text:
Doubts whether to continue a PhD due to supervisor's lies and loss of funding
TL; DR: PhD with a supervisor who states things that turn out not to be true in order to manage people; funding lost and replaced with smaller financial contribution; serious doubt whether to continue the PhD due to change of mind in future career and difficulty in recognising the title in another country.
I hope this question is not too long nor inappropriate (sorry if this is the case, I have just joined Academia SE) but I want to provide as much information as possible.
I am currently doing a PhD in Computer Science in the UK, but I am a European national. As the title has already disclosed, I am having some problems and I really need as many “valid” opinions as possible.
Yes, I read Phd advisor funding problem, PhD advisor lost funding, need advice, PhD Advisor to Stop Funding Me and others, yet I still think my problem is different.
Why I decided to do a PhD in the first place
Since I was a child I had always wanted to become a researcher, someone who does cool stuff and has a real impact in the world (now I know that the truth is a bit different…). This means that I had never thought about looking for a job after university, nor I wanted to work in a company. I could only see myself as a Professor in a university.
Why I decided to do a PhD in another country (i.e. the UK)
When I finished my Batchelor (with the maximum grade possible and in the smallest period of time possible), as I was unsatisfied by the quality of teaching of my university (and also by the public “college” in which I was, supposed to provide “gifted” students with very high level of teaching), I started to look for another university where to do a Master.
In addition to this, I also wanted to live far from my family because unfortunately the situation with them had become unbearable for some problems of “incomprehension” that cannot be solved as of now. Since I did not want to spend my family’s money (we are not exactly rich) I applied for several scholarships and public “colleges” for talented students (like the one I was in), where I got admitted to one (currently considered one of the best youngest academic institutions in the world). At the same time, by chance, I found out that in countries such as the UK you can do a PhD without a Master, and talking to who is now my current supervisor I decided to apply. I got admitted in this course as well, and since the other one did not include any funding (unlike this one) I decided to go for the PhD.
Finally, changing university and moving out would force me to prove myself and to see if I was the person that I had always thought I was. Indeed during my last year of university, following the stress at home and university plus some terrible experiences that had happened in the college I had started to question my abilities and decided to book some counselling sessions to solve the “psychological” problems that I had piled up. To be more specific I had basically started to sleep less than four hours a day, except for the weekend when I used to sleep at home and not in the college, and I had also become unable to focus as much as I used to be able to. My fears with the counsellor were that I would not be able to carry out the studies for a Master, that I had lost my brightness, that I had wasted my life. They suggested that I was “anticipating”, that I had to lower my expectations, that it is normal to get distracted every once in a while (which clearly was not my point), that with my grades that would be fundamentally impossible. They also said they were confident I would be successful in a Master and I should not worry that much. Basically, it looks to me now that they were treating me as if I “had” the impostor syndrome. Due to these reasons and to the fact that I wanted to see whether I would be able to carry out high level studies in autonomy I decided to apply to these “advanced” courses.
Problems encountered
The supervisor lies
Following my acceptance the supervisor suggested I could come more than one month before the starting date of the PhD, so as to settle in and potentially start before the defined date. I trusted them and paid the rent and the food for the month without seeing any money from the scholarship. This is fine, what is not fine is the fact that I was told a lie, a constant for this person, plus a number of other unsaid characteristics of the PhD such as the stated official duration of it which was supposed to be three years and turned out to be four.
The scholarship for the PhD was provided by a European fund, while the tuition fees were supposed to be paid by a company (with which I would be collaborating during the project). When I came, I was given some papers to start off with, that later on I realised to be totally unrelated to the work I was supposed to do with the company (but clearly strictly related to my supervisor’s research interests). I was also given a “side project” (as my supervisor defined it) to begin so as not to get bored working on a single project. This was basically after just a couple of weeks since my starting date. During these 15 months of PhD indeed, I have basically worked on my supervisor’s ideas (still this “side project”), instead of doing something for the company. I asked them twice whether this was proper behaviour/strategy, but they said both of the times that “The PhD is funded by the university so you should not worry about that”, only to say a couple of months later that “The PhD is funded by the company, you should do something for them to make them happy”.
Moreover, as soon as I started I found out that in the office we did not have the necessary equipment to conduct the kind of research I was supposed to conduct (I had not asked during the interview because I thought it would be superfluous). As of now, after one year and three months of PhD, I still do not have the highly performing computational machinery required. Clearly I have repeatedly asked for it, I also tried to use the computers in the postgraduate lab (just to be told to refrain from attempting to install the software that I needed on them). Also, the supervisor told me many times that I would be able to use the computers in the new centre the university was building, but after waiting for its completion when I asked the people in charge of those computers I was told that that would conflict with the use for which those computers were destined. Then the supervisor told me some computers would be bought, and after weeks of problems (please read excuses) they said the computers were on campus and would be assembled the following week. This was two weeks ago.
Another thing that I consider to be extremely ridiculous is the fact that he uses me blatantly as a means to start new collaborations whose only purpose is to get the data that we actually need but do not have. Everything seems to revolve around the data (fundamental to conduct our analyses) that we cannot procure. I even went to America to allegedly start a collaboration with an expert in the field and when I arrived there they did not even know when I was supposed to come nor what I was supposed to do. Basically as far as I understood my supervisor had told them I was an expert in the field of my PhD (which is obviously false given that I had just started the PhD) and that I could help them. At the end we did not even get the data that I was supposed to be given.
Problems with the company
The company is constituted by just a single person, but when I questioned my supervisor about the soundness of the situation they said that the government was in charge of the fund so the company was trusted by the government.
This person has a project in mind which according to my understanding is either impossible to realise or trivial. Furthermore the equipment they said they had does not exist (they finally admitted it, after 9 months of my questioning) and also the data they were supposed to provide us with must be invisible because I have not received anything yet (at the beginning they did not know where the data were, then they found them but it would take too long to process, then they said they would send us the results…). The only thing I received from this person is a report of their previous company which contains grammatical mistakes, is terribly printed and contains whole sentences from Wikipedia. Finally, the knowledge contribution provided by them, which was expected to be in regard to some new equations, turned out to be absolutely old knowledge, with no novelty at all (except for the general idea of how to use these equations; yet they still lied).
General problems
I knew that the university I was moving to was not as good as mine, but I thought that “If things get more difficult I will be more challenged and this will further contribute to my personal growth”, strengthening the hypothesis that I could actually do these things. I know that it sounds a stupid reason (it really is) but back then it seemed to be a way to escape from that situation and I wanted to give it a try.
My current supervisor did not look as “strong” as the other professors I had met, but again that was not a matter of primary concern for me.
Besides, a totally absurd thing in my group, maybe common to other research groups is the fact that the code that I write is not checked by anyone. I came across the code of someone else previously in the group and I even had to fix it because it was full of silent errors which would produce distorted results, maybe then published. This is also a thing I definitely do not like about research in this field (and in general), since no one checks the results in the papers and it becomes impossible to replicate them.
Also in the group as far as I have understood the only thing we do is to follow a certain methodological approach to solve some problems in the area, and this makes me question the real innovation between what a colleague of mine makes and my projects.
Finally, I have to say that luckily there is a postdoc in the group who has helped me a lot during the first months and every time I have some doubts, since my supervisor sometimes gives me the impression they have no idea what I have been doing for weeks. Unfortunately this postdoc will leave quite soon, so I will probably be done for.
The last straw
The straw that broke the camel’s back is the fact that the company does not want to pay my tuition fees anymore (I suspect why but I am not sure) and probably they want to withdraw from the partnership with the university. As a result, I will lose all the funding. I found this out when the person in charge of the senior management in my department came into the office asking after my supervisor, explaining that a company with my kind of European fund did not want to pay the fees anymore. Clearly my supervisor did not say anything to me until they “managed” to find a solution. Indeed one week later my supervisor asked me whether I wanted to continue the collaboration with the company or I would prefer to be employed by the university in order to be able to pay the rent and the other things. I obviously said I would prefer the latter, since the company was a totally mad person and I would not have pressure about the project from that side anymore. They made clear that one of the requirements for the job at university was that I would be paid the same amount of money as stated in my original PhD contract, which should plainly be the least.
Now that I have received the contract, I can say that this is not the case, since there lack about nine months (comparing the monthly salary) because I cannot be on a full-time job since I am doing a PhD and part of the money (very few) goes into the pension scheme. I think I could survive with what I have left in my bank account, but I just think this is the nth affront. It almost looks like they are doing me a favour while it is their duty to honour the contract the made me sign.
What I think will happen if I leave now
If I leave now it is very likely that I will go home. I will probably try to find a part-time job (it is very difficult in my country and especially in my area since the levels of unemployment are extremely high) in order to do a Master to “strengthen” my cv for a full-time permanent job in the future. My fear is that I will not be able to keep the job because of my slowness in performing tasks and my lack of certain skills that I do not think I can gain by myself. Also the two “wasted” years will not probably help (nor affect negatively though).
What I think will happen if I stay
Assuming that I will not have any financial problems my main concerns are related to the stress due to all of these aspects of my current situation (my supervisor lying, the absence hopefully-about-to-end of the equipment, lack of necessary data, lack of technical supervision, …) and to the fact that once I finish the PhD, presuming I will be able to gain it, I will not be able to do anything but what I am doing now already, which is not what I want to do. If after the end of the PhD I went back to my country the PhD would not be useful to get a job, because in my country it is considered only for a career in academia (when I started that was what I wanted to do, so it was not a problem at all).It will not be even recognised since in my country you need a Master to get a PhD so I would need to get a Master first anyway.
Finally, my supervisor looks very kind and they are certainly a good person, but this gets me into more trouble when I have to question their whole management. I have already talked to them about some of these things (trying not to be rude, especially because I would find it difficult with them) but the situation looks still the same (we talked about eight months ago).
Sorry again for the length, but I felt I had to explain in detail. My question is: do you think I should leave, or should I grit my teeth and hold on (regardless of a new contract that I could be offered, since I have already complained about that)?

