Hi all,

I have something that is not properly a problem, but I would like to listen to your opinions.
My supervisor hasn't really ever been present in my PhD. Still, I would have never imagined he was that uninterested in his job. Honestly, in my field (music), institutions do not spend money for their PhDs and are not really motivated to provide an effective mentoring, or maybe my supervisor is just careless.
For example, 1 month ago I asked him to let me use the server of the university for some heavy processing for my thesis but, after answering "yes, send me the abstract", he has never opened the ticket - of course this is on a long list of "yes, I'll do it".

The thing is that I have sent him half of my thesis 4 months ago, and after having him for 3 months saying "sorry, I didn't find time to read your thesis" (to which, honestly, I don't know what to reply), he has never even opened it. The workload is all on my co-supervisor, which has arrived to the university 8 months ago. Both haven't read my thesis for months, but after having them notice the little time left my co-supervisor has tried to go through it. He is a good guy, honestly. My supervisor hasn't replied. A few days ago, I sent the last chapters to both, and explicitly asked my supervisor to read some parts, and still he has't answered to me.

The point is that in a few days I am submitting a thesis that was only partially corrected by my co-supervisor. Nevertheless, it's true that I am responsible for my thesis, but it's very upsetting that the thesis will be signed by my supervisor (and this could help him run for a "Prof." title one day, if my thesis will be useful) while he has done more or less nothing for it. I would rather prefer to give the merits to my co-supervisor.

So that I said: 'well, that could be an experiment for the future. Don't worry, I will write the analysis by myself following some samples and then I will send it to you for corrections'.

Reply: 'Man, that takes time'.

My reply: 'Of, but can you provide me with the results?'

He said 'yes, no prob for those'.

then he ended by saying:
'You should not speak about your ideas to people, as they can steal those to you. But don't worry, I won't talk about it to anybody. If you want we can have a beer next time'.

Now, to be honest, I didn't like this last sentence so much, but I could be seeing it wrong.
In any case he did not contribute to the paper BUT he directed me a little, as for example: 'for the literature review, you could write one sentence describing each paper you have written that could relate to this case'.
Two weeks later: 'now create links between the sentences'.

And he has provided me with some analysis not for the article but for one of the 2 conference that I have mentioned before.

He could be really have some time-management problems, who knows, but the fact is that I have already wasted months to wait for him to finish all his commitments as he told me and I really need a collaborator to write down those things that I cannot do, and for this reason I am thinking whether I should ask somebody else to help me (maybe someone more interested in the matter of music).

What should I interpret all this? And what can I do?

Dear all,

I am having a little problem with a researcher in regards to an article, and I would like to know your opinion as I have never dealt with a similar case before.

The idea is that I am a music composer, and one day I partook in a meeting of psychologists to ask for collaboration for a perceptual test that I was working on, as I miss the skills to analyse the results of my experiment and the vocabulary of the psychological field.

This experiment was exploratory, and the idea has obtained some interesting comments and very good feedback within my field, so that another PhD psychology student said to me that he would have liked to work with me on it.

I have so made the experiment all by myself (let's say a total of 120 hours for design, preparation of the room for each participant, actual test, etc.), and I have presented it at 2 conferences and started working on the article.

This person said to me: 'I am writing my PhD thesis so I have little time, but I can give you some help'.
So I replied: 'don't worry. Finish your thesis, submit, so we can later conclude this work. Do you think that we could send this for review before the end of the year?'. 'Sure we'll do it!!'.

In this time I have written the complete literature review, hypothesis of the experiment, methodology and participants. A few days ago he said to me this:

'I am sorry, man. I am preparing for the Viva and I have really too many things to do for it. I think that as for the experiment, it is not ready for a publication'
then
'Have you got time to make other experiments? We could do this and this and this (meaning that I should have done those)'

My experiment showed a statistical difference among types of participants in reaction to a musical concept.
He proposed a nice new experiment, but with a different focus.

(continue below)

Hello dear fellow researchers.

I am reviewing some universities for a possible postdoc. But there are so many!
And my judgement is often biased by their reputation, so I tend to look at big names within my field (music).

In general, I am wondering whether in 2017 this reputation is important. And whether important universities really provide you with some more benefit, given the usual high expenses associated and the load of work required to stand out.

Particularly today, where distance collaboration is so common and a researcher's reputation runs faster than his/her university's, due to online media.

What do you think?

Thank you for the clear reply.

>when you come as a short-term research visitor like she did initially, you don't need to have an English test certificate.

To be clear, she is coming t the UK again as a short-term researcher - this time, though, she is coming as a professional, not as a student exchange.
I don't really know if there is a difference.
I never understood the conditions to be considered a visiting scholar.
If you partake in a short-term University project of a foreign country, are you considered a visiting scholar by default?

If it helps (searching here and there on google) maybe we can consider that as a short-term research grant?
Maybe she can be called "junior scholar", but I repeat, I never understood the difference among student/scholar/professional researcher/professor, though I understand the difference between student and professor.

Hi all,

I am in need of an information that I can't find anywhere.
Probably the topic is too specific for this forum, too, but maybe you can give me some ideas or opinions.

I have a friend who has been appointed as a researcher (contract - scientific field) in a English university.

She is from a country outside the EEA and has been studying part of her PhD in that same university as a visiting student.
During her last visit to the UK, working as a PhD student researcher, she asked the international office whether she had to take an English test for being appointed as researcher, and therefore obtaining a Visa.

The university's international office answered that she would not need to present a language certificate or proof.
Now, she is in panic because she worries to be in need to apply for the Trier 2 (General) visa. In this Visa procedure it is reported to present proof of English proficiency.

So, I have the following questions for this forum:

1) what kind of visa are temporary international researcher usually asked to apply to?
2) is the language proficiency a requirement for temporary international researchers (contract) appointed by a university through a regular "call for applications"?
3) are usually universities able to provide documentation to assess or overcome the English language requirements (required for Trier 2 or others)?

To summarise:

1) she is an international professional;
2) appointed as temporary researcher for a project in quality of specialised professional;
3) she has never been enrolled in any English university, but only as a visiting student.

Kind regards,
Luca

Thank you all for your replies. It is indeed true that I am thinking about a postdoc to extend my actual research.

When I said that the theoretical output of my Ph.D. is promising, I mean that it is a good framework for future research at Postdoc level.

But I came to experience that to win a scholarship in the humanities, it is worth to have a "dissemination strategy", and mine would be in this case to collect research material into a book-form.

From what I read above, I understand that copyright issues depend on the specific University, but generally: "if the Ph.D. or Postdoc dissertation is considered a publication, the copyright is bound to the University; If not, the copyright is own by the researcher and he/she can forward the content for publishing". Is it right?

So, I would have to check about this with the specific program I apply to.

I heard that the thing works different for researcher associates and lecturers, for example: there, the copyright of all the material published is shared with the University, isn't it?
I believe that Postdocs are considered employees in the UK, so it is a confusing matter.

Hello everybody,

I am finishing my Ph.D. soon and I am thinking about a PostDoc position.
The idea is that (it will probably sound strange to you) I did a Ph.D. in music composition. Therefore, most of my dissertation will be made in the form of portfolio, and will mainly include musical works.
Meanwhile, I have brought on some theories that are promising enough to give birth to a musicological book.

I am therefore looking for a PostDoc position in order to conclude my theoretical research and have the time to write a book - thing that I can't do during my Ph.D. time.

I would like to ask you if you could tell me how is the copyright working for publishing a book during a PostDoc - had I to find a contract for publishing.

Kind regards,
Luca