Hi guys, I’m a first year mphil now.
Our school needs to submit an upgrade work in June to see whether you can upgrade to a PhD.
Today, I got the result that I failed and my supervisor asked me to do a 3 years mphil instead.

However, when I submitted my draft to him, the comment was positive. If he pointed out what I should improve, I whine I can make things right.
Last year, some students can resub it by September. I asked a resub to my supervisor, he rejected again.

I wonder can I argue for a resub???
Help!???!!!!

Not sure why you posted twice but I am only replying to this post.

You have not given any detail on why you failed the MPhil upgrade. Was it the quality of the idea/project? Or perhaps the quality of your writing/proposal? Or did the examiners feel that you have not demonstrated the appropriate attitude or aptitude of a researcher? If it's the first two, it reflects badly on the supervisor. If it's the last one, it may be hard for you to change the mind of the examiners/school as they probably had input from your supervisor on this.

Talk to your student body or postgrad coordinator and see what they can do to help you. Since your supervisor is not on your side, it will be a tough battle. Read you postgrad handbook to know your student rights. On the flip side, do you really want to do your PhD under a supervisor who is seemingly unsupportive?

Hi! Many thanks for your reply. I submitted my first draft to my leading supervisor in the middle of April, and he gave a very positive feedback and pointed out what I should change. According to his opinion, I revised my work and send it the second supervisor, who is the dean of the faculty.but he didn’t reply.
But I was informed yesterday, I need to do a mphil rather than upgrade. They believed my work is not critical enough and not focus on details. However, I think last year, some students got the second opportunity to resub.
I asked my first supervisor yesterday, he rejected a resubmission. I’m quite confused, if he thought I should improve, why he didn’t tell me at the time when I submitted the first draft.

Another problem now is about funding, if I can’t continue, I should refund the money...I’m an international student ... the tuition is really unaffordable...

Hi! Many thanks for your reply. I submioed my first draft to my leading supervisor in the middle of April, and he gave a very positive feedback and pointed out what I should change. According to his opinion, I revised my work and send it the second supervisor, who is the dean of the faculty.but he didn’t reply.
But I was informed yesterday, I need to do a mphil rather than upgrade. They believed my work is not critical enough and not focus on details. However, I think last year, some students got the second opportunity to resub.
I asked my first supervisor yeaster, he rejected a resubmission. I’m quite confused, if he thought I should improve, why he didn’t tell me at the time when I submitted the first draft.

Another problem now is about funding, if I can’t continue, I should refund the money...I’m an international student ... the tuition is really unaffordable...

I'm afraid tru is correct. If your supervisor won't back you, you are in a very difficult position.
You should at least have your supervisor answer your question about why he has changed his mind.
I suspect he has been over-ruled by his department. Is he a new researcher?

My leading supervisor is the lecturer, but the second supervisor is the dean.
I never got the feedback from the second supervisor. So, this is the current situation. I’m writing an email to the director of doctoral school to appeal a second opportunity. However, I just confused, whether the supervisors have responsibility to point out your shortage when you submit your draft...I just doubted that whether was because he believed I’m not qualified and canny do a PhD, so just told me every was fine?

From what you have shared, I agree with pm133 that your supervisor (being the less experienced one) has been over-ruled by your co-supervisor (dean, super experienced and powerful). The inability to upgrade to PhD is a reflection of the dean's thoughts on your supervisor and his idea for your project -that it is not critical enough and not focus on details (ie below standard of PhD). It may not seem like it but it may be a good thing for you in the long run rather than having to suffer through a badly thought project.

Would you consider transferring to a different department and start again? The lack of chemistry between your two supervisors will most likely cause you grief in your academic journey.

I’m doing art history now, I don’t know whether I can transfer?Another problem is that I went to meet the dean today, he said even if I give an opportunity to you to resub, you cannot pass, and even if you pass this time, you may fail at the PhD stage. I asked why my supervisors didn’t give me a signal or tell me what they want or what I should improve. He said he will see that...what I can do at this stage..

These are all red flags that you probably do not want to continue doing your research here. Something is wrong and I am not sure if it is the supervisor or project or even uni. You probably should talk to student union or postgrad coordinator about your situation. Try to negotiate a transfer or quit without penalty if possible. The decision is yours to make, and it is a hard one.

Hi, Tru!
Many thanks for your reply. Yes, I think you are right, I’m positively contact other universities now, even if I realized it’s very late now. I spent 3 years to here, but things never happen as my expectation. It’s like a nightmare. But anyway, many thanks, again.