This is extremely long. It needs at least a TL;DR summary.

I haven't read everything but "It will not be even recognised since in my country you need a Master to get a PhD so I would need to get a Master first anyway." doesn't seem likely. I'm from Germany and here you need a Master degree to start a PhD. However, a PhD from, e.g., the US (where you only need a Bachelor degree) will of course be recognized.

If you don't have funding, try and see if you can get an advisor who will give you funding.  The fact that you are effectively paying fof someone to lie to you is a good sign that you and your advisor need to part ways.  Does your new contract involve new funding?  If so, maybe you could stay, otherwise do yourself a favor and leave.

The length makes this incredibly unclear.  There is a lot of extraneous detail in here.  I would aim for around 10% of this length, give or take.  Try to summarize your problem in one paragraph, and move straight to questions.  Also might help if you review a some other successful questions on Academia to get a feel for them.

I streamline and rearranged the content and proposed an edit, but it was rejected by the reviewers. I suspect the reason is that it looks messy in the reviewing view because I shifted so much text around (everything I left was part of the original question, though sometimes rephrased).

@Roland in the US when you do a PhD it lasts 5 years because you are also doing a Master. In the UK it lasts at most 4 years and you are granted only the PhD. I have also asked to general office in my country and I was told that I do need a Master in order to have my PhD recognised.

@Daveguy yes, the new contract involves funding, but it is less than the first contract granted. I will be able to survive for sure, but I just do not think it is fair. It is almost impossible to change supervisor because what I have been doing for these 15 months is studied only by him in my university.

A UK PhD is recognized everywhere in the European Union. I cannot imagine a country that would not recognize a UK PhD.

Hi @Roland, the problem is that in my country (and in yours) the PhD can be obtained only after a Master, while in the UK this is not necessarily true. This means that I cannot have a PhD recognised (by recognised I mean officially my the public institutions) in my country unless I have a Master. Otherwise, everyone would go to the UK to get a PhD and then would go back saving the years of the Master to have an evident competitive advantage towards other candidates for a job place.

Your question consumes ~3 pages of A4. Can you rephrase succinctly?

Alternatively, could you raise each issue in a separate question?

I am a regular user on this site. According to the record, I have reviewed more than 5000 first time posts. Your question is among the top 3 long posts, if not the longest. Please cut it into a shorter one. After reading the TLDR. Here is my short response. I am 60-something old. I have never met anyone who never lied. If you have funding problem, the solution is to find the funding, or ask us a question on how to find it.

@map2gap I don't think that's the case, at least it isn't in Germany. A UK PhD will be recognized without a Master degree. Everyone can try to go to the UK to do their PhD but not everyone will get accepted. I simply don't believe that in your country a PhD from Oxford or Cambridge wouldn't be accepted.

@Roland That's not true for Germany since Brexit happened, as the regulation applies to EU member states, which the UK is not anymore. See this answer for more details: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/87628/15

@MatiasValdenegro Regulations can be adapted. Until the end of the year, a PhD from the UK will be fully recognized. We don't know yet what will happen afterwards but I wouldn't worry. Also, in Germany there is a crucial difference between being allowed to call oneself a Dr. and the recognition as a qualification.

the new contract involves funding, but it is less than the first contract granted. I will be able to survive for sure, but I just do not think it is fair Are you studying there for a PhD, or for the sake of fairness?

You talk about a lot of work related nonsense, which I agree are difficult situations, but they are by no means unheard of (or even uncommon...) in academia. It seems that your main issue is really a lack of a mental health support structure (be it friends, therapy, etc.), because it sounds like you have had to suffer through a lot of issues both in your Bachelor's degree as well as during graduate school without adequate support. Whatever step you take next, I think making sure that step includes access to mental health support should be a top priority.
Taking your work/advisor issues, I have a bit of a different take. Your advisor has not been upfront with you, that much is clear. However, from the advisor's perspective, their "side project" they were having you work on could have been - from the very beginning - them trying to make sure you had something that was totally within the lab's control to work on for your dissertation. This is them looking out for your interests! It's very possible that they knew from the beginning that the company wasn't going to amount to anything, and they were just trying to string the funding along as long as possible. Perhaps not exactly ethical, but it doesn't point to obvious maliciousness on their part towards you, either.
As to whether to stay or go, despite the length of your question, I don't think you've given us the key details that those here would need to make an informed answer. Certainly if you think your work so far has a chance to be taken to completion, then gritting it out seems like a reasonable strategy. However, the false binary you've set for yourself (stay at X university or return home) doesn't reflect the diversity of your options. What about switching to a new advisor? Applying to new programs while still working with your current advisor? Applying for jobs while keeping your fellowship rather than quitting and applying for jobs while unemployed?
Finally, in the future you would probably find it more useful on SE to ask more targeted questions that those here could answer with confidence (i.e. What jobs could I get in X country with Y degree?), since a "stay or go" question requires so much situational knowledge (as well as knowledge about you as a person) that you can't adequately convey, no matter how long your question is.

thanks for all the suggestions. Regarding the supervisor, I have just happened to know that the company was not paying the fees there were supposed to pay. This is the reason why the university stopped the collaboration. The problem is that my advisor has kept telling me the problem was intellectual-property related, and due to "this" the university wanted to stop the collaboration. Why would you lie in such a situation?

again, without knowing the specific situation, anything i could say is pure speculation. But it could be that there was an intellectual property dispute and therefore the company was withholding money to keep an upper hand in negotiations? It could be that both things are true: the company wasn't paying the fees, and the problem was intellectual-property related.

Thank you again for your opinion. However, my supervisor asked my whether I would like to continue the collaboration with the company or I would prefer to have my PhD funded by the university. They did not mention any fee-related problems, which is something that I had found out by myself totally by chance. It looks to me they wanted me to "believe" I had the choice between the two, and that I was not forced to do so. I would like to know what is your opinion about the fact that they "gave me" the opportunity to choose when there was actually no choice at all (they could simply say the truth).


text:
How to put research, teaching and service into a single job talk
I am going to give an on-campus job talk for a tenure-track assistant professor position. According to the searching chair, my talk will include teaching, research, and service philosophy, and other attributes that show me as a good match for the position. The time slot allocated for the presentation will be about 45 minutes.
Since the anticipated appointments for this position are about 60% research + 40% teaching, I wonder if my talk should cover the two topics in a similar proportion, with just briefly touching on services. Regarding research, how should I balance my previous and future research?
Logically I will first talk about my research philosophy, then some selected past research projects and finally future research plans for this position, but there may be other more effective way. Similarly, I will talk about my teaching philosophy, experiences and future teaching interests.

I don't think this question can be answered without reading the job ad and the profiles of existing faculty.

What field are you in? Most of the job talks I have seen (computer science) focus primarily on research, with some minor emphasis (<5 slides) on teaching and service.

@Spark I am in agriculture engineering. I am not sure if I should also do that as you mentioned

If your job implicitly would include some outreach... to literally help/advise farmers in your area... you'd want to mention something about that!

Let me suggest that this depends to a certain amount on what is already in your CV. If you need to "boost" any area there, use more of the time to provide that boost.
For example, if your CV is already very strong in research output, you don't need to focus especially on that, other than to give an overview of your future directions (sort of like an SoP). So, spend a bit more time on teaching philosophy.
But if you are a bit weaker in the research area (hard to judge, I know), then focus more on that.
In any case, talk about how you fit in the department; synergy with current faculty members.
But don't completely ignore any area, even at an R1 university (or at a liberal arts college, for that matter). It has a broad mission, after all.

