From what I understand of your position from your other posts, you are not eligible for the government PhD loan, as anyone receiving RC funding in any shape or form is not eligible.

I am not quite sure, but it seems likely from the SFC website that those on university scholarships (as opposed to RC funding) or other financial support from a 'non-public' source are eligible. I am waiting on the decisions of my university scholarship applications, and I have also applied for the PhD loan, intending to take both if my scholarship applications are successful.

If Edinburgh had 'clarified' that your overall marks is 65%, how come they gave you a Pass for your Master's?Will you be returning your parchment for them send you a new one?


Lastly, why would you need gradehub to work out your overall average when Edinburgh would have supplied you with a full transcript, based on which you can easily work your average using any spreadsheet, especially when 'Big Data' is your field?

So long and thanks for all the fish!

As Alice might say, curiouser and curiouser.

First it was 69% not including the '0%' modules, not it is 65. Edinburgh, who first gave you a 'Pass', has now changed your grade to a Merit, with Imperial Admission insisting that you still have a Pass, and they are discussing this internally. I would like to know how Imperial can affect grades given out by Edinburgh. Either you have a Merit, or a Pass. It is Edinburgh's decision. Imperial has no say in this.

Furthermore, Your proposal is better than a 'perfect-scored' student, according to an Imperial academic, and he wants you to be his student so much that he is challenging Admission.

Finally, Technical University of Munich is 'equally better'.

Nice trolling!

The OP say that he passed these 2 modules of 20 credits each. Even if they were re-sits/re-submissions, they would still be capped at 50%, and not 0%. I really cannot see a situation where 40 credits out of 180 is treated as 0% as a matter of course, yet that 0% is still counted towards an average based on 180 credits.

I'd like to know which uni this is, and I can go and check on their rules, purely to satisfy my personal curiosity.

But surely if the OP had stated his case correctly, then the two modules where he passed, but scored 0 % somehow, contributed to his final grades, caused his low average.

This is the bit I don't get:

"After digging details ( for which I am still in contact with Uni of Edinburgh) . I found out that 2 of the modules I took (research proposal, research review) have only PASS or FAIL (no percentage). and somehow even though I have passed both modules, my overall percentage being calculated is taking into account 0% for both of them. these were 20 credit modules so 40 credits out of 180.

taking 0% of these two modules in my overall percentage is bringing it down to 54%.. I of course had no idea that if I take such modules 0% will be counted towards my overall grade."

If I got this correctly, he is saying that he got an average of 69% in 140 credits, and the 40 credits at 0% (both modules he passed without being given a percentage mark) dragged the 180 credits overall average to 54%. How can 40 credits out of 180 credits be classed as 0%, yet still are used in the calculations for the final average?

OP, please clarify.

Even then, you are confused between the interested parties in charge of allocating research funds and 'society' in general. Or is it your assertion that all government agencies and quangos always reflect the interest and will of 'society'?

LOL. If you say so.

Why?

Hope for the best, but expect the worst. Time to put alternative plans into action.

Read more and think more.

Having gone through (and are still in the process of going through) the process of choosing the best uni for a PhD, here is my two-cents worth:

There are no reliable metrics to show the best uni that fit your topic...the best you can do is try and narrow down the field by matching potential supervisors' interest and expertise with your own, and the uni's particular strength in the area of your research interest. How likely you are going to get on with the supervisor is anyone's guess, as a twenty minute skype, or even face-to-face, interview is not going to reveal that much.

In that sense, the best bet might be to stay at the same uni where you did your undergrad/master's, as you would have a much better idea of the personalities of the supervisors. It also helps to talk to the current students of the potential supervisor if at all possible.

Research Ranking can also play a part. At least you have a better idea of the research environment as graded by the REF.

Hope this helps.

Assuming that you are a full time student, you would have done something similar already. Assignment deadlines for each semester usually all fall on the same date near the end of the semester. In a 12 week semester, topics for the essays are usually chosen in week 5-6, so that's 3 essays of 4 000 words, about the length of your dissertation, in about 6-7 weeks.

Even if you are part-time student, the above time scale would suggest that that it's normal to write 12 000 words in about a month and a half. Therefore, you have plenty of time to do a decent 12 500-words dissertation in 2 and a bit months. 4 000 words a week should be very doable if you have an outline planned. Use the rest of the time to edit, polish and proof-read. The best thing you could do is to stop worrying and starting writing. It's not a tight deadline, and you have plenty of time to produce a great dissertation!

Lastly, don't be too concern about grades as you write. Just concentrate on the logical flow, getting your (coherent) arguments across, and proper referencing. It's quite hard to actually fail, and you might well be surprised by your marks if you just get the basics right.

Platitudes without content. I really had expected better from you...

Why are we getting stuck on undergrad grades, and ignoring Master's? The OP asked about his chances with a 2:1 and a 'mediocre' (Good pass? Low merit?) Master's. I can see the case that someone with a 1st-Distinction combination will have an edge over someone with a high 2:1 plus Distinction. But is it the case that a 1st plus a Merit will always trump a 2:1 plus a Distinctions when it comes to funding?

I always thought that a good Master's will mitigate a less than perfect Bachelors, but it seems, not according to you. And before your ask, yes, I do know someone from my cohort with a good first from a 'top' uni getting 'only' a high merit at Master's level.

They do. Hence I stressed the difference between sitting tenants in a shared house expressing a preference about the type of housemates they want, and student halls run as businesses stating that they would not do business with customers above a certain age.

Given your impeccable academic record, I am surprised at your poor reading comprehension.

However, assuming that your reading comprehension is as good as your academic achievements, why would this blatant age discrimination by a business opened to the public be in anyway funny? Please expend.