently working or tied down to anything, you might want to try an Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP) which offers intense and comprehensive help to people who struggle. They tend to accept all insurances, so it may be an affordable option. These programs can help people recover quicker and learn lifelong skills in the course of a month or two.

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


text:
Is it rude to change universities/supervisors after already indicating research interest with a current supervisor?
I am currently an undergraduate student studying in an area of mathematics and am planning to apply to do a masters research degree next year. I have been doing research with my supervisor who works in some topic say X and will be doing more research throughout the remainder of the year with him.
I am still very interested in topic X and consider this a large option for my masters, however, I have greater interests in another topic say Y. There is another university in our country that has a specialist research group in topic Y. I am looking into changing to this alternative university to study topic Y for my masters, however, I have had no conversations about my future research with people at either university.
Would it be considered rude for me to leave my supervisor now, who currently offers me a lot of support during my undergraduate, to pursue research in this other area of mathematics solely because I am more interested in this alternative topic? And what would be the correct way to go about this without burning any bridges with my current supervisor?

If Y is what you really want to do then go for it. There is no point in going down a career path just to please someone else.
Talk in person to your current supervisor once you have a written offer from the university that does Y. Explain to him that it is your dream to do Y and you hope to keep in contact with him even though you are leaving the university.
A good supervisor will understand - if not then he was not a good supervisor anyway. It's a win-win for you.

If you have spent the time to earn a degree somewhere and have interacted with the faculty there who are closest to your interests, then it is actually a good thing to move on to another university for continued education. Don't get too comfortable early on.
You have learned a lot from a few people, but other people have different ways to think and it is good to get exposed to that early in your career.
Many, maybe most, faculty understand this. Especially undergraduate faculty. I always thought it was best if my best students left me behind and found inspiration elsewhere. My view is that it is much better if my students can surpass me than if they wind up just like me.
So, don't worry much about rudeness as much as you worry about maximizing your own opportunities. Thank your professor for all that s/he has done for you and for making it possible for you to move on. In a few years, return and thank them again and bring them up to date on your success.

A good advisor will tell you to explore the new areas and make new connections, even if that means you will be leaving them. Both my MS and PhD advisors told me to go to different institutions whenever my degree was completed, but still kept their labs open in case I don't feel like doing that. Therefore, as a result I have my BS, MS, and PhD from three different institutions. And I believe that attending different institutions, meeting different people, learning and embracing their different operating styles, prepared me much better for job hunting and future career.
If your supervisor is understanding, he will put your interests and career ahead of his comfort of not finding another student. However, you have mentioned that you haven't talked about this to any of the people yet (current or future potential supervisor). I would talk to your future potential supervisor if s/he is interested in supervising you before you talk to your current supervisor about leaving. You don't want to be standing in two boats with one foot in each, because if the boats drift apart, you could fall in the lake. Once you have a confirmation from your potential future advisor then you can talk to your current supervisor, and if he is understanding, then he will understand and will let you go without burning the bridge.


text:
Australian Honours degree for admission into European PhD programs
I have currently completed a Bachelor's degree in mathematics in Australia and want to go onto do a PhD in pure mathematics in Belgium or Germany. I need to either complete my Honours degree next year at my current university or move elsewhere to do a Masters degree as my current university doesn't offer Masters. I want to stay at my current university due to having good research opportunities here, however, I am concerned I won't be admitted to a PhD program at the universities I want to go to with only a Bachelor Honours degree (4 years).
The universities I want to apply to require Masters for admission, however, state that degrees of minimum 4 years in length considered equivalent may be accepted. Upon contacting these universities with my issue, they essentially just reiterate the information already provided on their website, and it seems I just need to apply to the program to truly find out whether my degree will be considered sufficient for admission or not.
Does anyone know if Australian Honours degrees would generally be considered equivalent to European Masters degrees, at least in Belgium and Germany? Also, does anyone know if it is common for students to be turned away from admission to a PhD due to only having an Honours degree, assuming they have good results and research experience?

I don't know about the maths degrees in Australia as a whole but my impression of the Honours theses at ANU is that they are certainly well above the level of many MSci dissertations (in maths) that I have seen in the UK. Whether or not this is good enough for Belgium or Germany, I am not sure; but of course it may depend on where you are applying

I don't know how the bureaucracy/administrative procedures would work for either Belgium or Germany, but assuming your application does not get filtered out at the first hurdle and is seen by a mathematician, I think they would be more interested in what courses you have taken and what content you have seen in 4 years of your degree rather than "Bachelor's" or "Master's" per se.

@YemonChoi I would have a supervisor sorted before applying to the program and they would be able to support my application along with my current supervisor in Australia, I just worry that they would reject me solely on the basis of not having a Masters without considering my research experience, publications and who is supporting the application.

If/when you do apply, why not translate the situation on your CV and cover letter. Put a line for your undergrad then split off your honours year, putting (postgraduate research qualification, equivalent of MA) next to it in parentheses, and put the title of your project. Make it look like the postgraduate degree that it is. Ask your references to be clear on this matter too. Make it very easy for them to see it as a masters equivalent by presenting it as such

The three year Australian degree is equivalent to a US four year degree (Bachelors). A Masters in Australia is as short as 1 year for an honours graduate?  I expect that most EU Bachelors degrees are 3 years as well. This needs to be disambiguated for market segmentation purposes. (US students students matriculate after year 11).