While not an exact duplicate, you might benefit from some advice given in this related question.  I will repeat some of that advice here.
While the breakdown of your presentation time for each topic is important, a more important thing is to see your presentation as a unity, and use each part of it to demonstrate your abilities in all aspects of your academic work.  Ideally, your presentation of your research should show what a great teacher you are (e.g., by exhibiting your engaging style, the ease of explaining the material, etc.) and your presentation of your teaching style and method should show what a serious and thorough researcher you are (e.g., that your method is informed by pedagogical research, etc.).  Similarly, your professional service is likely to interact with your research and/or teaching, so it can often be weaved into these parts to augment them as you go.  By augmenting topics in this way, you can "cheat" the time allowance --- e.g., your audience is seeing what a good teacher you are both when you talk about teaching and when you talk about research or service.
Likewise, rather than trying to demarcate your research philosophy from your actual research, and do these in a strict sequential order, it ought to be possible to weave these together so that they are a unity --- e.g., discuss your research philosophy, but use examples of your past research to concretise this discussion.  Similarly, use discussion of your research philosophy to explain choices you've made within your actual research.  As you illustrate your past research, you can raise questions that you want to pursue in future research, again tying this in so that your past and future research are unified.
The ideal result here is for each part of your presentation to augment the other so that the exact split of time between the parts is not to the derogation of one or the other.  If you can make an engaging presentation where your research, teaching and service weave together into a compelling whole then your audience is likely to be left with a positive impression of each.  It is unlikely that people will care much about the time split so long as they felt that your presentation was engaging and interesting, and they got at least a little taste of each part and how it ties together as a whole.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How To Cope With The Stigma of Quitting a Second PhD for a Third one?
As per the title, I quit my second Ph.D. after 10 months, having quit my first after one year.
My first supervisor was narcissistic and a sociopath. (Nonetheless, I received prizes for my research.) After one year I left.
I took a lab position, in an isolated country, whilst seeking a second PhD program. The lab took advantage of my situation (low salary, humiliation, harsh work conditions). After 5 months, I was about to commit suicide, until I started a second Ph.D. I thought this was the salvation.
I didn't know my second supervisor. They seemed nice. Ultimately, I took the position out of desperation. However, after several months, I found myself stuck with a supervisor who was always jealous, in a constant fighting mode, moody, angry like infant. The final straw came when I was nominated for an prestigious award, which I was to collect at a conference, which waived the usual conference fee: My supervisor refused to support my travel, even though it was only around 500 Euro. They weren't constructive at all. Perhaps more importantly, the lack of dataset from our collaborators, sketchy understanding about my research which leads to lack of feedback,  this was a wrong match in all levels.
I've found another lab in a different country. They are interested in my work and I've joined their
group.
My question: I feel so much stigma about the situation and I feel sometimes insecure about what happened. In my current position, they know my situation, but they did not know all the story.
Now, I have to move by the end of the month. But, I am torn. I feel a failure because this situation doesn't sound good. Even though I asked many wise people and having a discussion for hours to split the emotion and facts about my situation that my decision to leave is right, I am stuck somehow emotionally about all experience, I saw a psychoanalyst, but not so much helpful, how can I get out of this stigma, I am afraid this would jeopardize my academic career? How I can remove this past?

I've edited in an attempt to clarify and improve readability. (Please revert/edit further/etc. as you see fit.) I'm somewhat confused about the closing paragraph: Why do you have to move? Are you moving from the (second) lab to a third PhD?

"How To Cope With The Stigma of Quitting a Second PhD for a Third one?"  Short answer: Complete the third one.  After that, few people will remember the first two.

Actually there is no stigma. What you have is feelings of failure. Stigma is something imposed on you by others and you have found a group that doesn't feel that way. It is time to feel good, not bad.
Bad things have happened to you. You were put in unfortunate circumstances. Hopefully you have escaped them. Look to the future, not the past.
If you escape from a lion attack it is time to rejoice, though the wounds may take time to heal.
I've been in the profession since dinosaurs ruled the earth and I don't look down on you. You seem very persistent. I predict success.
I also predict that once you make it over the finish line you will have so much experience with bad advisors that you will be careful to be a good one.

thanks so much for this, my energy is just drained, please wish for me luck this time. I tried to speak with trustworthy people who are pragmatic and not emotional neither biased, and after three hours they second my decision.

Agree but you also will need to unburden yourself to someone. Both to a professional, e.g. psychologist/counsellor and to a trusted friend, from outside academia preferably. Don't feel guilty spending some of that research grant on your own needs - you've earned a bit of care.

First things first, if you have suicidal thought, then you need help. The fact that you tried one psychoanalyst, and that did not work for you, does not mean that the entire mental healthcare system is useless for you. Finding a therapist and a therapy that works for you can be long process of trial and error. Don't give up.
As to your question: You can't remove the past, all you can do is focus on making a better future.
If you want to reflect on your past experience to try to learn from it: I notice that you externalize the blame a lot. In the way you present your story there are three person: you are a top-student who wins prices, while the two others (the advisors) are narcissistic sociopaths or jealous and childish. That is probably not the whole story, and sticking to it will probably prevent you from learning from your experiences. However, now may not be the right time to process this. The only advise I can give you is: find a therapist that works for you and discuss this with her or him.
If you worry about how to present your story to others, then it is this black and white presentation that raises lots of red flags with me, not the fact that this is your third attempt.

How you can judge on me although you havenot been in my circumstance, " while others" who others? in my story only two persons i am speaking about, of course I have other people in academia who believe in me, but non of them were my advisors. It is quite unfortunate to have a mentality like you have. Of course, no one is perfect, but the ughly truth is that most of academia:

It is shortsighted to judge, since I wasnot the only case in both stories, I have other members but in both cases were afraid to complain, even if I am a really bad student, I musnot be treated in that way, BTW, I was teaching at university for five years and have all the patterns of students and I never ever have been offensive towards them.

You seem upset. Whenever that happens, it is a good idea to take a step back. In this case, try and read your own question again, and imagine you don't know anything about your situation other then what is in your question. You asked the question and controlled the information presented in it. You can't blame people for answering the question based on the information you presented.... If you thought I should have considered other information, then you should have given it to me. If you don't want advise, then you should not ask for it.

I think I asked for the stigma only not for my personality that I am externalizing blame, there is a difference, I agree I confirmed in my story, that I didnot tell every thing detail. I am not upset, but sometimes I would prefer not to jump in conclusion, I had an extensive discussion with. trustworth people who are not biased either emotional for three hours because I was afraid maybe I am the problem.

I was trying to split the facts from emotion, I dont want to be deluded on life, I am also not perfect, but in two situation, me and other students werenot fortunate to be in with not good advisors, I just do my work hard, I speak up in apolite way, if there is an argument, but again these two supervisors although they have different patterns, in end they were not constructive.

I don't think there is much use talking to you like this. All can say to you is "get well". This is not a put down. I genuinely mean it.

@ Maaryen Buis, Thank you!

+1, this answer is a great example of firm politeness.

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


text:
Trimester percentage 22% due to an accident. How to explain it to employers? How will it affect internship and job opportunities?
I am an international student currently pursuing my Master's program in Computer Science that follows the trimester system. Before the beginning of the trimester, I had an accident but I decided to continue with the trimester. However, I left my trimester in between as it became much worse. As a result of which I was not able to sit for my final exams and got 22% in my trimester and took a break. I am planning to withdraw from the courses which I took the last term on medical grounds so that I can get my money back with the academic penalty.
I took one year off from the program and after a full recovery, I came back again this February to continue with my Masters Program.
If they do not refund the money, they will keep the grade as it is and it will look terrible on my transcript. How do I explain this to my prospective employers? How will it affect my chances of an internship?
Thanks in advance.

you are withdrawing then you are continuing... Which?

let me re-edit the question @SolarMike

What do you mean by "I am back after one year to continue with my program"? Are you back now? Or you will be back??

I am back after I took on a year off from the Master's program.

Anybody can have an unexpected accident interrupt their life, like getting run over by a bus or struck down by a dangerous disease.
If you withdraw from the courses for medical reasons, your university will likely adjust your transcript in some way that reflects that as well (e.g., deleting courses or marking them withdrawn) rather than simply leaving a bad mark that looks like you simply failed.  That will help.
Whether or not your university adjusts your transcript, however, if you feel comfortable sharing some information about your accident, most employers you'd want to work for will not hold it against you that you were run over by a bus.  In this case, I would advise three steps:

Include a very brief note on your resume explaining the gap (e.g., "Took an extra year to graduate due to injury in an accident."). This will help get you past initial filtering.
Be prepared to say a little more about it if asked during an interview. You might even turn this into a positive by noting how you've worked through adversity.
Don't let it be a big part, however, as it shouldn't be an important part of what you will contribute at your workplace.  Even if you need a significant physical accommodation (e.g., your accident has left you partially paralyzed), with a good employer that should be an afterthought of how to arrange your work environment rather than a consideration in hiring you.

