Background: I am writing a MSc dissertation in a technology/business-related topic. I interviewed 15 people for about an hour each. Each interviewee was given a choice of anonymity (e.g. tech-sector employee), organisation only (e.g. Microsoft employee) or named (Joe Bloggs of Microsoft). Most went for named; although in the final version of the text when I referred to interviews I just used organisations (mostly for presentational reasons).

Question: Is it considered polite to include the interviewees in the acknowledgements (clearly just those happy to be named)? If I did so I would probably email first to check they were happy (and I’d got their name/title right!); although might be overthinking this…

Edit: I have written consent from each participant regarding the use of the information they have provided.

I realise after submitting my dissertation lask week that I posed my hypothesis in the wrong manner.

I posed them as I believe that X will Not be a predictor of Y

I subsequently went on with results which returned a p value of 0.01 and subsequently said we reject the null and discussed throughout my discussion.

It may be simply viewed as a typo. Am I likely to suffer greatly as a result of this mistake. I proceed with my methods, data analysis and discussion as if the hypotheses are proposed in the correct manner and given the overall premise of the dissertation and explanation of the result, it’s quite clear what I am trying to achieve I believe.

Am I likely to simply be failed as a result of this error?

Any help greatly appreciated as I’m very as this has been submitted and I am extremely worried

I have one year left of my Biology degree in the UK, and I want to do a masters. I love biology and I enjoy learning, specifically in cellular and cancer biology. However, I do not enjoy labs, I find it very mundane and boring, and also not rewarding. Most of the research I have done shows that all masters courses are project-based, and thus require labs. I do not want to a bioinformatics masters. I was wondering if anyone had any information or experience that could help, or could point me in the right direction?

I have written a thesis about applying some AI techniques to a simulation that my professor introduced. To make this happen, I had to implement a very large amount of software, because the simulation works in another language, follows different principles etc.

After 6 months of hard work, I did not reach my goal. I was not able to actually implement the AI technique I wished to apply to the problem. I created a lot of reusable components that future developers (and in fact other students as I was told) will want to use. But the actual question and also the title of the thesis (which both had to be fixed ahead of time and cannot be changed once it has been started) don’t match the main body of my work.

Can a thesis still be considered good even if the question was not answered because it was not “reached”? If not, why? If yes, why? I can imagine this going either way but I’d like to hear opinions and experiences.

Basically I would require another 1-2 months and maybe someone to work on the problem as a team to get new ideas. I believe I still worked in a scientific manor (I prioritized reusability and usefullness over just reaching the question but without it being easily reusable) and no one ever said science is only good if it never misses a deadline. But I can also imagine an argument that simply states an unanswered research question is a bad work.

My original intention was to apply this AI technique to the common example research problems (like Atari games or locomotion) but my professor insisted I apply it to his field of work (energy market simulation). I had to agree if I wanted him to take my thesis and I didn’t know how complex the mapping of his problem to the commonly used tools would be. The argument “a good researcher is also capable of creating a reasonable problem scope” therefore is a little unfair as he sort of forced me to extend it.

Alternative B I write a preface / authors comment at the beginning, stating that the title/research question won’t be matched but due to university regulations may not be changed retrospectively.

Alternative C: A fellow researcher recommended me to just change the question and content but ignore the title. I hand in my thesis under the forced title but publish it under a more suitable title. That seems a little “fake” as I don’t want to lie about my original goal and me missing the final goal.


Edit: Most suggestions go along the lines of “depends on your professor or institution”. While I fear this is probably the only right answer that helps me personally, it doesn’t seem right that it depends on the professors attitude or personal opinion. From an abstract perspective, is it OK to rate a scientific work as a bad work if it fails to reach a previously defined target when new information came to light along the way? Probably not. But is it common practice to change the research question at the end to better match / suit the line of argumentation? It seems to me the question should reflect what the researcher asked him/herself when he/she started the inquiry. If the results are not what was expected, that doesn’t mean it’s bad results.

The Computer Science study guide of the ETH Zurich states

2.4. Master’s Degree

The Master’s diploma in Computer Science at ETH entitles graduates to have the following academic title:

English: Master of Science ETH in Computer Science (MSc ETH CS)

I was under the impression that a Master of Science is somehow standardized in Europe, even in Switzerland which is not part of the EU.

Why does the ETH Zurich add ETH to the title and what implications does this have?

I obtained MS degree in Computer Science degree some 7 year ago from a decent German state university. Since then I majorly worked in system software roles and occasionally embedded software and hardware. Over this time I have also developed keen interest in designing circuits for signal processing but my skills are very limited.

I am therefore thinking of going for further higher education in area of Integrated Circuits. However I donot want to go for PhD as its 5 year investment. I also looked at continuing education programs, but I couldn’t find anything interesting. I am therefore thinking of doing second Masters degree in Electrical Engineering. I would be applying to schools in US and Europe which are either equal or better established than my alma matter.

The question is what issues can I expect to face when looking for work after graduating with two MS degrees: one in Computer Science and recent one in Electrical Engineering

I have just completed my B.Sc in Physics and I have a unique opportunity to do internship in my field of interest for more than 6 months. If I choose it, I may not be ble to start with my Masters’ courses this year and this academic gap will be reflected on my CV.
I would like to know how will it affect me and my career. My aim is to become a good researcher.

I have a BSc Psychology degree (2:2), my goal is to work developing technology or software for people with disabilities (or just making tech more usable for all), I felt that the combination of concrete rule based-ness of the job, with some client based people interaction would be ideal for me.

I applied to a number of conversion CS courses in my area (Lancs) on the basis that I can commute and specialise later. However, I was declined based on my 2:2, the place I’ve been offered is MSc Computing

However, I have some concerns:

1) what is the difference between Computing and computer Science – will it matter?

2) whether the course is a “good” course overall? I notice it doesn’t include a discrete maths module, or algorithms – how much is this likely to matter? The course leader says they’re covered where required.

  1. Does anyone else work in this area and can offer advice?

This is a bit long so please feel free to skip to tl:dr

I have a BSc Psychology degree (2:2), it was not the area for me and I struggled to find related work – I ended up being a support worker for four years. I then went abroad, teaching English and decided getting a MSc was the best way for me to make an alternative career, so I applied and was accepted to a university in Europe for a MSc in Human Media Interaction – with a pre-course option to bring me up to speed.

I hoped to work developing technology or software for people with disabilities (or just making tech more usable for all), I felt that the combination of concrete rule based-ness of the job, with some client based people interaction would be ideal for me.

However, the course was not what I was expecting and I did not do well on the weekly programming exams nor the maths, so I returned home. The university said I could return if I wanted too the following year, once I had worked on the skills needed,this is what I have done this past few months, my discrete maths is now around standard and programming skills are still to be worked on (I haven’t done as much as I would have liked – lack of time).

However, due to Brexit, the (Erasmus MSc+) funding has disappeared and it doesn’t look like it’s going to be reinstated. So I applied to some UK universities for their MSc conversion course with the view that I could specialise later. However, Liverpool declined me based on my 2:2 degree and Birmingham isn’t doable due to a need to commute (no funding available for living costs) but Manchester Metropolitan have offered me a place on the MSc Computing course, which I’m debating accepting.

However, I have some concerns:

1) what is the difference between Computing and computer Science – will it matter?

2) whether this course is a “good” course overall? I notice it doesn’t include a discrete maths module, or algorithms

3) What are my career prospects following the course?

tl:dr – Struggled to break into an industry, thought that a Human Media Interaction MSc would pave the way into a more suitable profession, had to come home to the UK, worked hard on the skills required and looking for advice on finding a way into this profession.

The MMU course