I can say some things about the situation in Germany, I know nothing about how it works in Belgium (Europe is diverse, and for this case, even Germany is diverse...).
The short, but not immediately helpful answer is: It depends on many factors. I would expect that most of the time you will have difficulties going for a PhD with a Bachelor´s degree in Germany. But a general answer if this will be the case is not possible. Every university and to some extent every faculty can make their own rules, and a supervisor who really wants you in her/his group can fight for your case. If you do not have such support, your case might be doomed to fail, or you will have to take so many extra courses that it would be easier to take a Master´s degree. Because the outcome of such a discussion (usually on faculty level) is hard to be predicted the people you contacted cannot say much more than what you found online. So you should find a potential supervisor who is convinced of you as a PhD student.
One of the reasons is that the Bachelor/Master system has no long tradition in Germany. Bachelor´s and Master´s degrees first appeared around 10-15 years ago within the Bologna process (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_Process). In most cases, there was a hard transition from a diploma degree (without any 'intermediate' degree comparable to a Bachelor´s degree) taking 4-5 years to finish to a Bachelor/Master program taking 5 years in total. The old diploma programs were more or less copied to the new program. Therefore, it is still rather unusual to finish with a Bachelor´s degree only, and practically everybody going for a PhD has a Master´s degree. You come from another part of the world with another tradition, but this is what you have to understand for Germany.
You can be very happy that the Bologna process exists, otherwise it would be much harder for you. My father came to Germany in the 1970s with a B.A. which was unheard of, so faced difficulties more or less throughout his career. And to be honest: I, as an example for somebody rooted in German academia, do not know what an Australian Honours degree is and how it compares to a Bachelor's or Master's degree.

This depends a great deal on which specific university you attended.  There are a number of international rankings for universities worldwide, which allow people to make broad inferences on the quality of education at overseas universities that they are not familiar with.  Several of the "Group of Eight" universities in Australia are ranked commensurately with highly esteemed universities in Europe.  It is likely that academics assessing your application will try to make themselves familiar with the rough "world ranking" of your university, to get some idea of how that university compares to universities in their own country.
As an example, in the latest THE World University Rankings, you can easily search for the rankings of all universities in Australia, Belgium, and Germany.  This search shows that the top ranking university among these countries is shared between LMU Munich (Germany) and the University of Melbourne (Australia), both of which are ranked equally as the 32nd best university worldwide.  Other highly ranked universities in Australia are the Australian National University, the University of Sydney, the University of Queensland, the University of New South Wales, and Monash University.  Bear in mind that these rankings are not sacrosanct, and they most around each year, but nevertheless, they can give a reasonable impression of roughly where a university sits in comparison to universities that are in other countries.
As to the particular content of your program, if they say that they expect four years for equivalence, then that suggests that you will need to have done a four year degree program to quality.  A standard mathematics degree in Australia is three years, but it may be supplemented with an Honours year or one-year Masters degree, depending on the university.  If you have only done the base three-year program so far, then you probably need to supplement this with an honours year or a one-year Masters degree to get up to the required level of equivalence.

Does anyone know if Australian Honours degrees would generally be considered equivalent to European Masters degrees, at least in Belgium and Germany?

Australians would consider it equivalent.  Belgians and Germans probably haven't heard of it.  Just tell them it's the same as a masters degree.

Their admissions departments will have heard of it for sure. You have to get the official line from admissions.


text:
Specialise now or broaden knowledge?
I am currently an undergraduate student in mathematics coming to the end of a 4-year Bachelor degree. I have strong credentials (good marks, plus research and teaching experience) and have been doing research with one of the leading Professors in my area since the second year of my undergraduate degree. I have a couple of publications with this Professor as well and most would say I have a very strong foundation to do good research in this particular area of study during my Masters, PhD and beyond.
I have been keen on learning/studying another area of mathematics for a while now that has connections with my current area of study, though, would require me to change to a different area of research. I'm considering changing to this other topic of research for my Master's degree, both because I'm interested in doing research in this particular area, and also it would be good to broaden my knowledge at this stage of my career. Though, my current supervisor and mentors seem to have high expectations for me to continue here, and they have relatively large research group set up at my current institution that provides me a lot of undivided support.
Would it be silly for me to change universities and research areas when I already have a good setup now, or is this stage of my career a good time to move, learn and try different things before a PhD? I feel it would be better to stay in my current area as I have a good foundation here and am quite knowledgable of current research, though, I don't know many people who specialised in their research area from 2 years into their Bachelors degree. Is it a risk making this change seeing as I would have to get up to speed in the other area of research, or am I overthinking things?
N.B. Master's degree are mostly research based in my home country, minimal coursework is completed.

If you are on a trajectory that will let you quickly complete a doctorate, then I'd suggest that you don't redirect at this time. This depends on your country, of course, and the requirements for a doctorate. In the US, having a broad enough knowledge base that you can pass qualifying exams is a necessity and is also an advantage in that you would be able to teach nearly any undergraduate course after completion. But standards differ.
But you can always broaden your view later if a narrow view is indicated at present. And you can then do so without compromising career goals.
I'll note also, that having insight into one area of math doesn't necessarily translate easily into insight into others, even if they seem quite similar in some ways. I (retired now) had great insight into Real Analysis, but very little into Abstract Algebra. I could fight my way through algebra but it wasn't fun. So, broadening may mean a longer path than you need to travel at this instant. But math can also be synergistic, so ignoring other sub-fields, long term, probably isn't optimal.
If you are well supported in what you are doing now and the end point is reasonably in sight, then it is probably best to keep on keep'n on.  But note that this is mostly just opinion, and others will differ.


text:
Accepting offer from one place while waiting for answer from another place
I have received an excellent job offer from institution A. I have also applied to institution B, which I would likely prefer over A if I had the choice. I believe I have a shot at getting an offer from B, but it is far from sure, and they will only start making offers well after I have to give an answer at A.
Suppose I accept the job at A and subsequently I am offered the job at B. Once I accept A I would commit to staying for at least 1 year, but starting one year later at B should not be a problem.
My question is: how and, more importantly, when should I tell A about B? I can think of three possibilities:
1) I tell A even before I accept the position at A (and before I get the answer from B). I believe in honesty so I would prefer this but there are the obvious risks that A will withdraw their offer or assume that I will leave at the first chance I get (which is not quite true; if I don't get B I'd stay at A for at least a few years).
2) I tell A right after I accept the position at B (this would mean I would start my job at A with everyone knowing that I'm leaving after a year - awkward).
3) I tell A at the very latest legally allowed moment. This would seem best from a selfish point of view, but in addition to having to lie about my future plans there is a risk A will find out I accepted the job from B anyway (it's a small community).
Any additional thoughts are very welcome! In particular, how would you react in each scenario if you were a member of A?