Some types of accident, however, will likely prejudice many employers against you (e.g., overdosing on heroin, failed suicide attempt). Whether or not this is justified, you should expect that if you do not provide information about your accident, some employers will fill in the blank with their worst imaginings.


text:
Changing interests after joining grad school
I joined graduate school in the US with interests in theoretical chemistry/chemical physics. Though I was enrolled for a PhD in chemistry, I was taking classes in physics for an entire year. This made me realize that I was more interested in physics related research than my current work in theoretical chemistry. While I was still in a dilemma, I convinced myself that I should continue in chemistry and joined my current advisor's group. Things were going fine for a while until I ended up having a minor confrontation with my advisor that made me feel sick about myself. I didn't know some of the basic things he was asking me and I was left stupefied by him. This made me think if I really wanted to pursue research in this direction. As a reaction to the flashpoint I had hit, I approached another professor in the physics department. While he rejected my request, he also notified my current advisor about my intentions. I really didn't mean to hurt my current advisors' feelings about this but, I was dumbstruck when he confronted me about my emails to another professor and accused me of unethical behavior. I am really confused about what to do with my situation. There have been a few students who have had similar issues of feeling disconnected from their research in my current research group, in a case even one of them switched to another group abruptly.
What should I do if my current advisor decides to step down?
Edit
How do I really find out what I am passionate about and is there a way to separate the reality from noise?

Things were said between the two professors that you couldn't control. It puts you in a difficult position, but might also be an opportunity.
To switch fields you need to satisfy the university about some things, but also find an advisor in the new field. Either of these could be a stumbling block. The worst case, I think is that you need to find a new university, but that isn't entirely uncommon. It would cost you a bit of time, of course.
But there is little worse than spending your life doing things that don't interest you. There is no replay button on life.
Re-evaluate both your desires and your options. But also connect to those at the current university who see you in a positive light. They can also give you advice.
FWIW, I think your advisor behaved badly in making accusations against you. I don't see your explorations as unethical in any way.

But, given that I am an international student and the current cycle of admissions has ended for grad schools in the US, I really don't know what to do? I mean I am really confused about my desire to do anything at this point, as I am threatened of lossing whatever I have.

Talk to someone local that you trust. Preferably someone who knows the local educational system and the options better than yourself. As an international student your options may be narrower, especially with the pandemic raging now. But think long term about where you want to get to. In the US there may be some administrative solutions. The head of department might be a useful person to talk to - maybe both in chemistry and in physics.

But, I don't know if there's anyone who would be willing to do that.

Another student might suggest someone. There might also be an office at the U that deals with special student problems and can intervene.

I feel like a big part of the problem here is that by the time you're at the PhD level of work, you're expected to know that you want to do that work.  You're making an enormous commitment to go through a PhD, and, rightly or wrongly, the time for flirting with different majors is when you're in undergrad.
At least that's how it's "supposed" to work, and is likely what both of these professors expected of you.
I don't mean to make you feel bad here; what I'm wondering is if you've asked yourself if a PhD is really right for you.  Why did you start a PhD in chemistry in the first place? Was there something you loved about the subject that made you want to go this far, or was it an ill-thought out decision to begin with?  If it was a good decision at the time, then is this really a change in your interests, or is it just a reaction to the difficulty of PhD work?  It's quite normal to get discouraged and/or become sick of your work as a PhD student - it's something we all push through.  Or was it just a reaction to the confrontation with your adviser, and can you get back on track by clearing that up?  Are your reasons for changing to physics more compelling than the reasons you had for starting chemistry, or are you just repeating any previous mistakes?
If you've asked yourself hard questions like this and are sure you should be here, you need to commit.  Fully and right away.  The whole thing with being a chemistry student while taking physics classes seems bizarre to me.  Assuming you are funded through chemistry, I'm surprised you were even able to do that.   Regardless, I would strongly discourage you from continuing anything similar.
If you do decide to stick with chemistry, get with your adviser and have a frank talk, right away.  Explain what happened and express your commitment to continuing on.  If you decide to change to physics, Buffy had some advice in his answer.  All I would add is that you shouldn't lead on your current adviser and take up their time if you're not committed to staying, so start collecting information and make a decisive move.  And if, when I said "you need to commit" above you though "Well that doesn't help!  Where do I commit?" then it comes back to asking why you want to do a PhD in the first place.  Maybe consider some time off to re-evaluate?

Taking classes in Physics is a very common thing for most PhD students in physical and theoretical chemistry, infact it was my advisor who suggested me to do so in the first place. As most of our research involves the implementation of quantum mechanics, statistical physics and a lot tools from mathematical physics. The first thing that drew me close to this subject was that it was the closest I could get to physics. For some reasons I didnt realise that until I had come to grad school that I was more inclined towards these ideas.

But, as I reflect I am not completely against my current line of work as I further ponder over this situation, I see it as my frustration about my advisor pushing me towards research while I was getting overwhelmed with coursework and Teaching duties.

That seems like a really solid reflection to have.  I hope you can clear the air with your adviser and refocus successfully.  Good luck.

But if things go south, what are my options given what has happened so far.

I'm not sure there's any way we can answer that for you.  Go talk to your adviser, apologize (it doesn't matter so much whether YOU think you need to; your adviser clearly thinks you do) and express your desire to get back to work.  If it goes poorly and there's no way to rectify it, you'll need to ask your adviser and/or department what next.


text:
General guidelines for those who do not have college degree and are not students but they could publish an article?
I am amateur mathematician with some formal training but am not a student and did not get some college degree, but, much of the time (really really too much) I think about mathematics and mathematical tasks and problems and I expand my knowledge of and about mathematics.
Sometimes I am solving some (mostly) undergraduate exercises, and sometimes I even do try to settle some unsolved problems.
Of course, if I dwell onto and into some mathematical theory, I try to understand basics and then the more general results.
Now, there are some ideas and a few results on the papers next to me, but I am extremely non-motivated to do the research in the future because of lack of support.
I can expect that even if I prove something of major interest, or if I prove something known by some other methods, that my work will hardly be published, because of lack of support.
So, if really I have written some results which could be published in some journal, or if I prove in the future something worthy of publishing, what are your general guidelines of what to do?

Sorry to have to say it, but the first step is to assure yourself that you aren't a crank. You don't sound like someone trying to "square the circle", so the first comment was just for completeness. But if you aren't sure about the validity of your research then getting some feedback on it from a pro would be helpful. Perhaps you are close enough to some university to make contacts and talk about what value your ideas might have.
But in the final analysis, you publish in a journal by submitting your work to the journal. If you get desk-rejected by an editor you have some information that your work isn't up to the required standard. But otherwise your work will be given to experienced reviewers for comment.
You don't need any credential or affiliation to publish. Just quality work.
Longer term, however, forming some circle of collaboration can help get you in the game. It can help you up your game as well.

You don't say what you mean by "lack of support". If you edit the question to add more, I might have more to say as well.

it seems (at least to me) that i have proven elementarily that if k>1 and b>1 then n!+k=m^b has a finite number of solutions n_1,...n_a and this is already proven somewhere, but only by assuming abc-conjecture of which there is no proof (one, but controversial and largely unaccepted) and i think that this result could be published somewhere, this is just me giving you an example of some of my findings

I won't discourage you at all. But collaboration and feedback are good. Submit and learn.

I'll also note, as I have elsewhere here, that proofs are more "interesting" than theorems, especially if the give new insights. So an elementary proof of anything is a good thing.

@Ante: Especially in Number Theory, journals will often just ignore amareur mathematicians. So, please talk before to some mathematicians who you are on a friendly basis with (ie a friend who is phd or prof). Convince them first and pay them a glass of wine for their help.

Perhaps you could 'practice' by submitting solutions to the venerable 'Problems and Solutions' in either the College Mathematics Journal or the American Mathematical Monthly.  I submitted a solution to this in my student days (early Pleistocene...) and they published it.  These journals are great for amateur mathematicians.


text:
Acknowledging local government for quarantine measures
It looks like I may completely write a paper while in coronavirus-related quarantine.  Would it be appropriate to thank my local government in the acknowledgements?  If I'm honest with myself, I don't think I would have been able to do this with such focus and efficiency if all other aspects of my life hadn't been suddenly shut down.
People often acknowledge visits to other institutions, which seem to serve a similar purpose, hence why I pose the question seriously.
Edit: I'm also in an at-risk group, and the government-mandated quarantine is kind of saving my life, so there's also that.

The answer to this is no.

When this is all over, and most of your readers will probably know multiple people who died during the crisis, this would not be a good luck.

