![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 7 of 7. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 2, 2020, at 14:41:08
I started working under supervision 5 March 2018.
I have email record of work done / supervision received from that date. The University simply denies it.
I submitted a thesis for examination 14 September 2018.
I have track and trace courier signature of 3 softbound copies submitted to the Graduate Research School on that date. The University simply denies it.
The University never sent the thesis I submitted for examination out for examination.
The Dean returned that thesis to me in January of 2019 -- which is only supposed to happen when examiners fail a thesis. Examiners did not fail that thesis, however, because the University refused to pass it on to examiners.
I paid them fees and they did not do their job on the most basic level.
All they needed to do was enrol me within a month of my applying, offer me supervisory comments, process my scholarship applications for (and only for) scholarships I actually applied to (and not for a bunch of other sh*t) and then send it to examiners, and base the outcome of examination on their reports.
They did not do ANY of the things they were required to do.
_____________
Wow. I paid the University, like, $5,000 in fees to do a 120 point MPhil qualification. That is 1 year of research. The Tertiary Education Commission says 1 year of work = 34 weeks (including the examination period). The University simply refuses to accept this and has it into it's head that students are required to work for at least 1 Calendar Year before submitting a thesis for examination. There is no regulation that requires students to work for at least 1 Calendar Year. 1 Calendar year of Academic work has been defined by the Tertiary Education Commission as 34 weeks (including the examination period).
The Tertiary Education Commission won't respond appropriately to my complaint.
The Office of the Ombudsman won't respond appropiratly to my complaint.
The Minister of Education.
The Prime Ministers watch-dog.
I am talking about a Public University simply refusing to do it's job.
______________________________
So I work for a couple more weeks because my supervisor is having screaming fits of tantrums that her student dared submit her work on time. I guess she thought that every time she says 'I'm off on a holiday now, see ya!' I was supposed to stop work and wait until she returned to keep going.
I work for a couple more weeks.
At which point she seems to have come to terms with the fact that I am actually submitting a thesis for examination.
The newer one goes out to examiners -- couple weeks later than it usually would have. They did delay sending it out becuase they simply denied my first submission. They spent a week, apparently, looking for the regulation that a thesis couldn't go out for examination without the supervisors approval, and they couldn't find a regulation.
But they did not send out the thesis for examination until they had the supervisors approval.
In December the report of one of the examiners came back.
The Dean said 'I am breaking regulations for you in order to tell you now that I cannot tell you that your thesis has been accepted in fulfilment of regulations for the Degree' and I am giving you the report of the examiner.
I don't know what the Dean is talking about with respect to her violating regulations -- but I can read and there are 6 outcomes of examination and the only outcome consistent with that report was 'accepted subject to revisions to be completed within 10 weeks'.
Why is the Dean wasting both of our time telling me irrelevant sh*t?
The second report comes back and again the only outcome consistent with that report is 'accepted subject to revisions to be completed within 10 weeks'.
My supervisor contacts me all upset 'I'm so sorry you have failed!'.
Are these people retarded that they cannot parse the reports of the examiners?
I point out my supervisor doesn't get to decide. She's not an examiner.
I get a letter from the Graduate Research School from an administration person saying 'pay us additional fees for a period of re-enrolment or you will not get your qualification'. I point out that she doesn't get to decide, either.
I get a letter from the Dean (whose decision is final apparently) saying that I need to pay additional fees for an extended period of re-enrolment.
I point out that this decision is not based in the reports of the examiners. Calendar Regualtions state that if the examiners intend 're-enrol' and 're-submit' outcomes they are required to return the thesis to the candidate (and their examiners pack informed them they would be reimbursed for courier / air mail costs of returning a thesis).
They didn't return the thesis as they are required to do if they intend the outcome to be re-enrol and re-submit.
They didn't say 're-enrol' or 're-submit' in their reports.
The only outcome of examination based in teh reports is that I have up to 10 weeks to make changes that may be substantive.
Then the University is required to accept my thesis in fulfilment of Regualtions for the Degree.
It is now, like 1 year later and the University still hasn't accepted my thesis.