Edit: Thank you all for the comments and answers. In my situation A is not able to wait until I get an answer from B; I agree this would be the best solution. Although I haven't made a decision yet, I'm leaning towards avoiding all the scenarios in the question and either accept A and withdraw my application from B, or reject A, wait for B, and keep applying next year if I don't get B.

Try negotiating an extension of deadline from A. Doing anything else is essentially dishonest, and will jerk some people around, and become part of your permanent reputation, because "everyone" will hear about it. (This is not answering the question as posed, hence I'm posting it as a "comment", not an "answer".)

What type of job? Postdoc, tenure-track, something else?

@paulgarrett - I think negotiating an extension is not possible... wouldn't option 1) be equally honest though? It does give them the choice to extend the deadline or even withdraw the offer

@NateEldredge - they are all tenured positions. But since I'd expect this situation to be rather common at all levels in academia, comments on any type of job would be useful

@Anonymous: Yes, the situation is common at all levels, but the way to respond is different.  Taking a postdoc and leaving after a year has a much less severe impact on the department than for a tenured position, and so the blowback to your reputation would likewise be much less.

Now that I read "option 1" carefully, perhaps it is honest. But I guess I cannot imagine any graceful way to communicate that point to "A", and, if/when you go to "A", quite a few people will already think ill of you ... for being so arrogant, etc. True, there's a constant risk of that, anyway, but, still, ...

That is... trying to insist on an extension already communicates the point that you have other more desirable opportunities you're waiting on... but/and allows all parties to retain their dignity (apparently, according to the current rules of the game?) To not even bother to maintain a certain facade about it can be construed as fundamentally more insulting.

Perhaps this is a candidate for porting to the workplace SE? It's a very common theme for questions there.

@dwizum Since the current answer by Buffy has a lot of upvotes even though it would be counterproductive and weird outside academia shows that the question is in the right place.

I've added the ethics tag to the question, since it has ethical implications.
However, since there is no guarantee from B and you are willing to make at least an initial commitment to A, I see no ethical constraint. It would be different if you would be intending to drop a commitment to A immediately on getting an offer from B. After all, the offer from B may never materialize.
But you should, out of courtesy, at least, inform A when you do get an offer from B. Don't wait until you accept the offer, but when you get it. There are a couple of reasons for this, one being that A might want to sweeten the conditions. It would also give them more time to find a replacement.
No one assumes that accepting an offer means a lifetime commitment. But there are situations where you need to make a multi-year commitment and you would need to honor that ethically, and probably legally.
There might be different issues, of course, if A needs to spend considerable resources to support you than would, in effect, go to waste if you leave early. That would change the balance here. Likewise if leaving early would leave others, students or researchers, disadvantaged in their own work, then you would need to consider that as well.

This would be a completely wrong answer if it happened in the industry. Telling your boss that you got an offer from another company and that you're looking to change would possibly lead to you being replaced sooner than anticipated and you're now out of a job completely until hired by the other company - an event that may or may not happen until you have a signed contract. What makes this a reasonable way forward in academia? Would your institution offer you the same courtesy of telling you that they plan to replace you in the future if they find a better applicant?

@pipe, one difference is that industry employees may deal with company (trade) secrets, future product development, and market strategies. That isn't an issue in academia. Universities, being not-for-profit, don't have the same competitive concerns that companies do.

I argue that honestly is the best policy here. Unless there are very special circumstances, search committees are generally aware that their positions are not the only game in town. You can say that you are very honored by the invitation to join the faculty at A, but you still need some time to consider it. Of course this means that you may lose the offer to someone else who’s interested, but if there’s genuine interest in you they’d be willing to wait a bit.
The one year option sounds like a bad idea to me. I can’t imagine anyone in A’s administration would like you too much. You are making the department undergo an expensive search in a year’s time, and also making the search committee look bad for taking in non-committed people. It may also reduce the number of slots the department gets next year. You’ll also have problems collaborating and finding students if you’re there for 1 year, and if management is sufficiently vindictive they can make your life hell for that one year (less consideration in teaching loads, equipment and resources don’t get to you etc). It might make B uneasy about taking you, and make your time there less fun when you join.
The last option also seems like it would anger any department. It means a lot of sunk costs and perhaps dropped offers to other good candidates. If you start waffling, they’ll wait a bit, and if you don’t sign they’ll post a deadline after which they’ll rescind the offer or extend offers to others.
Good luck!


text:
Is it possible to finish my PhD at a different institute?
I got into a delicate situation with my supervisor (and the director of the institute -- they are very close friends) and I will not have a chance to get my Ph.D. at the institute, at least not under conditions that I find acceptable.
My thesis will be finished soon; I wouldn't like to lose years of work because of this toxic person. Is it possible to defend my work at some other institute and with another supervisor(s)? Where to look and what to look for?
Institute is not so big and it is placed in Eastern Europe. There is no "postgraduates officer / director or student union or department or college head" or option to change my supervisor at the institute, and this director is the top director at the institute... I would appreciate any suggestions and experiences.

Welcome to Academia.SE. You may get better answers if you specify what country you are in (my answer is from a Western/US perspective).

If you transfer, you will probably end up taking more time than you would if you continued; I expect it will be very difficult or impossible to find an institution that will let you transfer and then defend your thesis immediately. On the other hand, you should be able to find somewhere that will let you graduate in much shorter a time than their regular PhD students do. If there are professors you know at other institutions, you could ask them bout this.