All other factors aside, publicly presenting yourself as someone who benefited from a crisis that is causing untold misery around the world sounds like — how to say this politely? — not an amazing idea.

I meant a "good look"

Let’s just say that my opinion of you and your work would not be enhanced by reading such an ‘acknowledgement’.

To be honest, that sounds more like an acknowledgement to the Corona virus for arranging focus time for you. And no, that doesn't sound good.

Really glad I asked.  You all have provided some interesting perspectives!

People reading the paper will probably not know you are in a risk group.

@user111388 Unless I tell them!  But I won't, because who cares?

Yes, I meant to say that I don't think people will understand the acknowledgement as "he is in a critical group, so he thanks the government" but rather as "thias strange guy wants to be funny over a catasteophe".

Caveat auctor: In a year or two, once the cases of suicide, domestic violence and obesity caused by the quarantine have been tallied, you might not be very proud of that acknowledgment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaTRBipzxtc  Some academics seem to be out of touch.

Turning it around, you could possibly dedicate the work to everyone that had to work through the quarantine to keep you, your community, and all safe. I don't believe that would be misconstrued. After all while the government ordered, it's the people that do... the government won't die, but people will.

@J.Hirsch You're right. Acknowledgements saying "I want to thank people that kept me and my family alive" does not sound bad.

I decided to elevate my comment to an answer.

When this is all over, and most of your readers will probably know multiple people who died during the crisis, this would not be a good [look].

This is a global crisis that is only just beginning. By the time the dust settles, millions may have died from the virus alone. It would be a rare reader who does not personally know someone affected. More will have died because of how overwhelmed the global healthcare system is.
Even more will be affected by the economic fallout.
Viral infections can have lifelong consequences, even if you live.
If you're in a medical field, many of  your readers will be caregivers who were worked to the bone for months, and had to make impossible triage decisions.
For your readers, researchers are forced to halt research, often at great expense. Many studies cannot be paused for three months and picked up at the same place.
And you're proposing to put in your acknowledgements "gee I got so much done while quarantined!" This is offensive at best, and obscene at worst. We in universities are extremely lucky that our pay will most likely not be stopped, and we can just pick up and work from home. That is not happening for most of the nation.
Frankly, I would be ashamed to be your co-author, and if you were in my field, put you on blast across every channel I knew how. Do not do this.

Thank you for your perspective. Your insight caused me to update my answer. Just because someone can do something doesn't mean they should do something.

This is a great perspective, and why I accepted it.  BUT your answer might be assuming that I'm 100% healthy myself.  (I'm not.)  The quarantine thus far has protected me and my co-author (also in the at-risk group), which is one reason we're kind of grateful to the government.

@artificial_moonlet Well, what you said was I don't think I would have been able to do this with such focus and efficiency. That's a far cry from "I am thankful to my government for keeping my safe by implementing social distancing"

@AzorAhai They can both be true.

@artificial_moonlet It wasn't clear that was your perspective. I think you risk it being taken extremely poorly. Stay safe.

millions will have died from the virus alone. [Citation needed] especially on the alone part

Regarding "if you were in my field, put you on blast across every channel I knew how.", I would find such behavior unscientific since you choose to put somebody on blast not for their academic contents, but for one sentence in their acknowledgements.

@user897029 What on earth is "unscientific" about blasting somebody on social media about their bad taste in acknowledgements? It may or may not be the best idea (I have personally found social media witch hunts to be extremely unproductive use of my time), but it's in no way scientific misconduct.

@user897029 I did not claim it to be scientific.

@xLeitix I read "every channel" to include scientific channels as well. For example, putting someone on blast there might mean to deny collaboration. (I am not a native speaker, so might be mistaken on my reading.)

@user897029 No, to "put on blast" would mean things like Twitter (not that I'm particularly active on Twitter), or other avenues, like the relevant disciplinary committee, if the fallout is as bad as I fear it might reach. But yes, I would not be too interested in collaborating with someone that wrote an acknowledgment as the original, unedited Q proposed.

@JeffreysupportsMonica Point taken, but I maintain that it will be a rare person whose life was not impacted by this crisis.

@JeffreysupportsMonica Clearly he’s expecting a lot of people to die from a Mad Max-style societal collapse. ;)

Also, for what it's worth, I don't think that something like "I would like to thank the government of [area] for saving my life with their quick and effective actions in enforcing quarantine during the Covid-19 epidemic" would be offensive.

@nick012000 That's not how the question read when I answered. It only said I don't think I would have been able to do this with such focus and efficiency if all other aspects of my life hadn't been suddenly shut down.

@JeffreysupportsMonica there are almost 8 billion people on this planet. If only 10% of them catch this and only 1% of those people die, that will be millions of people dead. Those numbers are both optimistic compared to current projections, so it seems like a reasonable statement.

@JeffreysupportsMonica As Kat also said, millions could die from the virus alone, not even including the death from the overwhelmed healthcare system. See this article: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf This is quite an established prediction and fear within epidemiology and public health, hence why governments are taking such strong actions.

To me, it would seem unusual and tongue-in-cheek to acknowledge a person or organization who did not make any conscious effort to assist you. Acknowledgements are typically used as a means of recognizing the effort of others and thanking them for their contribution. Your local government's quarantine may have incidentally benefited you, but no effort was put into helping you with your paper.
This would seem like thanking the local lottery for making you independently wealthy enough to pursue research, or thanking the local government for a parade that really got you inspired, or thanking Ikea for the comfortable bed you bought there - none of those things relate to your study or were specifically intended to benefit it. You might as well acknowledge the weather, as it is equally indifferent to your manuscript's success.

To add to the other answers, which already clarified the problem with your idea quite clearly, if you truly are grateful to the government and to your community for helping to protect you and other at-risk individuals, there are many ways to show your appreciation that would be more meaningful than a perfunctory acknowledgement in a paper, which frankly no one in the government will ever read, or care about if they did.
Specifically, it would be much more helpful to express your appreciation to the local health authorities on social media or by writing blog posts and newspaper letters/opinions, or to donate money to local charities that are helping your community deal with this crisis. You can also donate your time and skills to help, say, mentor local community college students who are struggling with learning difficult material through online instruction. Perhaps this may come at a small cost to your scientific productivity, but it would be a much more meaningful and genuine expression of gratitude and likely to be much better received.

I'm going to agree with the consensus and say this is definitely a bad idea. I don't think it's nearly as bad as the higest-voted answer (by Azor Ahai) suggests.
It's neither wrong nor particualarly unusual for acknowledgements to be humorous and personal. However, inclusion of humor into published papers is a risky business - to make a successful joke, you need to understand your audience, which is difficult face to face and nigh impossible in writting. Hence, it's generally best to stick to jokes that cannot possibly be construed as offensive, no matter who reads them. Want to thank your cat - sure, go ahead, nobody is going to be offended by a feline. Puns are fine too, some people will roll they eyes, some will chuckle, but none will feel personally hurt. Jokes about an epidemic are a different matter entirely.
I personally would appreciate a flippant remark like the one you mention - if it was coming from a colleague who knows that neither me nor anyone within earshot was personally affected by the pandemic, beyond the inconvenience of having to stay at home. Even if we were being personally affected, I could see myself enjoying some dark humor (e.g. coming from a friend who was actually infected and reached some breakthrough during that time). The problem with putting it in writting is that it will be read by many people who lost their loved ones during the pandemic, and barring a miracle all of us will soon know someone who lost someone. Many of these people will be offended and will not see the fine line between making jokes about the daily life during the pandemic and making jokes about people dying in the pandemic.

If you sincerely want to thank them you can try. The journal might make you remove it. A 2019 PLOS article did a review of acknowledgements. One quote from the article demonstrates you're not the first person to be uncertain about acknowledgment:

The literature also underlines the elusive nature of acknowledgements, pointing to their form and tone, which have been described as sometimes flowery, personal, and even manipulative

An Insider Higher Ed post by Glen Wright rounded up The best academic acknowledgements ever. Some examples describe similar situations to yours:

Others explain the occasionally unusual circumstances surrounding their work:

“Most of the paper was written during my daily commute from Vancouver to Surrey, Canada, and I would like to acknowledge TransLink, Metro Vancouver’s regional transportation authority, for making the task of writing in buses and trains such an enjoyable exercise.”

“If the book is not a success, I dedicate it to the burglars in Boulder, Colorado, who broke into our house and stole a television, two typewriters, my wife Helen's engagement ring and several pieces of cheese, somewhere about a third of the way through Chapter 8.”

Although, just because you can, it does not mean you should. In this case, you may want to think about the tone of your acknowledgement. As noted by Azor Ahai's answer, there is a large chance your action will quite likely be taken in bad taste and tarnish your reputation as both a scientist and decent human.

I think they are not similar. The first is just funny, the second one affects only the author, not the reader.

