Hi, Jobergstein,

Unfortunately, you would not be the first PhD student who has been neglected/bullied + has no publication + no positive data. However, even in the worst of circumstances, there are people who survive their PhD and earn their doctorate.

What is more important at this stage is your state of mind. You have already decided that you will fail or be humiliated at your defense. This is not a good mind set. Please change it immediately. If you have endured all the shit that was thrown at you during your candidature and bothered to write and submit that bloody thesis, then you should find the courage to just give the best defense you can. This the absolute last milestone, so do the best you can, and be done with this horrible affair.

About whether or not to sue your uni or supervisor, please park this thought to one side first and focus on what is more important - your defense. All the extra stuff can wait.

What I want to say is practise your defense and be prepared for the toughest battle of your life. Explain why the data was no good if asked. As long as you can explain to show that you have the scientific knowledge worthy of a PhD (but probably not the luck in choosing a great supervisor or project), you should be fine. Stop pitying yourself and get the job done.

In conclusion, give it your best damn shot!!!


From someone who has survived a horrible PhD,
tru

Hi, iwan,

Maybe remove the bit about academia then.

About mentioning financial stuff, I really can't quite comment on it. I guess you would be best to judge the local and cultural perception on talking about that. However, would the interviewer then question why you bother starting a 3-4 year knowing full well that you wanted to settle down and buy a house in the very near future? Just a thought.

Could you have a chat with your supervisors to voice out your concern about not having a PhD reserch question? You could bounce ideas off them since they are more experienced. While it is expected that a PhD student should read a lot in their first year, it is not expected that they could formulate a solid PhD research question from the start. How can someone in the first year of their research career be expected to come up with a better research topic than someone who has been in the field for 10-20 years? Maybe in your third year of PhD you start to have that strength, but for now, you need your supervisors' guidance.

When you said that your supervisors increased their support yet did not give you a topic, what do you mean? I am concerned that you are self funding your PhD and so it is more important that you finish in a timely manner. Could you discuss a deadline with your supervisors to identify a suitable PhD topic, maybe say in the next 2 months? A PhD topic could change over the period of candidature but you need to identify a suitable topic as soon as possible to work with. It is the responsibility of your PhD supervisor to guide you on what is a suitable PhD topic. Otherwise you can go down many wrong rabbit holes and waste a lot of time. That is not ideal since you are self-funded. Have you also thought that maybe these supervisors are not good for you?

Hi, iwan,

Perhaps you can consider: "I accepted the PhD offer with the understanding I was going to work on a particular topic. However, upon starting, my supervisor changed my topic to something completely different and unrelated. I was determined to continue my PhD despite this major set back and gave my best to work on this new topic hoping my interest will grow with time. Unfortunately, despite all my efforts, it was not meant to be. I also strongly considered about whether I would like to pursue a life long career in academia. After much thought, I decided that I did not want a career in academia and therefore decided to cut my losses and left my PhD for a different future."

Your original response has negative elements including words like "don't enjoy" and "got depressed". These words should never be used in an interview. Your future employer may interpret this as you having mental health issues or that you have difficulty staying focused and interested in a role for long. All your responses to an interviewer must be in a positive light.

No one can force you to quit your PhD without valid reason. Just don't sign if you don't want to. Could you negotiate to change supervisor? Could you switch to another project under a different supervisor, maybe even in a different field?

Hi, monkiaa,

What you have highlighted point to a bad supervisor and a toxic environment. I am particulary concerned that the senior PhD student has not been allowed to defend, as it is unfair for him and this may happen to you in a few years time.

I am unsure of European PhD system. However, are you able to change to another supervisor while taking your grants with you? Have a close look at your grant and PhD terms and conditions. In some other countries, it is possible and a funded student (which you are) are very well regarded and can easily find another willing supervisor to pursue their PhD with. It also helps that you are still so early in your candidature.

If you are able to change supervisor, have a chat with both your postgrad coordinator and student union to seek advice on procedure. And search hard for your new supervisor. Pls do not feel pressured to continue under this horrible supervisor out of loyalty/guilt because he does not seem like he will care about your well being anyway. You also do no need to inform him of your intention of changing to a new supervisor until you have actually found a new supervisor and has put in the form to change supervisor.

I wish you all the best.

You have funding and industry backing. You hold d cards. Renegotiate with your supervisor to settle this within the next 2 days. Normally they would listen to voice of reason since you are funded. But start looking around for plan B supervisor so that you can immediately approach if your current one refuses to budge. Normally you can change supervisor after you start your Phd but I am unsure in your case since you sign a special contract

Could you ask the company after working there a bit longer? And if you are not sure if you are committed, it might be better to delay this decision a bit longer until you are sure.

Since you have only a short 6 months left, why don't you just give it one last a shot? Sit down and plan your thesis writing with your supervisor. Rather than quit, try your best and in the worst case scenario, you will end up with a MPhil rather nothing. You are training in your PhD, not trying to get a Nobel prize. It is understandable that things may not be smooth, and sometimes, there may not be much results to show for your efforts due to circumstances. It is hard, but do hang on just for a little while longer.

Have a short break to renergise. Then reengage with your supervisor to set the thesis outline and your milestones to get all the work done. If your supervisor is one of those absent types, then get another experienced researcher to have a look at your outline. Invest in a proofreader if necessary and get a friend to read your chapters if you could. All the best.

Please dont do your PhD unpaid. Do try to get a scholarship.

Just a thought, is it possible to get your company to sponsor your PhD? My friend terminated his PhD when he was in his twenties because his PhD supervisor left the country and his new primary PhD was a former rival and in dispute with his former primary supervisor. Currently in his fourties, he has been working in a company and is being sponsored to study his master part time and later perhaps his PhD. I wonder if you too can ask your employer to sponsor. The topic can be a real world one applicable to your current industry, maybe even to solve your company's problem. Most supervisor will not reject a sponsored student who comes with a topic and relations to the industry.

A part time PhD usually takes 6-8 years. It is doable but it does take a lot of discipline. Are you committed enough to do this?

Hi, gdiben17,

If working with big pharma is your interest, could you use your current qualification to get into a Graduate Program by the big pharmas eg. Astra Zeneca, Novo Nordisk, GSK and Roche? Then, whilst you are working with them, see if they could internally sponsor you to do a PhD. Big pharmas are big on prof development for their own staff, so that maybe a way to go.

Just write that you are a graduate researcher for the time you were doing your PhD. And no, I do not think that they will discriminate you on being a PhD dropout. However. they will be reluctant to hire you if you display negative emotions or attitude at the interview. I have friends who dropped out from their PhD, worked for a while at odd jobs (cleaners, tutors, waitress, etc), before getting their full time position. The important thing is to display a positive attitude and not be bitter about quitting your PhD.

Different uni has different processes. Some will require that you present your project outline, lit review and whatever results you have. Others, a chit chat with no docs or ppt slides. The process aims to spot major project issues eg. supervisory issues or technical issues as early as possible. It is also the best time to share with your interviewers any problem or help you need, after the supervisor has left the room for you to have your confidential meeting at some stage with your interviewers. Check your process with your uni.

Don't worry. It happens more often than not that the abstract maybe different to actual results on poster

Hi, squattingslav,

I agree with pm133. Normally, it won't be necessary to get a second master of the same degree. People do get a second master if the degree is different and maybe complementary, eg. having a MSc in Biology and MSc in Bioinformatics. I would suggest that you reconsider putting your time and perhaps money for better use.