In most institutions, they require that the Phd. work to have been done after the student enrollment in their program during the program. Otherwise, the student's work does not reflect their teaching/supervision and they can not claim so with previous work done elsewhere.
You might be exaggerating your directors' power. They are not Gods at the end. Each institution have regulations that protect students. You can speak to postgraduates officer / director or student union or department or college head for advise. I am sure there are much more people managing the institution other than the two persons you conflicted with.
Your institution can assign you a third person. Remember Phd. require external examiners who will judge you independent of your previous supervisor. Also try to avoid people in their circle as examiner.
So if you have work done, do not waste it. Fight for your right and give it a try. If it failed, when you go to another institutions, mostly, you will start all over again. Your experience is advantage so you might finish earlier. But I really do not think you can take your current work. It is explicitly not permitted in most universities.
Consult your institution's regulations and student support officers they will help you. Also consult them about the intellectual properties, so you may be required to insert heir names in publications out of the work etc.
Another issue that might be problematic on taking your work , in case you could find institution that will take your work to continue it, is the intellectual property. Check it first to avoid issues.

My writing of the thesis will be finished soon...Is it possible to defend my work at some other institute and with another supervisor(s)?

Do you have a supervisor in mind? If there is a particular professor who supports you, they may be able to help you navigate this and waive some of the usual requirements.
If not, there are many issues:

Residency requirements. You generally have to be "in residence" at an institution for 1-2 years before that institution can award you a degree. So, this would put you behind schedule.
Admission. You would effectively be a transfer student, and would have to apply for transfer admission like everyone else. This could be non-trivial: admission committees are not going to be excited about admitting a student who is already ABD somewhere else, left under less-than-good circumstances, and is eager to graduate as soon as possible.
Letters. You've spent enough time at this institution that you will be expected to have at least one or two letters of recommendation; their absence will be suspicious.

So: you're probably better off trying to patch things up at your current institution. If that's truly impossible, I would at least try to get a master's degree (if you don't already have one), a few good publications, and a letter of recommendation from someone at your current school before transferring somewhere else.


text:
How do I tell whether I need another advisor?
I am a second year PhD student in math. I recently feel miserable working with my current advisor so I am considering switching advisor or adding a second advisor.
A few problems I can think of at this moment which make me want another advisor include:

He constantly forgets meeting. For example, I schedule it with him on Wednesday. He would probably forget it on Friday. Of course this is minor if I send out a reminder in the morning on the day...
I feel he is not able to suggest me good references or offer help. I am surely not an independent enough student that can work on my own yet. I kept desperately seeking answers online, asking everywhere, and probably spamming the authors who wrote the papers... This is probably the right way of doing research, but I doubt whether I could speed up my progress a bit if I could get more help from my advisor.
I guess one reason also for the last paragraph is he is giving me something that he is not very familiar with. I believe this is probably the case with most advisors. But once I tried to search for a long time and just could not find an object in the problem that he suggested me, and it turned out he remembered it wrong... I just wish he could be less careless.

I actually kind of transferred following my advisor to this university, so I tried to work with him since I came here, though I actually did not really start working with him in my previous school and came here as a first year student. I always thought seeking for another advisor would again take effort, and the miseries come and go, so I just did not do anything with it.
What I am thinking now is, if everything like the above is normal for a math advisor, then I would like to convince myself and go along with it. My miseries are probably just what I need to bare to do math, but If it is not, I really hope to get more help and support from my advisor for my next a few years in grad school. I guess one direct reason why I am posting this is I have not made any progress reading one paper (not even doing a problem) since 3 or 4 months ago. I could not answer my advisor's questions about the paper perfectly as he wants and he would not let me move on. I do not really see the meaning of doing it and he could not give any suggestions, and I started to hate the math and lost motivations, so I think I definitely want some adjustment, either real or mental.
Thanks in advance for any advice.

He constantly forgets meeting.

That's normal (and perhaps a good sign). You need to take control and establish a procedure to ensure meetings take place. (It's perhaps a good sign, since it suggests your supervisor is busy.

I feel he is not able to suggest me good references or offer help.

For good references, that's probably normal: You've been conducting research for over one year and your knowledge of the research domain now exceeds your supervisor's, hence, you are more familiar with the good references. An exception arises if the good references are unspecialised, but that doesn't seem to be the case, since "he is giving me something that he is not very familiar with."
For offer help, you'll need to provide more context. As it stands, I cannot judge whether the degree of help is normal.

once I...could not find [what] he suggested me, and it turned out he remembered it wrong

That's normal, he's human.

I guess one direct reason why I am posting this is I have not made any progress reading one paper (not even doing a problem) since 3 or 4 months ago.

This is perhaps your real problem.

I could not answer my advisor's questions about the paper perfectly as
  he wants and he would not let me move on.

That's good; you probably need to understand the material before you move on.

I do not really see the meaning of doing it

Why not?

and he could not give any suggestions,

What suggestions do you expect?

and lost motivations,

See elsewhere on this forum for questions regarding lost motivation.

Thanks. I expect at least one or two readings on topics that he suggested if I ask. I expect the problem that he gives me to solve at least is, to some extent, carefully chosen with probably a second thought. I know things differ between advisors. I can adjust my expectations if these are not reasonable for an average advisor, though I really admire my friends' excessively nice ones, or my undergrad advisor who is still sending me good papers & books to look at until now... still learning to be a grad student.

About meaning of doing something, I guess I just didn't see the significance of the thing that I am looking at...

What does I expect at least one or two readings on topics that he suggested if I ask mean? I expect the problem that he gives me to solve at least is, to some extent, carefully chosen with probably a second thought That's unrealistic, your supervisor will make mistakes (hence, "solvable as-is" won't always hold) and the degree to which anything can be carefully chosen during a meeting is restricted (due to time constraints).

As suggested in other answers here, none of the things you describe are necessarily deal breakers.
But you don't give any positive aspects of the relationship. A lot of relatively small negatives can add up.
I'm going to guess that you've made up your mind already, even if you haven't noticed it, and simply want confirmation that it is ok to go. Yes, it is ok to go. There is little worse in a doctoral program than having an advisor who isn't right for you. If you don't have some big positive sense that makes the negatives less important, then you should start looking for a different advisor. You don't have to break ties before you start to search, of course. But explore the options, at least.