The acknowledgments are the one location in a paper where you can put personal stuff, sometimes not to be take too seriously. I have a paper in which I thank jet-lag for giving me the nocturnal clarity of mind to write most of the paper in one (very early) morning. A colleague thanks a particular brewery for their product. I think it is fair game to put a tongue-in-cheek acknowledgment into a paper.
I do appreciate @AzorAhai's perspective on the issue, but I don't share his opinion.
(If you do want to try: Put the acknowledgment in after review is over and your paper is in its last edits. You're unlikely to be called out by anyone at this point ;-) )

What OP is asking about seems less comparable to thanking a brewery for making a beer that you like, and rather more similar to thanking a brewery for a food poisoning event that led to your main competitor dying...

@DanRomik: No, not really. The OP does say "I'm also in an at-risk group, and the government-mandated quarantine is kind of saving my life, so there's also that." That seems very different from what you're suggesting. I don't know where you actually are, but it's worth pointing out that not all governments around the world have approached the current situation with the same indifference and ineptitude as the US government have; some actually do deserve credit.

Readers don't know the context of OP being a risk peesion. They will assume what @DanRomik says.

@WolfgangBangerth yes, really

Nothing to stop his acknowledgement for saying he (and the co-author) were in the high risk group.


text:
How is the production of a Festschrift usually initiated?
For the first time I have been asked to contribute to a Festschrift. I was surprised to read in the invitation that it is being prepared "in consultation with XY's institution and himself". I had always expected that the book would be a surprise for the honouree. I also don't quite understand what role the institution has to play in this. So how is a Festschrift usually initiated?

Do we assume Germany?

Perhaps it has been found that some people don’t want a big celebration like a Festschrift.

@SolarMike the Netherlands, but I suppose that's not wildly different.

There is no standard, but most frequently, the 'birthday child' themselves initiate the Festschrift. This may be disillusioning, but it is the reality. I can say that as someone who has been involved with a few Festschriften (including once as an editor).
Only in exceptional cases can I imagine a Festschrift being initiated without the jubilarian's knowledge. In such cases, the jubilarian should have an extremely high reputation; otherwise it is improbable that people would voluntarily use so much resources to initiate and edit such a huge (and not-so-rewarding) project.
But as stated above, usually, it is the jubilarian who expresses a wish to have a Festschrift. They then need to convince friends to take the time to serve as editors. The jubilarian and their friend-editors coordinate the whole Festschrift together so as to ensure that the jubilarian's wishes and preferences are satisfied. (There are quite some sensitivities and vanity involved, e.g. who should contribute, who must not contribute, who and how many hundreds or thousands of people should be listed in the Tabula Gratulatoria etc.)
As regards the involvement of the institution in your case, I can imagine that the institution may have provided a part of the budget (or perhaps administrative work or materials). A Festschrift consumes a lot of money, time and work. The help of an institution can be immensely valuable.


text:
What to do if my undergrad hasn't prepared me well for grad school?
I will soon graduate with a data science MSc and am specializing in AI/machine learning, in which I would like to do research. I can read, understand and apply research papers pretty well, but I don't feel like I have the background to actually do research. When an author derives something, I sometimes need a few minutes to make sure that the math is sound. This comes from the fact that my undergrad school is only really good at teaching software development, and most of the courses I could take ended up being linked to that, neglecting the mathematical side of things.
The most worrying thing is that I don't feel completely sure about my choice of fields, since I have not been exposed to serious courses in most subjects that interest me. My bad results in math years ago were not from lack of interest, and I would have liked to take some serious courses in math and related areas, and give myself some time to decide what to do. This will probably become harder when I enter the job market. I may also have good PhD opportunities in machine learning through my job, which makes it even riskier to leave and start another degree without being sure I will like the field and do well in it.
I have started working through textbooks in various areas (linear and abstract algebra, statistics, machine learning), but without a clear plan, it's hard to prioritize self-study and focus effectively. There are too many interesting areas and not enough time and energy to learn all of them. Finally, I can't be sure that I am learning well or just getting the illusion of progress, since a set of textbooks can't replace a structured degree program.
How can I make sure that I'm ready and in the right field when I start applying for grad school? I'm not afraid of "losing" a few years to get another degree, if that's part of the answer.

I don't feel like I have the background to actually do research. — Nobody does.  If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be research.

@JeffE, hmmm. plagiarizing Einstein now???

undergrad. is mostly about teaching the minimally required skills to get a job; YOU have to put something on that base to do whatever you want.

"When an author derives something, I sometimes need a few minutes to make sure that the math is sound" - actually, normally it takes some time to understand some mathematical reasoning (which really is written as a shorthand - otherwise, papers would often be hundreds of pages long).  It doesn't sound to make like evidence that you're underprepared.

“When an author derives something, I sometimes need a few minutes to make sure that the math is sound.” – apart from the fact that it's normal to need some time to understand it... in the machine learning community you'll have plenty of company who just don't make sure of such things. Most don't really care about sound maths. (Whether they should care more about it is debatable.)

When I was an undergrad, I had a friend in grad school who often worried that she didn't have a good enough base in math. She seems to be doing fine now. I did a math undergrad, so I thought I would have a great math background. But, guess what, I am in grad school now and "doing research" is still challenging. I feel the best case scenario is that one becomes more comfortable with uncomfortable math.

I guess an aspect you are facing right now, is, that ML is a very large landscape - every science is but especially here is a lot coming up all in parallel: Pure mathematics (algebra, optimization, calculus,..), statistics (tests, bayesian, regression,..), data science (neural networks, svm, forests,..), computer science (algorithms, data sctructures,..), software (R, python, AWS, dockers,..) and then add the field of interest (engineering, science, politics,..).
It is very hard to catch up on everything there..  you will always have to focus at least on something and neglect something else.

@Buffy I think you misspelled "standing on Einstein's shoulders"

Just a guess, but the guess is that you are uniformly underestimating your own skills and the quality of your education. You say "When an author derives something, I sometimes need a few minutes to make sure that the math is sound." Well, it might take me hours or days.
You are undecided about field and find a lot of interesting things that you might study. This is natural, but could be a block, since doctoral study is all about specialization. So, pick something that seems the most interesting to you and that seems to have some future possibilities. Apply to a program that is good in that field and find an advisor. You will be led toward specialization over a year or so and your research will lead you deeper.
There are two hard parts to research (well, maybe three). You need to find a suitable problem and you need to find a way to resolve it. (The third is, in some fields, coming up with a methodology for the resolution). An advisor can be helpful, especially, in coming up with a problem - or at least suggesting several, or pointing you at places that might be hiding problems.
But you won't know until you get into the thick of it.
And, for all of the "other" cool things that you leave behind by specializing, they aren't closed off from you forever. But first, get a doctorate so that you again have freedom to pursue whatever interests you.
Some people (myself) have changed fields quite drastically for many reasons. Some because of the academic economy at the time, but others (not me) have actually invented new fields. Some just followed their thoughts and branched off into a new area.
As a researcher you are currently unformed. The forming will come through practice and with the (hopefully good) guidance of an advisor.
Narrow your focus a bit. Apply to a good school. Find a good advisor. Work hard. Hopefully success will come, but satisfaction probably will in any case.

I don't feel like I have the background to actually do research

Undergraduate degrees do not (generally) prepare you for research. By teaching software development and neglecting the mathematical side, your school prepared students for the workplace, rather than academia, which is their job.

How can I make sure that I'm ready and in the right field when I start applying for grad school?

Apply, learn what you need once hired, and hone in on your field as you go.
Ultimately, [t]here are too many interesting areas and not enough time [nor] energy to learn all of them. That's not a problem, you can just learn what you need. Your supervisor will help you.

The second part of my question is about choosing between math, machine learning and other fields, not just between different areas of the same field. I’m not sure I can do that when I’m far enough in the process to have a PhD advisor. I don’t have an undergraduate advisor, if that’s what you meant.

Also, I can’t get accepted into anything without the basic background knowledge that a good undergrad gives you, which other candidates will probably have. The “once hired” in your answer seems optimistic to me.

@Hey The second part of my question Please ask one question at a time. (For math, mathine learning, and other fields, I'd suggest computer science.)

@Hey I can’t get accepted into anything without the basic background knowledge Presumably you have basic knowledge. The “once hired” in your answer seems optimistic to me. Most PhD students start with only knowledge from a undergraduate, a postgraduate degree, or both. (It its unclear what degrees you have. An MSc is usually a postgraduate degree.)

(My question was about how I don't feel prepared in general, not being sure of my field is part of this. I'll open another question if necessary.)

I forgot to mention that I'm in Europe. In my country, a master is more like a US undergraduate degree. Though it's a master, the courses were very basic, focused on the programming side, and I definitely don't have the knowledge that students get at better schools. In practice, my degree is named "computer science", but I don't feel I've learned much more than coding. I really don't know anything beyond my first two years of math, and as a result I can't know what fields I would like.

