Tweet
A few days ago I was awarded my Ph.D. in the UK. I should have been awarded this Ph.D. more or less one year ago, but a problem all of a sudden prevented me from getting it. In my opinion, my university did not do its job properly and showed a pattern of negligence in monitoring me (my primary supervisor never took a look at my submission and stopped replying for the last 6 weeks before submitting), which resulted into a postponement of one year. I am set to prove this to the OIA, the National Court for Students.
Meanwhile, I applied for a postdoctoral opportunity of 6 month in another European country (value £30.000). This program has 3 steps: 1) application, 2) pre-selection (they choose whether I can participate to the selection process), 3) selection.
A few days ago I received a mail from them, saying that during the second phase, they judged that I did not obtained enough achievements in my career and I could not participate to the selection step. The point they felt I couldn't meet states:
To this, I also consider the consequent lack of credibility from the professor who chose to support my application, and the fact that by having the possibility to participate to the selection and (hopefully) by winning a research grant, that would have been in itself an achievement to put in my CV to prove that I am able to get funding for my research. And this is very important in an academic perspective. And that I missed to do a postdoc, which everyone knows is very helpful for later job applications.
I don't know how to deal with this.
Supposed that I was able to prove that the University has a major responsibility in this postponement, would this be material for a redress? How can I compute how much the eventual redress should be? Any advice is appreciated.
Meanwhile, I applied for a postdoctoral opportunity of 6 month in another European country (value £30.000). This program has 3 steps: 1) application, 2) pre-selection (they choose whether I can participate to the selection process), 3) selection.
A few days ago I received a mail from them, saying that during the second phase, they judged that I did not obtained enough achievements in my career and I could not participate to the selection step. The point they felt I couldn't meet states:
1.5 : An application within the Programme for Arts-based Research (PEEK) must be led by an applicant of good standing, as judged by international standards, whose research demonstrates a relationship to EEK1. This applicant must show that she/he possesses the qualifications needed to carry out the project by means of relevant artistic, scientific, scholarly, and/or arts-based research achievements over the last 5 years commensurate with her/his career stage, which establish her/his international visibility.
This is extremely frustrating. I worked hard and was able to obtain an invitation to make a research in one of the most prestigious centers in my field. I completely lost this opportunity to develop my career, and besides (and most importantly) to work in a place which is great for my research goals. If I was in possess of my Ph.D. two month ago (so, if my university had considered my concerns at the right time when I notified the problem with my submission), probably things would have been much different, as a Ph.D. is a major achievement.To this, I also consider the consequent lack of credibility from the professor who chose to support my application, and the fact that by having the possibility to participate to the selection and (hopefully) by winning a research grant, that would have been in itself an achievement to put in my CV to prove that I am able to get funding for my research. And this is very important in an academic perspective. And that I missed to do a postdoc, which everyone knows is very helpful for later job applications.
I don't know how to deal with this.
Supposed that I was able to prove that the University has a major responsibility in this postponement, would this be material for a redress? How can I compute how much the eventual redress should be? Any advice is appreciated.
Comment