Thanks. I posted this because everything just kind of burst out at 2 or 3 am when I couldn't sleep. The day after when I re-read this post I felt as lazy as usual to take any action. I've actually been thinking about it for half a year. As pointed out from other answer I also heard from my therapy group members, not making any progress might be the main stressor for me right now, which I didn't notice. Just going to try longer to see if the math could work out, though I literally need to cry several times a day looking at it. I'll also try to talk to other faculties more at the same time.

The meeting forgetting is minor.  There can be way worse aspects of an advisor (competition, power struggles, etc.)
Giving good references:  in an ideal world, "apprenticeship" would be more normal.  However the reality is that many grad students forge their own path and are even expected to do so.  Definitely this is the case in experimental sciences with large groups and advisors who have teaching responsibilities and spend a lot of time grubbing for money, etc.  Perhaps this is a bit different in math because the groups are smaller and the work is harder.  But still, perhaps it is somewhat the case in math also.  I would lean to assuming you need to do your own work.
Project selection:  this is a big issue.  It's probably the most important part of a Ph.D. to pick a problem that is tractable.  Advisors are not the ones doing the work.  It is easy for them to assign "nice to know" projects that are too difficult or have low likelihood of success.  And then the risk/reward is dramatically different and the pain of failure much harder on you.

Based on what you say so far, I would try to pivot to some easier project that is more tractable.  Probably with a different advisor, perhaps with yours.  Would be open to some field of math that is not as challenging as what you are in (stats or OR versus Andrew Wiles stuff) if such a change is still feasible.  You seem to need something easier.
Note, I'm not sure if the issue is you were given an unreasonable problem or if you don't have the traits to deal with what was assigned.  But it sort of doesn't matter.  Find a better match.  You've been doing this a little while and some parts of your question text make me think it unlikely you will succeed with challenging material.  (It's OK.  Michael Jordan was bad at baseball.

It is worth noting here that you could choose to keep your advisor and add additional “mentors” to your team. This may mean increasing your relationship with committee members or forming mentorship relationships with other faculty or perhaps more advanced grad students. In this way, your advisor can be appreciated for his good points and you can go to him when you have problems or questions that relate to his strengths.
Ideally you will have a team of mentors across many sub-fields and universities by the time your graduate. You will tap each person when they can be the most helpful resource rather than relying on one person (and thank them appropriately in your publications, of course).

Thanks. That's one thing that I think I indeed need to do, to get a supporting team... it's hard, but trying.


text:
How to handle capitalized abbreviations in Book, Anthology, Journal, etc. titles in APA?
I am using APA and need to cite an article from a conference that has a capitalized abbreviation in its name:
Proceedings of the 1992 ACM/IEEE Conference on Supercomputing
https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=147877
I can't find information on how to handle abbreviations in the reference entry. My BibLaTeX code is this:
@inproceedings{schutze_1992,
    author = {Schütze, H},
    year = {1992},
    pages = {787 - 796},
    title = {Dimensions of Meaning},
    booktitle = {Proceedings of the 1992 {ACM/IEEE} Conference on Supercomputing},
    editor = {Robert Werner},
    location = {Los Alamitos, CA, USA},
    publisher = {IEEE Computer Society Press}
}

On suspicion, I manually kept the abbreviations capitalized, producing this output

But per default ACM/IEEE is not capitalized by BibLaTeX.
What is correct?

First of all, do not trust Bibtex/Biblatex on capitalization issues. Every Bibtex/Biblatex style file I've looked at handles capitalization using quite simple rules - either it's "Title Case" (capitalizing every "major" word) or "Sentence case" (capitalizing first letter). There's no extensive hidden database used to tell if a given word is a name, proper noun, abbreviation, chemical element, etc. That is, Bibtex/Biblatex would happily output "On gustafson–barsis's law", for example.
Now, APA generally recommends abbreviations to be capitalized (there are some exceptions like 'laser' where an acronym has become overly familiar), which presumably also applies in the reference list. The clearest statement to this effect I've found is from this library guide:

Capitalize proper nouns, initials, and acronyms in a title.


text:
Volume 00, issue 0
I have met this in a few articles already: the volume and issue number of the Journal are 00(0). What does it mean? How should I use it in my reference list?

Volume 00 Issue 0 of a journal looks like a placeholder for the actual volume and issue numbers, especially if you're seeing this in a manuscript that is under submission or, as noted by Anyon, an online preprint made available by the journal prior to publishing.

Yes, it likely is a placeholder for an "online first" article.


text:
What are the risks associated with taking a semester off while doing a Master's degree?
I am curious about this -  I'm currently undergoing a Masters degree and am almost finished.
I finished the coursework, however, I still have the thesis project plus the thesis. And it's looking unlikely for the Spring semester.
My prof is a little bit agitated, but I'm just strapped for time. I'm working full-time and school is simply becoming second-fiddle to work. I come home from work, and if I'm lucky I can spend 20 minutes on school material. Weekends are tough also, as I travel to meet family.
However, I feel that taking a semester off only hurts my overall situation. Because even being registered for 1 hour of thesis credit is a sort of motivation for me. I.E "OK I'm paying money so I better get my money's worth"
However, I see the other argument which is "well if you know you can't graduate this semester then why not just do the work without paying.. then register  the following semester?"
But I am worried that there'll be some hidden snag associated with re-enrolling?
Does anybody have advice/suggestions? Intuitively I'd rather pay up and at least stay enrolled, but I can sympathize with my prof's view.

Talk to your advisor.  Sheesh!

I know several people who have deferred their degree's at all levels for one reason or another.  In all these cases, the student has spoken not just to their professor but to the relevant department admin person and it's been pretty straight forward to enrol and pick up from where they left off.  None of them have suffered from taking time out.
I think you need to ask yourself a couple of questions so you can figure out which is the best solution for you.  Here's a few that spring to mind....
Is taking a semester out really going to solve your time problem?  If you will have the same issue again the next semester you enrol in then taking time out is probably a little pointless.
If you take time out, do you think you will stay motivated enough to re-enrol again?
If you stick with it this semester, what can you do to generate more time?  You mentioned you travel to see family at weekends - is this something you can stop doing for the semester or is visiting an absolute necessity?