@Hey It seems like you have many questions... Regarding I can't know what fields I would like, I don't think many PhD students do! They hone in.


text:
How do you know if a journal is registered on PubMed
I have several research projects that I am looking to publish but as a young research who is new to the field I am confused as to which journal to submit to.
I know that to get published on PubMed you have to publish on a journal that has been accepted by Medline or PMC. When I look up journals a few say they are affiliated with PubMed but do not specify if this affiliation is through Medline or PMC. Does this mean that mentioning Medline or PMC is not necessary and a PubMed affiliation is all that matters?
In the medical field what seems to matter is being published on PubMed regardless of the journal you published with. This means that submitting to a less known journal which is affiliated with PubMed will guarantee your research is published and available on PubMed. This seems to me that you can make your life easier by always submitting to a less known journal and in the end enjoying the same benefits as a publication in a well known journal.
Is this all that there is to it?

You added the research-undergraduate tag, so I assume you're in undergrad.  You should really involve an adviser from your faculty in this.  Not only would they help you with improving your research and potentially recommend you for grad programs, they would answer questions like this as well.


text:
Can I still ask my prospective advisor (guide) for a confirmation letter in the middle of Covid-19
I am a masters of mathematics student in Asia and I wrote to some professors for PH D position in number theory. One of the professors in France said yes to me but he said that I should look for other sources of funding as his university didn't had PhD funding at that time. There is one scholarship Foundation in my country where I was thinking of applying as a potential candidate. But the Conditions are that I should have a written appropval from my prospective guide.
In between I began preparing for my mid term exams and then appearing for them and masters dissertation viva . As I got spare time, the covid-19  outbreak spread. It's not to worry about here but I came to know through news that it's very serious in France and whole Europe. Also, last date for applying to scholarship portal is 31 March and it will not be extended.

So , should I ask to my prospective guide to write a confirmation letter in the middle of Covid-19 in his country. Doesn't this show that I am an emotionless person with no etiquette at all who doesn't even care about in what situation my prospective guide, his family and his colleagues are?

I am really sorry for putting unrelated title. It was of another question I wanted to ask but found answer in related questions. Inconvenience caused is regretted.

It is fine to ask. Life goes on as best we can manage. The situation is worldwide, of course, and we don't yet see the end of it.
In a letter, you could, if you wish, say you are sorry if the request is coming at a bad time and that you understand the global situation.
You may not be able to get a reply in time, of course, or at all. But there is no problem asking. There is only a week left.
And note that people will want to start up as normal again as soon as the situation allows. Things may be delayed.

Could the downvoter.please explain?


text:
Is it common for students to complain directly to deans, or for deans to review faculty's message to students?
I am a tenure track assistant professor in a relatively small university (approx. 6000 students).  Without giving too much identifiable details, I'll just way that a student was unhappy with some aspect of the course (e.g. grading scales) and filed a complaint directly to the department chair and the dean of the college without giving me any opportunity to respond.
I certainly believe I didn't do anything wrong.  At least no other student had a problem with the course.  But that's perhaps not important to my question. (Update: The department chair stated over phone conversations that (s)he does not believe I did anything wrong under the extraordinary situation that we and many other schools are facing. My tone, in email messages, is professional but cold. E.g., using "Mr." rather than first name, using "I can..." rather than "I'll be more than happy to...". The Chair said (s)he would not consider this to be an issue. So while it's less than perfect, the Chair cleared of wrongdoing in private)
Surprisingly, the dean of my college got involved directly.  Sending detailed instruction through the chair telling me what to do.  After several rounds of negotiation, I gave the student exactly what this student demanded.  But still, the dean does not like my tone.  My messages to this student now have to be reviewed to make sure I sounded friendly and helpful.
This whole thing strike as rather strange.  My question is how common are these?  Is it common for students to complain to a dean and get their support?  Is it common for a dean to get directly involved like this?
A bonus question is, as a tenure track person, what should I do?  (Shut up, do what they say, and update my resume, just in case?)

This whole things strikes me as rather strange too. However, the answer to this question rather depends on how exactly the "several rounds of negotiation" went. Did the dean initially ask for your version of events, and did the dean take this information into account?

Frankly, I'm worried that "But still, the dean does not like my tone. My messages to this student now have to be reviewed to make sure I sounded friendly and helpful." implies that you aren't free from fault here. Perhaps you responded inappropriately to a student if the dean feels the need to monitor your communication. I'd recommend some self-analysis here.

Nobody ever believes that they did anything wrong. Maybe you're getting railroaded. Maybe you need to act like a professional. Part of your job is dealing with problem students and if you can't do it you need to find a new job.

No, I was never given the opportunity to present my side of the story.  I was only given instructions from the Dean which were based on students complaints.  There were complaints that are not reality-based.

If you're at a small, well-regarded (expensive) liberal arts school then the student probably has mommy and daddy power. This is a common situation and you can't do anything about it. It doesn't reflect anything about you and is unlikely to hurt you during tenure review a few years down the line.

Some complaints were are not reality-based.  E.g., I failed to respond to student's concern for a week (True, but that was the Spring break);  I accused the student missing many classes (True, but I pointed out in a polite way because attendance is an important item in my grading scale, which was the central question); I gave an F mid-term grade even though (s)he is doing great (True, but score<30% by mid-term is indeed an F).

I think if the issue is mostly about tone, you could download Grammarly, which will alert you to your emails’ tone in the future.

Let me stick to answering your questions directly.
Yes it is common for (a few) students to complain. Usually the complaints will go to department heads but, especially in a small place, might go directly to the dean. This might also be the case if the dean has a fairly public presence, as my own dean did.
No, it is pretty uncommon that a dean would want to monitor an individual faculty member directly, especially at so fine a grain as the communication with a particular student. They have a lot of tasks that would normally seem to be much more important. The fact that the dean is intervening directly here seems to imply that they think the situation is especially (important, disturbing, disruptive, ...). The implication is that it is important for you as well.
This can affect your future both locally and more generally. Good relations with students is an important selling point of many institutions, especially smaller ones. Your relationship with students generally can be an important consideration when it comes time for a tenure decision.
I don't have any knowledge of how you acted or whether it was appropriate or not, but the fact of the dean's intervention suggests that you need to take it as an important message. Some interactions with students are entirely inappropriate, even when the student has erred in some way.
If you have a trusted colleague, preferably tenured, I suggest that you review everything with them and see what advice they have for you.

As a tenure-track person who presumably has the goal of making tenure, you must fall in line with what your dean has prescribed as behavior commensurate with one of their department instructors. If you feel the student has violated some part of the institution's enrollment agreement or your syllabus, these violations should be enumerated for your dean. However, if the dean is talking about tone and messaging, then this is likely an issue of your dean feeling like one of their tenure-track folks are not falling in line with what is expected of a tenured professor at your institution.
This question--and any answer, frankly--is very specific to your institution and your dean's management style, unfortunately. At the end of the day, if you want to make tenure, you need to consider that your dean will be a powerful voice during tenure review. Even if you don't intend to speak to your students in the way that you feel runs counter to your personal understanding of best practices, I think anyone else would recommend that a tenure-track person ought to focus on behavior and strategies that would more likely result in a positive tenure review.
That means, unfortunately, that you must start sanding down parts of your puzzle pieces so that they're fit with the existing puzzle.


text:
When are there reasons to cite more or fewer sources?
As a young scholar I was paranoid about accusations that I hadn't read the literature, so I tended to cite lots of papers. More recently, I've noticed an  elegance in relying on fewer of them.
Trimming the fat in general results in fewer citations, but is the number of citations in an article itself of any interest? Are there contexts when loads of sources, or few sources, are preferred?

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/46324/20058

Assuming you want to be helpful to the readers (without regard for pleasing the authors of the cited articles), this depends on whether you are writing a guide to the literature, or merely explaining facts and results.
A guide to the literature should include many sources, while saying something useful on these sources. An explanation of facts and results should include as few sources as necessary for the reader to understand.
Not all articles need to include complete guides to the literature. It is not very useful to write a half-baked guide with many sources but no precise hints of why these sources should be interesting to the reader.


text:
COVID-19 - Is it okay to send emails this time for post-doc position?
I will be submitting my Ph.D. thesis in the comming two months. From last one month I was sending email to professors for post-doc position but from last week I have stopped sending emails requesting for post-doc position due COVID -19. Although the impact of this virus in my country is less. I am in a confusion whether or not to send an email regarding post-doc position at this time?

Why not? What is alternative?