They refused to sign the forms accompanying the electronic copy (and refused to authorise campus copy hardbinding costs).
I was supposed to submit the hardbound thesis within 10 weeks -- but the Univesity is supposed to cover those costs. The University administration refused to authorise the hardbinding of the thesis.
___________________________
I followed the University internal complaints resolution.
People seem incapable of parsing the reports of the examiners.
They seem to have it in their heads that there are 2 outcomes of examination 'pass' or 'fail' and because both examiners did not say in their reports 'pass' the thesis is failed.
I don't know (or care) where they get these ideas.
They are paid to follow their regulations.
______________________
I f*ck*ng hate this country.
Where is the justice for me?
_____________________
So last year my application to Medicine is declined because I haven't completed my Degree. By delaying getting my thesis out to examiners the University delayed getting reports back from examiners until after the arbirtrary date when teh University required the reports to be back for selction to MEdicine.
But then the University miscalculated my GPA for selection for Medicine. According to their own algorithm on how GPAs are supposed to be calculated. THey thought they would simply miscalaculate mine .6 too low so they could tell me that even if I had have completed my thesis on time I wasn't academically strong enough for a place in Med.
So this year they are telling me that my applicatino to Medicine is declined because my Degree hasn't been conferred already. Teh University is still refusing to accept that I completed the requirements for the Degree and they have no grounds to refuse to have accepted in fulfilment of regulations for the Degee on eof the substantively updated theses that I presented to them for sign off within 10 weeks of the outcome of examination that was delivered by teh Dean January 11 of 2018.
_______________________
Whenever I tell people (particularly students) about the above they jump on the 'you failed!' bandwagon.
I feel like following the internal complaints resolution process.. The NZ Zealand complaints resolution process (the Ombudsman) etc is just a way of the mob gaining momentum... Mobbing of... Me.
Because there is this whole thing of 'nobody completed graduate research Degrees in the minimum, normal, or standard time'.
That is because the Universities will violate every regulation in the book in order to not give you your Degree.
They are too busy giving Degrees to people who did not earn them (e.g., because their supervisor or because their department or because their independently paid editors etc etc etc wrote them for them).
That's why the time to completion is important. It shows that you did your own work -- because you could not have paid anybody else to do it that quickly for you.
But we don't actually want capable competent people.
We would rather not pay them.
We can just steal their stuff...
Until they stop producing...
Swampy swamp swamp swamp.
We don't want i-phones and internet and cars and sewerage systems. We don't want medications and television. We don't want the products of overseas arts and culture (the music and the television shows). We just want to live in our local community 'yes sir no sir anything you say sir' can't even organise a local garden...
Sigh.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 2, 2020, at 14:49:19
In reply to Universities., posted by alexandra_k on January 2, 2020, at 14:41:08
So apparently the people of Samoa were immunised.
They were involuntarily immunised, I'm sure, they did not have any say in the matter, at all.
They were involuntarily jabbed with needles containing product that had been inappropriately kept without refridgeration in a tropical climate.
Or they were involuntarily jabbed with needles containing product that had been inappropriately reconstituted (e.g., with anaesthetic.
Probably administered by people incapable of 'rephrase to me in your own words what you just read' when it comes to manufacturers instructions.
We don't want our kids learning reading, writing, arithmetic!
We would rather stab them with needles that are (best case) ineffective against the thing they are supposedly helping with (e.g., measles) and (worst case) introducing a whole heap of additional hards (e.g., introducing pathogens into a needle stick injury if skin steralisation is inappropirate, spreading disease if needles are reused) and so on...
We don't want to contribute towards developmoent.
We don't want the kids who have the capacity to learn to learn.
We want these kids (who don't have the capacity to learn) to take up all the training places.
To be head of the hierarchy of 'all the stuff mewards' yehaw.
Posted by beckett2 on January 2, 2020, at 20:02:27
In reply to Universities., posted by alexandra_k on January 2, 2020, at 14:41:08
> I started working under supervision 5 March 2018.
>
> I have email record of work done / supervision received from that date. The University simply denies it.