Thank you so much, yes you're right - i can certainly reduce weekend-travel  so I'll look at that option. As to If you take time out, do you think you will stay motivated enough to re-enrol again? - some soul-searching needed... Thanks!!!


text:
What is the best way to motivate teaching assistants?
I am head TA in a 300-student class, with 12 other TAs.  Currently I do the following things to motivate my TAs:

We have an internal Slack channel called #shoutouts where I mention TAs every time I notice them going above and beyond.
I post Piazza statistics to the Slack channel every week so that we can see who is posting the most, and then rank TAs in order of how much they posted (currently, a lot of students say that Piazza is very helpful)
I post grading statistics to the Slack channel so that people can see who grades the most (and least) submissions, and what is the average grade they give.
I have a feedback form for students to give feedback to the course staff, and I send a message to the #shoutouts channel every time a student says a TA has been especially helpful.
I tell TAs they are getting evaluated by the instructor (which I think a lot of the TAs didn't know).

However, I have been told (by someone not involved with the class) that I am "overquantifying" things.  Also, even with all of this, there are four people who I would describe as "bad TAs" (and five people who I would describe as excellent TAs, and three people who I would describe as good TAs).
What are your best ways of motivating TAs?

I'm a TA.  All the ways you are causing some sort of competition between TAs would drive me nuts and be extremely de-motivating.  If a TA isn't doing enough, let them know privately.  Creating a public ranking amongst TAs strikes me as really unpleasant.

The public ranking kind of comes across as being similar to that restaurant manager in Offices space. "You don't have enough flair on your uniform". Sure stats are good in private, but ranking a job that should be teamwork seems counter productive.

There's nothing magical about TAs -- they're people, and people have both common motivating factors and individual ones.  Competition is one of the latter, and usually only ends up being positive for those who do well in the competition.

Are you trying to desperately get rid of half your TAs? Because 2 & 3 is how you get rid of the "bad" ones. If you want them to do equal work, assign them equal work. If they are able to choose how much they work, you end up with an unequal share, that is just how it works, especially if they can not compete (Why bother becoming #1 if you do not have the time, better do nothing) What is the relevance of showing the students the average grade the TAs give? At best its irrelevant to the students and at worst it gives them an emotional cop-out ("It wasn't that bad, it's the stupid TA").

I'm a TA, and personally I don't need any of that. The crushing embarrassment from not being able to answer a student's question provides PLENTY of motivation.

Do you evaluate yourself publicly with the same paternalistic enthusiasm you apply to the others?

This question is the poster child of "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"...

I TA, and I feel zero need to be motivated, really. I also see no reason whatsoever to quantify the work I do (except for administrative purposes), and I see less reason to even "compete" in any way with other PhD students that also TA. You seem to be wanting to turn a TA team into a Starbucks team, which is beyond disturbing. I would completely forget about 2 and 3, do 4 personally and forget also about 1. I don't know about 5, and I feel like a professor being excessively onto his/her TAs is also troublesome.

Out of curiosity, what do you hope to accomplish by posting the average grade a TA gives out?

Have you asked them what they would like to get out from the TA-ship?  During my time, asking that itself opened doors to figuring out what motivated them. Teaching a class motivated me so I was allowed to do that. For some it was "never interact with a student" but will happily responding to emails, discussion boards etc., and they got that and rather motivated too...

Can you edit your question to say what the job requirements are? Point number 3 seems odd to me, because as a TA we always had assigned sections and our grading load was thus more or less fixed. Point 2 seems to be valuing quantity over quality in the Piazza interactions (unless there is someone looking at the logs and evaluating the interactions). That's an uncommon way to evaluate a TA's effectiveness, but if that's part of your criteria, please say so.

Have you tried donuts instead of living hell?

@DanFox Yes, I sent out an upward feedback form a few days ago, and posted the results publicly.  4 out of the 5 TAs who responded gave me a 5 out of 5 for both my teaching and my leadership style.  (The remaining 1 person gave me a 5/5 on teaching and a 4/5 on leadership.)

@MarkPlotnick We have grading sessions, where all of us grade together and nobody leaves until all the grading is finished.  In classes without grading sessions, TAs often procrastinate on grading and we have to deliver the grades to students later.  Unfortunately, one of the TAs was complaining in the upward feedback form that some people were taking long breaks during grading sessions and not actually grading.  So I posted the statistics about how many submissions each TA graded.

@jcm Posting the average grade a TA gives out is useful for two reasons.  The first reason is it allows people to see if they are grading too harshly or too leniently, and adjust their future grading accordingly.  The second reason is it allows me to see if people are just marking everyone with perfect scores to reduce work.  (The average grade is never shown to students, it's only posted internally.)

Your system is unfair to students, because they're evaluated differently, and to the TAs, because hard work during grading sessions is nit really worth it. My professir made sure the exercises were made on separate sheets by the students. Easier to parallelize, and to do the grading in your own time. Grades are also fairer to students. In would feel highly uncomfortable in your approach. No freedom, no real responsibility.

@HeadTA: So the self-selected respondents to a nonanonymous upward feedback form all rated you well? Were the five respondents coincidentally the five people you regards as excellent TAs?

There is research showing that rewards, especially quantitative rewards, actually decrease motivation and performance in a wide range of situations. See refs in Deci 1995 "Why we do what we do", and Kohn 1999 "Punished by rewards". In a nutshell, intrinsic motivation (liking your job and its impact) is better than extrinsic motivation (aiming at getting the reward).

@DanFox: Of course the feedback form was anonymous.  What kind of idiot do you think I am?

At the risk of being overly harsh, if I were one of 'your' TAs I would be most motivated by news of your resignation. Constant competition, ranking and calling people out over things is not motivation. Professional people are more often than not self-motivated and don't need this kind of prodding.