Yes, by all means keep looking for a position. The future is unknown. Things may settle down or not, but it would be a mistake to wait until they do before you even begin a search. But email responses may be slower than usual and people may need to be more tentative. Expect that.
I suspect things will be hard for a while, but no one expects it to be permanent.
You can't win the game if you don't play.

Is it okay to email multiple potential supervisors for post-doc position?

Yes, fine now, as always. Good luck.


text:
May a piece of results be presented in two theses?
Let A be a Ph.D. student who had defined a master project for a master student called B. The topic was indeed a part of the overall Ph.D. problem statement of A. To make it feasibly doable by B, A had already planned the solution strategy, but the detailed composition of a solution and its implementation had to be handled by B. The project was indeed a small open problem whose solution was achieved by extensive participations of A, as well. The project was successfully finished, and B wrote his master thesis including the results. Moreover, a paper was published whose writer and the first author was A. When A starts to write his thesis, may he also bring those results in his own ph.D. thesis? In one hand, those results partially do also belong to him letting him logically claim those contributions. On the other hand, bringing the already-published-in-B-thesis results in his thesis may be an instance of plagiarism.
What's the workaround for A?

This is a question for the advisor(s) and/or the university. You avoid plagiarism, however, by citation as needed, possibly cross citation for things published simultaneously.

@Buffy: What is the definition of "simultaneous publications"? The master thesis (and their paper) had been published over 2 years before the composition of A's thesis. I guess this wouldn't fit the class of simultaneous publications, would it?

No, the old paper can't cite the newer one. But the new one needs to cite the old.


text:
Can UK university require you email from @ac.uk, not OutLOOK?
I have children who attend UK universities. Because GDPR, the university forbids email forwarding or accessing @ac.uk on Outlook. However, the university's @ac.uk system is more user unfriendly than Outlook, and they prefer to use Outlook!
Some instructors and department admin agree, and are willing to email both her Outlook and and her @ac.uk account. However, others order her to email them from just her @ac.uk, and refuse email to her Outlook account.

Should she be required to send email from just @ac.uk account?
Because of freedom of speech, we can't force people to email her Outlook. With that said, how can we sway instructors to include her Outlook account as well?

Can you not just get your ac.uk account to forward the emails to your outlook address?

Is this a joke question?

I voted to close because this question is about software/undergraduate life and not specific to academia.  Any business could have this issue.

@AnonymousPhysicist I disagree. Most businesses have a different relationship with their customers or clients than universities do with their students.

I think the question would have potential if it were phrased in a more general way: "Can a university require you to email from a university-affiliated email, and not a personal email?" As it is it reads as quite specific, and I think it should be closed.

@user111388 Speaking as someone who works in the UK; I don't think this is a joke question, but as Dmitry explains below it seems to be based on some misunderstandings

@rob no. university banned email forward.

@user111388 no. why you think this is joke?

@DanielPark: It seems strange to be that children would not ask this question themselves if they had this problem. And because "LOOK" is in caps.

I am afraid that your question is based on a wrong premise, which I will try to correct.

Most (if not all) universities in the UK give their students and staff an email address in zone .ac.uk.
Most universities in the UK provide their email via outlook services. Outlook is a product/service offered by an international company which has physical servers in many countries, including UK, which make them GDPR-compliant. They can even install a server on University premises if required.
University staff are discouraged to reply to student emails coming from external addresses. The reason is GDPR or pre-GDPR data protection measures: there is no simple way to check whether an email from john.doe@obscure.server.com really comes from John Doe. That's why staff will usually only respond to university email addresses, which can be verified by University IT.
You can configure an email client (e.g. Outlook) on your computer to work with a university email address and it will be as friendly as your personal email.

In fact where I work it is policy to have any official correspondence with students or applicants through university-based email addresses.  The university does keep track of (or at least has access to) login details and various metadata, could search emails in case of dispute.  The attachments are also scanned for virus.  The major drawback is that format commonality makes this a juicy target for mass phishing emails, but this is no different than other institutions.  And of course the fundraisers can push their stuff even when you’re not yet out the door.

Additionally, university professors are busy people with lots of emails in their inboxes; requiring emails from students come from official university emails helps the professors find said emails and distinguish them from assorted spam emails.

Note: "Outlook" is not a company, it is a product (offered by Microsoft). Somewhat confusingly, MS offers several different products under this banner. And is not clear which ones the question (or the answer) are referring to.

@mmeent Thank you, I corrected my answer.

I think the deeper question (aside from some confusion what exactly Outlook / Microsoft Exchange is) is whether it is ok for an instruction to insist on receiving emails from the university-assigned email address rather than some private address (independently of whether that is Hotmail, GMail, or anything else).
The answer to this question will, as always, depend on published policy by the university. However, in the dark I would assume that instructors are in the right here. Normally, universities assign students email addresses under the assumption that this is the way how instructors and other staff communicate with students. If individual students prefer some other medium, or a different address, this is something that you can take into account as an instructor, but I would be surprised if the university explicitly mandates doing so.
As somebody teaching in a university where a lot of students are in the habit of using private email for course-related communication, I can attest that for the instructor this is often indeed rather inconvenient:

Private email addresses often use aliases that are not trivial to match to students on record, especially if the student is not from the same cultural region. This can be as harmless (but confusing) as students using a nickname that would require some detective work to match back to my records, but I have also received course inquiries from "Assbuster92" which, as you can imagine, is something I'd rather avoid.
An instructor may specifically insist on communicating via the official email address when discussing sensitive matters, such as grades. Frankly, for a private GMail account, I have no way of assessing whether I am currently sending private exam data to the person I think I am sending it to. GDPR may also play into this - I am not even allowed to send exams and other sensitive information to a server not authorized by the university, even if I had somehow verified that the owner of this GMail account is indeed the student in question.
For communication from me to the students (e.g., announcements), using anything but the official email address is very cumbersome or simply impossible. I don't have a list of privat student email addresses, and manually keeping track of which emails students use is frankly not a good use of my time in a class of any non-trivial size.
If I send students emails to their university address, but they send me questions from their private address, communication tends to get scattered, making it difficult for me to keep track of what we discussed / agreed.
Lastly, separating private and "work" life is a good habit that students should, in my opinion, adopt sooner rather than later. In any job they will work in the future, employers will also require them to use whatever email address they get assigned, even if said email address is not convenient to use for some reason. Forwarding work email to a private cloud service is strictly forbidden in any company with mature IT practices, so this is again not a habit that students should pick up.

This. This^2.  First and last bullet points each deserve at leats one upvote. All others are also true.

I am aware of UK universities that have the exact policies you describe. Some UK universities only allow their students to access their email through the web mail client (or their own app) and also do not permit (have disabled) facilities to forward or redirect incoming email to other addresses in other domains. Further they also actively prevent other mail clients accessing the mailbox for reading or sending of mail. They also do this for academic staff.
They do it for several reasons. As indicated in other answers it is a combination of several reasons:

It protects against address forgery and personation of staff and students. Students and staff should use their appropriate corporate mail address when communicating on university business.
It enforces GDPR so that messages and their contents are all retained within the organisation.
It allows users to be better protected against various forms of systemics attack, such as phishing and malware injection through centralised and orchestrated filtering of incoming mail.
It allows greater protection of the accounts, as university domain accounts are often ripe for take-over for further outgoing attacks.

However, even though I fully understand the reasons for the system, I am personally affected by it and find the user interface of the crippled mail clients quite an irritation. I also know that academic staff are also often unaware of how crippled the student email interface is compared to the staff provision!

Using their internal system also means they can reliably see whether (and when) a student received/read the email. In many institutions it is a requirement that students check their official email accounts at least daily.

GMail (and perhaps Outlook) can be configured to read and send email using POP3 and SMTP, if that's supported by the university. (Try searching the university's website, e.g., https://www.google.com/search?q=SMTP+site%3Acam.ac.uk, switching cam.ac.uk for the right URL.) Given that POP3 and SMTP are standard, the university would have had to adopt an non-standard solution to prevent such usage, which would cause many grumbles from the IT department (not to mention the many users that have been using email long before web interfaces existed).

Many UK universities DO adopt these  non-standard solutions and there ARE many grumbles as the question indicates...

@BrianTompsett-汤莱恩 Equally, many seemingly don't: https://www.google.com/search?q=POP3+SMTP+site%3Aac.uk Only the OP can check, unless they provide the name of the university in question


text:
How to reference a summary instead of the original sources?
I always get confused about this when referencing.
Example:
I am writing the Literature Review of my research on AI. I started with the history of AI.
I am reading a paper submitted by a university student online. The paper talks about Dr Turing's role and the Turing Test.
It also summarizes findings collected from different sources into one sentence. I would like to talk about that summary, rather than having to go back to 3 different sources for the original text. What is the right way to reference this? Is it the student's paper or the three original works?
Thank you,

Does this answer your question? Attributing Second-order Citations