>
> I submitted a thesis for examination 14 September 2018.
>
> I have track and trace courier signature of 3 softbound copies submitted to the Graduate Research School on that date. The University simply denies it.
>
> The University never sent the thesis I submitted for examination out for examination.
>
> The Dean returned that thesis to me in January of 2019 -- which is only supposed to happen when examiners fail a thesis. Examiners did not fail that thesis, however, because the University refused to pass it on to examiners.
>
> I paid them fees and they did not do their job on the most basic level.
>
> All they needed to do was enrol me within a month of my applying, offer me supervisory comments, process my scholarship applications for (and only for) scholarships I actually applied to (and not for a bunch of other sh*t) and then send it to examiners, and base the outcome of examination on their reports.
>
> They did not do ANY of the things they were required to do.
>
> _____________
>
> Wow. I paid the University, like, $5,000 in fees to do a 120 point MPhil qualification. That is 1 year of research. The Tertiary Education Commission says 1 year of work = 34 weeks (including the examination period). The University simply refuses to accept this and has it into it's head that students are required to work for at least 1 Calendar Year before submitting a thesis for examination. There is no regulation that requires students to work for at least 1 Calendar Year. 1 Calendar year of Academic work has been defined by the Tertiary Education Commission as 34 weeks (including the examination period).
>
> The Tertiary Education Commission won't respond appropriately to my complaint.
>
> The Office of the Ombudsman won't respond appropiratly to my complaint.
>
> The Minister of Education.
>
> The Prime Ministers watch-dog.
>
> I am talking about a Public University simply refusing to do it's job.
>
> ______________________________
>
> So I work for a couple more weeks because my supervisor is having screaming fits of tantrums that her student dared submit her work on time. I guess she thought that every time she says 'I'm off on a holiday now, see ya!' I was supposed to stop work and wait until she returned to keep going.
>
> I work for a couple more weeks.
>
> At which point she seems to have come to terms with the fact that I am actually submitting a thesis for examination.
>
> The newer one goes out to examiners -- couple weeks later than it usually would have. They did delay sending it out becuase they simply denied my first submission. They spent a week, apparently, looking for the regulation that a thesis couldn't go out for examination without the supervisors approval, and they couldn't find a regulation.
>
> But they did not send out the thesis for examination until they had the supervisors approval.
>
> In December the report of one of the examiners came back.
>
> The Dean said 'I am breaking regulations for you in order to tell you now that I cannot tell you that your thesis has been accepted in fulfilment of regulations for the Degree' and I am giving you the report of the examiner.
>
> I don't know what the Dean is talking about with respect to her violating regulations -- but I can read and there are 6 outcomes of examination and the only outcome consistent with that report was 'accepted subject to revisions to be completed within 10 weeks'.
>
> Why is the Dean wasting both of our time telling me irrelevant sh*t?
>
> The second report comes back and again the only outcome consistent with that report is 'accepted subject to revisions to be completed within 10 weeks'.
>
> My supervisor contacts me all upset 'I'm so sorry you have failed!'.
>
> Are these people retarded that they cannot parse the reports of the examiners?
>
> I point out my supervisor doesn't get to decide. She's not an examiner.
>
> I get a letter from the Graduate Research School from an administration person saying 'pay us additional fees for a period of re-enrolment or you will not get your qualification'. I point out that she doesn't get to decide, either.
>
> I get a letter from the Dean (whose decision is final apparently) saying that I need to pay additional fees for an extended period of re-enrolment.
>
> I point out that this decision is not based in the reports of the examiners. Calendar Regualtions state that if the examiners intend 're-enrol' and 're-submit' outcomes they are required to return the thesis to the candidate (and their examiners pack informed them they would be reimbursed for courier / air mail costs of returning a thesis).
>
> They didn't return the thesis as they are required to do if they intend the outcome to be re-enrol and re-submit.
>
> They didn't say 're-enrol' or 're-submit' in their reports.
>
> The only outcome of examination based in teh reports is that I have up to 10 weeks to make changes that may be substantive.
