Overview of eng77

Hi. One important criterion is the rate of PhD completion of the supevisor. It might not be sufficient to be a nice guy according to a negative experience I had with a nice supervisor. Another important thing is how would you like him/her to communicate and what is his/her style of communications. Some students like to communicate daily, others once a month. Supervisors are the same. Which way suits you? If there is a chance to contact other PhD students in both groups it would be great. All the best.

I would disagree with tru in these three points. Unfortunately 90% of supervisors would do the same. I would continue communications until further new happens.

Hi. I had a different experience but I would like to share it. It might help. I had a stable well paid job for six year but it did not include the research and development I wanted to do. So I left my job applied for Master and started in a new career field after 10 years of Bachelor graduation. After working for academia for 2 years I get a PhD position. I spent 5 years in RA role while doing PhD at same time but the PhD part did not work well. Now I am back in industry after 9 years of study and RA roles in academia. But now I do "partially" something I like. I do some research and development. I am much satisfied than I was 10 years ago.
My advice. Follow your passion. The industry will always be there. If you spend 4 years doing a PhD and then returned to industry even with the same salary you have now, but with different position which allows some research, you are a winner. In my opinion, 5 years industry + PhD is ways better than 10 years industry.

Hi Nesrine87. I understand your concern. You will get a job do not worry. I agree with TQ in applying for RA roles. Some RA roles are paid exactly the same as Postdocs. I agree also that everyone has his own way. Some are lucky or clever enough to get their job directly in same lab others have to search. I am in the same senioriy level with some colleagues who are 15 years younger than me. Sometimes I feel a bit sorry for myself but most of the time I thank God that I do something I love. If I do not do it now, I might have to do it 10 years later with colleagues 25 years younger than me.

Hi. You do not have to cite it if you do not mention it in your study. If you have enough bibliography, it is fine. Normally you mention the most important studies in the same area which are more likely to be journals and high ranked conferences. But if you are going to mention something in the methodologies in this paper, cite it.

Hi kate2112. I am sorry for the cruelness of acamdeia. I would tell you shortly my story which is not pleasant by the way. After I did my Master I wanted to do a PhD but could not find one because of difference in fees for EU and international students. I worked as RA and was told I can pursue a PhD at same uni but had to pay about 9000 GBP per years which means I would starve with my wife. I moved then to another country to do a PhD but was unsuccessful due to my own mistakes and poor supervision.
I was told that in academia there is no prospects without a PhD. There are some rare cases who survived permament posts with Master degree. Surprisingly academia is more about research not teaching. I feel your pain. All you can do is to try hard to finish the PhD. Focus more on it and work part time if possible. Try to be positive and hope for the best. Just keep progressing slowly and try to publish some papers. You will do it.

Hi rewt. Your topic is not typically posted here but I think it is a quite common problem.
Let me start by telling me my experience. I worked with two supervisors/PIs. Supervisor1 pushes to publish and believes that what you have is sufficient. Supervisor2 prefers to do more experiments and put more theory and publish in a higher ranked conference or journal. Personally I found supervisor1 approach is better because it led to a better publications output at the end.
Do you intend to put more data to target a higher ranked conference or journal or just to increase your chances of acceptance? If you want only to increase your chances, then listen to your supervisor. She knows better how much is sufficient. Also the six months waiting is something that you should take into consideration. I had a paper submitted to a journal and after back and forth for a year and a half, it was accepted by another smaller journal. There is also a chance that you prepare more material after submission. This material might be useful for the corrections asked by the reviewers.

Hi LS932,
I am sorry for what you have been through. I am not an expert in academia but I would like to show my support to you. We all make mistakes. You are not the only sinner in academia. There should be a rehab time also in academia.

3- There is a high possiblity that you won't work in academia because of the limited opportunities and limited funding. You might go for a role similar to yours after spending 4-5 year of research
My opinion:
Hope for the best, but be ready for the "not very bad" to come. If you could not secure an academic role, accept some role which includes some research and development. If you did a PhD and then got a job similar to yours, do not regret it. Corporate jobs are always there and what could 4-5 years have added to you if you stayed in your job? After 15 years, you would have 10 years experience and a PhD instead of 15 years experience, so what?
Try to do the transition smoothly. Look for a funded PhD that guarantees paying your rent and bills. You do not have to live in luxury but do not go for starving.
Do not think too much that I have used to earn xxxx. I had a nice office. Just get your hand dirty in the academia and enjoy it.
I personally do not regret my decision but somehow I believe I could have reeacted better to some situations and I could have worked harder but this all you can avoid.
I wish you the best and would recommend "proceed but with caution"

Hi Beth. I have done something not similar to what you want to do but somehow relevant. I was doing a corporate job for 6 years then decided to do MSc to work either in academia or industry but with more research and development role. I felt what I was doing back then is not what I want to do until the end of my career. My story is not a brilliant successful one but I would tell you shortly the pros and cons of leaving your stable job for the hope and ambitious of doing something you like
Pros:
1- If you are a passionate person, follow your passion no matter what. Not making a decision is already a big decision. You will definitely regret you didn't do it. But if you went for a PhD, you "may" regret or not.
2- Nothing is really stable in the world. Your job looks stable but what would you do if someday you are placed under a horrible boss and terrible colleagues? You might quit your job by "your own will"
3- Life short. Stable jobs do not bring happiness neither good salaries. Also working in academia won't bring happiness. So do what you want at least not to feel sorry (point 1)
Cons:
1- You might not be as successful as you hoped for. You might be an average PhD student (which in my opinion is absolutely fine) but you might not produce the "brilliant" research output we all expected before starting
2- Securing a stable academic role is tough. Typically you have to jump in a few Postdoc roles each of 1-3 years. I do not have statistics but I think from my basic observations that it might take 6-10 years after PhD to secure an academic role (either research officer or lecturer). You should be also flexible about the city.
- To be continued ...

Hi. The situation might not be as bad as you see it. Two good points, great supervisor and she likes you. Supervisors do not tend to "like" easily. So take a moment and believe you are not doing bad. I am also not the marathon runner style. If you and your supervisor understand this well, the strategy you do is in deed a good one.
I do not have a golden solution to the detachment issue. But I think more self confidence might help. For the field work, you do whatever is possible. The needed number is not a holy one. Just do what you can and most PhD theses do not include the "planned optimistic" results.

I am sorry for being somehow cold and rude. But again. My opinion is to continue. I think I am also entitled to write my opinion either way the readers like it or not.

Hi. I knew some Master student asked their supervisors to do a PhD with him. Some of them ended doing PhD with him (fingers crossed). Others were told there is no funding (maybe the supervisors did not have funding or simply did not want them). If you have a good relationship with supervisor (or even a "not bad" one), I would recommend to ask for a PhD with him/her. If he/she said there is no funding, then ask if you can put him as a reference in your application. Moreover, ask him to recommend other potential supervisors. The key in all this, is the worst that can happen if you ask is similar to the result if you do not ask.

Hi. You have already posted with another account the situation "Should I quit my masters degree?". Do you need an honest answer or a validation of your desire to quit? It is nonsense. Is 30 years the age of retire or what? Do you have a guarantee you won't be hit by unemployment at the age of 40 or 50? Move on. finish your MSc and look for a job.
Good luck

Good luck. In this case, the most important is education history (starting with PhD of course). You may later go to career adviser for future improvement of the job application