Dr rer. nat. is viewed as the equivalent to a PhD and is the usual title for a science PhD in Germany. I've never met anyone with a Dr nat.med but it sounds as if it's PhD level.The one to be careful of is the Dr.med which is not PhD standard - it is a very short thesis, more like a masters one, for medicine students.

For a research job no, for a lectureship, yes, I think it would be a problem even at a research intensive institution. I was surprised how many questions I was asked in interviews about teaching experience. From what I've heard the political emphasis being put on improving university teaching and the impact of the NSS means that teaching matters in a way that it didn't so much 5 years ago. More to the point, if you haven't done any, how do you know you'd like to be a lecturer? I know several PhD students who very rapidly changed their minds after TA-ing for the first time, when they realised that for most academics in the social sciences, teaching and student-related matters are a very large part of the job and that they hated teaching.
But it's not too late. This is the time of year when teaching crises hit for next year, so I'd get a speculative application for TA work in at any nearby unis if your own doesn't offer any. When I was in my final year, I got offered teaching work at a new university in August as one of their army of underpaid part-timers decided to desert academia in search of a wage more in line with her qualifications.

I would let your supervisor know that you intend to graduate in person and add a friendly will I see you there question at the end of the email. When I graduated with my PhD, it was in a ceremony for all the PhDs from all over the university, so only supervisors attended (they couldn't have fitted all the university staff in the hall!) But I remember, my supervisor saying about another student that she'd no idea whether she was graduating or not, so she didn't know if she needed to attend or not, so I think the supervisors aren't told unless you do it. Your university might do things completely differently of course...

I'm just finishing a postdoc at a Russell Group university in a cognate discipline. My current dept has been effectively told by the faculty not to take anyone with less than a 60 average at MA level even if they are international students, because departments are now nationally monitored for completion rates in four years for all students and they don't want to take risks. I have no idea whether this is a widespread policy or not. Have you offered any explanation for the weak MA marks in your applications? If not, it might be worth you writing a supplementary letter explaining the situation. You could then also look at each institution and see if they offer a 1 year research track MA eg this at Sheffield http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/postgraduate/taught/courses/arts/philosophy/index.html like another poster suggested, and offer to enrol on that instead, if they don't think you're ready for a research degree.
Incidentally, (this is meant as a friendly warning not to commit a major faux pas, so please don't take it the wrong way) don't mention you opened those reference letters to the people concerned, as they will be upset at what they would consider a betrayal of trust. In the UK, it is the custom (and I know it is different elsewhere, where references aren't confidential or have to invariably be positive) for academics to write confidential and honest assessments of students applying for research degrees. Their own reputation is partially dependent on this among colleagues in other universities, as it is awful for the supervisor to realise early on in the PhD, that the person prof X said was really competent at this, in fact isn't, and is instead likely to contribute to their dropout figures looking bad. If your HoD is looking at an average of 52, and with no knowledge of your problems, then s/he really couldn't write anything terribly positive in the circumstances.

======= Date Modified 08 Jul 2010 21:29:51 =======
If it's in North America, I think this is fairly normal (at least I have two friends who this happened to). If they were willing to pay then they would have brought you over for interview, but for a fixed term postdoc, I can see (particularly if it's a state university in a state with financial problems) that they might think the costs are too high. There will be other people they interviewed, so you may find that they only give you a short time to decide. Basically, you just have to decide whether or not to take the risk.

Also given how awful the academic job market is right now, you might really want to think about how likely it is another position will come up. Judging by the amount of people I know struggling to get science postdocs, I'd say grab it, but only you know your situation. Could you get advice from your supervisor?

On the clothes question, I'd wear what you would for a job interview. Even if you feel over-dressed, you will give off professional and reliable signals. All the academic job interviews I've had, I've worn a suit.
Find out as much as you can about the project and the academic(s) leading it. Practice those answers that show how your current knowledge and skills are transferable. There probably will be less autonomy in terms of methods and approaches than in a self-designed project, as those will have had to be written into the grant proposal to get the funding.