>
> Then the University is required to accept my thesis in fulfilment of Regualtions for the Degree.
>
> It is now, like 1 year later and the University still hasn't accepted my thesis.
>
> They refused to sign the forms accompanying the electronic copy (and refused to authorise campus copy hardbinding costs).
>
> I was supposed to submit the hardbound thesis within 10 weeks -- but the Univesity is supposed to cover those costs. The University administration refused to authorise the hardbinding of the thesis.
>
> ___________________________
>
> I followed the University internal complaints resolution.
>
> People seem incapable of parsing the reports of the examiners.
>
> They seem to have it in their heads that there are 2 outcomes of examination 'pass' or 'fail' and because both examiners did not say in their reports 'pass' the thesis is failed.
>
> I don't know (or care) where they get these ideas.
>
> They are paid to follow their regulations.
>
> ______________________
>
> I f*ck*ng hate this country.
>
> Where is the justice for me?
>
> _____________________
>
> So last year my application to Medicine is declined because I haven't completed my Degree. By delaying getting my thesis out to examiners the University delayed getting reports back from examiners until after the arbirtrary date when teh University required the reports to be back for selction to MEdicine.
>
> But then the University miscalculated my GPA for selection for Medicine. According to their own algorithm on how GPAs are supposed to be calculated. THey thought they would simply miscalaculate mine .6 too low so they could tell me that even if I had have completed my thesis on time I wasn't academically strong enough for a place in Med.
>
> So this year they are telling me that my applicatino to Medicine is declined because my Degree hasn't been conferred already. Teh University is still refusing to accept that I completed the requirements for the Degree and they have no grounds to refuse to have accepted in fulfilment of regulations for the Degee on eof the substantively updated theses that I presented to them for sign off within 10 weeks of the outcome of examination that was delivered by teh Dean January 11 of 2018.
>
> _______________________
>
> Whenever I tell people (particularly students) about the above they jump on the 'you failed!' bandwagon.
>
> I feel like following the internal complaints resolution process.. The NZ Zealand complaints resolution process (the Ombudsman) etc is just a way of the mob gaining momentum... Mobbing of... Me.
>
> Because there is this whole thing of 'nobody completed graduate research Degrees in the minimum, normal, or standard time'.
>
> That is because the Universities will violate every regulation in the book in order to not give you your Degree.
>
> They are too busy giving Degrees to people who did not earn them (e.g., because their supervisor or because their department or because their independently paid editors etc etc etc wrote them for them).
>
> That's why the time to completion is important. It shows that you did your own work -- because you could not have paid anybody else to do it that quickly for you.
>
> But we don't actually want capable competent people.
>
> We would rather not pay them.
>
> We can just steal their stuff...
>
> Until they stop producing...
>
> Swampy swamp swamp swamp.
>
> We don't want i-phones and internet and cars and sewerage systems. We don't want medications and television. We don't want the products of overseas arts and culture (the music and the television shows). We just want to live in our local community 'yes sir no sir anything you say sir' can't even organise a local garden...
>
> Sigh.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Your university seems like something out of Kafka. I'm sorry Alex.
So they haven't recognized your latest thesis?
Posted by alexandra_k on January 2, 2020, at 21:41:28
In reply to Re: Universities. » alexandra_k, posted by beckett2 on January 2, 2020, at 20:02:27
I applied 28 February for 5 March start (2018)
University Calendar Regulations say 'applications for thesis enrolments are due one month before the intended start date'. Then there is guff on how late applications may be considered...
Regulations are ambiguous. Maybe you can apply any time in February to start any time in March. Or maybe if you want to start 28 March your application is due 28 February.
Either way they violated their regulations when they refused to enrol me until 01 May.
I have evidence of work done / supervision received by email since 5 March.
They just refuse to accept it.
_______
I submitted a thesis for examination 14 September (2018)
I couriered 3 softbound copies as I was required to do. I signed my portion of ethics statement (my own work, no misuse of human subjects, ethics approval granted for animals) and an electronic copy to the Research School.