@ggll. It's the problem with extrinsic motivation.

@BenCrowell Those are just a few of the ways people can get mentioned in the #shoutouts channel.  They have also gotten mentioned when they stay at office hours for longer than they are supposed to, or when they point out errors in course material, or when they cover other TAs' office hours, or volunteer for extra work, etc.

That's a hell of a toxic environment you're cultivating.

@HeadTA I dont think you're an idiot, just that you're naive if you expect people who think you're bad to actually manifest it. They cant know if the survey is truly anonymous, so why take the risk?

However, I have been told (by someone not involved with the class) that I am "overquantifying" things. Also, even with all of this, there are four people who I would describe as "bad TAs" (and five people who I would describe as excellent TAs, and three people who I would describe as good TAs).

I presume that your good TAs are always on top of the lists you publicly post, and your "bad" TAs are on the bottom? Why do you think this public shaming will motivate them?
Here is what I would do:

Centrally, I would stop posting things that make some TAs feel good at the expense of making others feel bad. The shoutouts are nice, but for statistics etc. I would only post who was on top (or maybe the top-3 or something), and only if it is not always the same people. Try your best to rotate your statistics in a way that everybody gets some love.
Assign work. It appears to me that TAs are somewhat free in choosing their own work (since you give stats on who graded how many assignments). This naturally leads to some people slacking off and others, more or less happily, picking up their tasks. A simple solution to that is to make up a schedule.
Validate that your "bad" TAs are objectively not doing a good job, and are not just weaker in comparison to your exceptionally great other TAs.
If you feel your bad TAs are actually objectively lacking, use the central management principle of praising in public (which you already do, to some extent) and criticising in private. Talk to the TAs that you are not satisfied with in private and explain what you think they should do to improve. Give actionable tips - "you should know more about the subject" may be objectively true, but will also not change in the duration of the course. My impression is that with your statistics you attempt to shame people into improving without having to have an awkward conversation with the underperformers. Unfortunately, this is not how management works.
Above all, it pays to keep in mind that not everybody is the same and has the same constraints etc. No matter what you do, not everybody will go above and beyond. If 5 out of 12 people regularly go above and beyond and most others are also doing a good job, you already have a strong team. Don't downplay this, not to yourself and definitely not to the team.

Thanks for the suggestions!  I used to post the top 3 Piazza people only, but then some people accumulated much more Piazza posts than others, so they were always top of the ranking.  Now that I post everyone every week, it is easier to calculate how many posts they are making in that week specifically (because I can just look at last week's and do subtraction).  I guess I could keep it in a separate spreadsheet.

Everyone except one TA has been positively mentioned in the #shoutouts channel at least a few times (in part because there are a lot of different reasons you can get recognized).  Some of the "bad TAs" actually have a lot of mentions, because the reason they are bad is because they are inconsistent (sometimes go above and beyond and sometimes just avoid work).  There is one TA who is a real outlier and was mentioned in #shoutouts much more than anyone else.

@HeadTA What subject do you teach? By the mentality used in assessing them, I suspect it's something related to business or management, and you're trying to apply some theory principles to your team... By the many comments, and answer by Dmitry, I hope you've already realised that it doesn't work to create too much internal competition. Treating people just like capital, as simple minded factors of production doesn't work. There needs to exist some respect and dignity.  I wish you success in the near future, though.

@Anoldmaninthesea. Nah, those were business theories a good bunch of decades ago (taylor e.g.). I'd bet on something technical were people are interested in numbers and statistics

I think the best way to motivate a person in academia is to give them a bit of job security, some funding which enables them to follow their interests, and a great team to work with. I am not sure if you can realistically give "your(sic!) TAs" any of this.
In absence of solid motivating factors, you are trying to engage the team in some form of internal competition, which may motivate some people and completely put off others. For example, I personally would be puzzled as to why should I compete for some statistics or evaluations which look rather meaningless unless it has any effect on my promotion or chances of future employment.
Most people I worked with responded well to:

smart goals
positive example
cutting the crap (including crap meetings)

In my experience, teaching is rather a pleasant activity and there is a lot of gratification in the  process of working with students. An excessive amount of paperwork, bureaucracy and management can only spoil the fun.

I have heard beatings can work well:
There's a famous expression attributed to Captain Bligh of the stricken HMS Bounty, who was overthrown in a mutiny. While flogging sailors for small misdemeanours, he is said to have declared: "The beatings will continue until morale improves."

This is exactly the point...

Bligh was in fact considered a very moderate user of disciplinary measures by the standards of the day.  His image as a tyrant is largely down to a concerted campaign by powerful relatives of some of the mutineers, amplified by hollywood's script writers.

We have received flags about this post being inappropriate. Readers: this post is a joke. Please do not beat your TAs, or students, or advisors, no matter how much you want to. If this concerns you please read the fantastically titled "Stack Overflow: where we hate fun" blog post.

I have been told (by someone not involved with the class) that I am "overquantifying" things.

That person is correct.
Besides the quantifying thing and publicly showing these numbers, what do you expect? 12 excellent TA's? Not gonna happen.
There are always high, middle and low profiles in a group of people. Sometimes people out perform (themselves), sometimes only for a limited time frame.
In stead of posting all these statistics, try talking with your TA's. Aknowledge there effort, give feedback, give advice. That's how you motivate people.

For example the reputation points system and badges on stackoverflow; One colleague and I are competing for the most reputation points, because we like to. Other colleagues don’t. And that is fine. The moment my boss would grade us, compare us, and enforce us to have x amount of reputation points. That is the moment my colleague and I will dislike the reputation point system.

You have good intentions, so please forgive me for being blunt, but right now, the best thing you can do to motivate them is to stop doing all the things you're currently doing to motivate them.
The good TAs are going to be the ones who like teaching and thus don't need to be motivated.  The main downside of teaching is that it takes away from research time, and you're currently making that worse. I imagine that "being in competition with my coworkers" would have also made the list of downsides if any of my supervisors had ever done that.
There are, however, things you can do to improve how the team functions together.  The one potentially useful useful thing in your list is the grading statistics.  Not because it can be used to rank TA quality, but because it's important that everyone is grading according to the same standards so no student gets an unfair advantage (or disadvantage) based on who graded their work.  So keep those statistics, and if you see a few outliers, you might have everyone meet up and coordinate how harshly things should be graded.  One meeting before each major assignment would probably suffice.