I really hope you get it, but if you don't, please don't beat yourself up about not getting funding. The competition for PhD funding in the AHRC/ESRC subjects is ridiculous (and of course the struggle for an academic job at the end even worse), so it's really not a judgment on you particularly. There's no set time to do a PhD in life, so even if you don't do it now, it doesn't mean you're closing that path for good.

======= Date Modified 02 Jul 2010 18:27:57 =======
Yes. No harm in trying. I'd just use your cover letter to shown how you meet the appointment criteria for this job rather than waste space on explaining away your different sub-field. If you've got the basic degree, then a lot of research skills are transferable anyway.

Oh and given ads for lectureships and postdocs will be very thin on the ground, at least until universities know exactly how bad the cuts are going to be, an RA job is not to be sneezed at.

I'd definitely second the advice to check whether or not the world class institution actually delivers world class supervision and facilities. Sometimes the biggest names (universities & supervisors) are actually not the best for a PhD.
And also depends what you mean by second rate - I'd be hesitant about suggesting you did a PhD in a dept that didn't submit to the RAE, but if by second rate you mean Russell Group / 1994 group as opposed to Oxbridge then the difference is unlikely to effect your future career.

Not a scientist so apologies is this is way off your interests: I once met a guy who was doing an MSc in biophysics (at Manchester I think), who didn't have a degree in physics. I wonder whether a crossover type masters between the subjects might be worth investigating.

God knows where Goodboy is but it isn't in the UK that's for sure. Supervising PhD students is part of the basic lecturer job and every grade above it. You are allocated a low amount of hours for the task on the workload model (the 60 hours sounds about right) which does not in the slightest reflect what PhD students expect from you. It is often a thankless task as you are blamed for students failing to complete in four years regardless of the problems the students have in their personal lives. You do not get any extra pay and outside the sciences where you tell a PhD student what they do and thus can get publications / research support, you gain no material benefits whatsoever. Most supervisors try their best to help their students as best they can, but tbh it's more because they believe in furthering the future of their subject than because they are encouraged to by their employer. My Russell Group postdoc employer loses money on home/EU PhD students and consequently is encouraging academics only to take people who really are outstanding onto the PhD programme. And no, getting a PhD studentship is not viewed as a major research income achievement - more like a 'so why didn't you get a proper grant that employs postdocs' reaction....

Ah I thought it was somewhere that needed to select applicants from a big pool. I can't imagine that's the case with Roehampton given it's pretty near the bottom of any UK league tables and is only really known for Education. Given the application timetable it's unlikely to be a PGCE (but if it is then complain to the TDA as it is a bit dubious if it's a PGCE), but for any other programme there, I suspect you could just call their bluff and tell them you won't do the summer school. My betting is that they'll need your fees for the actual degree, and still offer you an MA place.

You could complain to the university itself. But given the LSE gets away with £75 application fees for all their Masters courses, and I imagine there's some small print in this case to say that you can be offered a place without going on the summer school, I rather doubt there's much comeback. Where out of curiosity? My guess is either Warwick or LSE and something business / economics / finance related...

This can be problematic as there are rules about not submitting the same work twice for different qualifications in the same institution. But it's not clear from your post whether this is what you want to do or whether you're trying to go elsewhere. I think you'd have to be up front with any potential supervisor about the circumstances though, as otherwise if you did take a long time over it, they will assume that this is a failed PhD that was awarded an MPhil as an outcome, and then I think they'd be very unlikely to agree.

You can try the UK but you may be disadvantaged if you haven't carried out a substantial piece of research. As I say though if you're not ESRC eligible then there's not much about usually and probably even less in the future.

In the USA you don't need a MA to go onto a PhD, you go in straight from undergraduate. But obviously you have to do very well on the GRE & other parts of the application process etc to get a funded place. You also have to be very aware that the US is very hierarchical when it comes to PhD programmes. If you google grad school cafe then that would take you to more information on the US.