My 2 cents.
Probably won't be a popular opinion here, but I've been head TA numerous times, along with being a TA (or equivalent) and this is what I have personally found.

A good TA is by their nature a good TA. It's an inherent property. Incentives or disincentives
will never transform a bad TA into a good one. A good TA can however
get burnout if working conditions are bad, or if they consistently feel that their efforts aren't acknowledged or appreciated.
Giving good TAs space is good, and the tools to do the job. They don't need someone looking over their shoulder. However, completing an arduous task well, and being told they did "a great job" will go a long way.
Acknowledging that certain tasks are a pain will definitely motivate TAs, while an attitude that such tasks have to be completed because they're "part of the job" will not. On the same note, making it clear that, as head TA, you are not merely offloading responsibilities, but making a significant contribution yourself will hugely motivate good TAs. Bad TAs will see you doing work as an excuse to swing the lead, but as I have already said, they're a lost cause anyway.
Attempting to reduce busy-work by TAs will always be appreciated. Are there tasks that have to be completed by TAs that don't really aid students? Can you ask the professor/lecturer that such tasks be removed? Are the rubrics for corrections too convoluted? Can tasks be streamlined? Reducing the amount of work have to be done on terrible software like Blackboard will help.
Depending on the institution there may be some way to have some monetary bonus at the end of the semester given to good TAs. That's not "a prize to one TA" but rather some bonus to all the members on the team that pulled their weight. It doesn't have to be much. It doesn't have to be a competition, just an acklowledgement that your team did good, and that their work is appreciated. A distinction, if you will, between the bad TAs who are there just for the money or because they are forced to be, and those who really care about doing a good job in the first place.
Just to reiterate: there is no cure for a bad TA. You can cajole them, you can monitor them, you can encourage them: there is no point, they will only work as long as you are monitoring them, and no longer.

"A good TA is by their nature a good TA. It's an inherent property." No, they have to learn how to do it.

@AnonymousPhysicist enthusiasm, dedication, dependability can't be learned (or at least in the time frame that we're talking). These are the most important aspects, besides actual knowledge of the subject that's being taught, of course.

Those things are definitely learned.  I would guess the time scale is highly variable.  And they are much more important than knowledge of the subject.

One can learn how to teach, one can learn how to act professionally, and many people do both.

Yea, I'm going to overnight 24 years of behavioral habits in 10 weeks of managing you. Does that sound realistic Anon?

From my experience the amount of time the TA intends to remain in the school/country, coupled with social/cultural aspects, both have profound impacts on the potential quality of a TA. It goes without saying that if a would-be TA is unlikely to have any long term connection with the university, and is unlikely to be looking for a reference, their investment is likely to be less.

Not everyone is motivated by the same things, and you may be encouraging behavior you don't actually want. Let's examine your current assumptions that I'm guessing you hold if you think posting charts with names is effective:
* Everyone wants to be the best among their peers
* Everyone wants to be known as the best
* Everyone feels they can be the best
* Doing the most of some activity means you are the best at it
Here's the truth though:
* Not everyone is interested in competing
* Not everyone enjoys public recognition
* If there's a best, there must be a worst,  and it's probably going to be the same people in the top 50% and bottom 50% on a regular basis
* Making more posts or slapping a grade on the most papers does not mean you are actually doing your job better
People who don't like competition will ignore your graphs. People who dislike being publicly recognised as being better than their peers will actively try to score lower. People who feel they can't compete even if they wanted to will come up with an excuse to ignore your graphs. Those who do like all those things will behave in a way that strictly improves their metrics, even if it is detrimental to the students (think many short posts with a minimum of effort rather than long, thoughtful, helpful posts).
There's almost no way posting your metrics will improve performance. You need to very carefully consider which behaviors you want to reinforce, how you will reinforce that behavior for each person. Being publicly declared the most helpful TA will thrill someone or mortify them. There is no single tactic that will motivate every person. You'll need a combination of talking to your TAs and trial and error to figure out what works.
I would strongly recommend avoiding tracking how many of X each person does. Your issue isn't that some people are grading more assignments than others in the same amount of time; the problem is some people are taking long breaks. And why wouldn't they? Grading isn't fun, and a break has an immediate and guaranteed reward of not having to grade during the break. Instead, change your process so one person taking breaks doesn't cause another person to do more work, or limit the breaks to specific times when the whole group breaks together.
In short, focus on the behaviors that you want to increase/decrease, then figure out what each person considers a reward. Then give out those rewards when you get the behavior you want.
There are whole books on this topic if you really want to get into it.

Not everyone motivated by same thing. Very good observation +1

Give them important things to do.  Show them how their work helps students learn.
Grading and "posting" do not necessarily help students learn.
This is more the responsibility of the instructor and institution, rather than a "head TA".

It can be difficult for TAs to feel invested in a course; often what works best is to sit down with the TA at the beginning of the semester, ask them what they want to get out of the TAship that semester. If the TA can feel involved with course development -- whether that means that they get to design one of their own lectures -- or have some form of input to make it a worthwhile experience for themselves, then that can mean more for retention and performance than anything quantitative.

Only my opinion, but I don't see many posts that push giving TAs helpful ideas, suggestions for developing their teaching skills. Intended for those TAs who happen to be doing the teaching parts of it all. Many who have never taught anything before to anyone can feel hopelessly lost at times, as will their students. Suggesting ideas to them for designing exams, marking papers, calculating grades, and all that could go a long way for providing assistance to any TA. Plus, their students would likewise benefit from a trained instructor.  When TAs or anyone start to feel competent and confident in their work, that pays for itself at least in part.