They swore black and blue 'nooooooo, you need to hand it in in peeeeerson you can't post it!' and 'nooooooo, you need to send it to 'Research School' not 'Dean of Research School, Research School' and 'noooooo you can't submit it without your supervisors permission'!
They said it was too early because I'd only been working on it for 4 months and refused to accept evidence I'd been working on it since March.
________
My 6 month review was not released to me until end September (after I submitted my thesis for examination). My supervisor said my progress was satisfactory - which is all regulations require her to say. My supervisor said it would be better if I 'kept working' but this is, of course, irrelevant.
My 6 month review had my 'thesis submission date' recorded as being '30 April 2019'. Which is 2 months extra on a 12 month enrolment. In other words, they decided before they sent it to examiners that they would not accept a thesis from me unless it was 2 months 'late' and unless I paid 2 months (at least) of additional fees.
The decision to refuse to accept a thesis to me any earlier than that was not a decision based on the reports of examiners.
It was a decision made before the theis went out for examination.
________
My supervisor and the Dean persuaded me that I could 'keep working' for a couple more weeks and the examination process would continue without any delay because it typically took a couple weeks to get it to examiners, anyway. I kept working on it only becuase I believed the new version would go out without any delay in the examination process. If I understood that providing them with a new version meant they would then swear black and blue I never submitted the old one and if I wanted an outcome of examination by 7 December (3 months after submitting) I wasn't going to get one because they tricked / fooled me into submitting late.
So the last report came back a week later than it should have because they decided not to process the thesis that I submitted for examination in September. Which is not a decision that they get to make.
Only I don't suppose it says in the Calendar how long examination is supposed to take. They could take 10 years before they send it out for examination. They could take out shares in this that or the other thing on the basis of inforamtion contained. They could take out copyrights. They could take out patients. They could detain the work indefinately and profiteer from it themselves... There don't appear to be any regulations preventing them doing that.
The reports came back and the Dean decided to reject the reports of the examiners. Apparently she gets to decide whether she thinks the examiners have written well written reports or not, whether htey are considered enough. Whether they will listen to what the examiners have to say...
Or whether they will say 'keep working' because they decided that months and months and months ago.
Because they decided all the way back in April (when they got around to considering my application for a Masters along with the PhD applications -- when I had not applied to study a PhD) that there was no way that they were going to let me complete the 120 point MPhil in a timely fashion. Because nobody does, you see. Nobody does. If it means they need to violate every regulation in their book nobody completes graduate research degrees in a timely fashion.
_______________
The only OUtcome of examination that is based on the reports of the examiners is that the thesis is accepted subject to substantive revisions ot be completed within 10 weeks.
That means they have 10 weeks to sign me off.
The first outcome is that it is accepted without any revisions. The second outcome is that it is accepted subeject to minor / typographical alterations that have been specified and that will be signed off by the supervisor. The third is that it is accepted subject to substantive revisions to be signed off by the supervisor or an examiner within 10 weeks. The fourth is that there needs to be an oral examination and another round of reports need to be written. The fifth is tha that the examiners *return the thesis to the candidate* and the candidate undertake no less than 6 months additional work and submit a thesis for another round of examination. The sixth is that the candidate is failed.
My supervisor read the reports of the examiners and decided I was failed. I did not complete the degree in the minimum time.
I don't know if she's intellectually handicapped or corrupt. I don't know what the problem is. The examiners did not say I was failed. The examiners did not say I was required to proceed to oral defence. The examiners did not return the thesis and did not say I was required to re-enrol or re-submit for another round of examination.
The examiners did suggest substantive changes.
My supervisor needed / wanted a holiday. Fine. Go nuts.
Then sign me off.
The Dean refused to pass my work on to externals so they could sign me off -- which is what they were required to do given that that was the outcome of examination that they both recommended.
Instead I get a letter from the Research School in January of 2019 inviting me (not to proceed to PhD -- which they could have done) but attempting to extort additional fees for a Degree they are required to sign off on, already (the Masters).
I was told I had 1 month to comply with their demand for re-enrolment or I would not qualify to complete the Degree at all.
_________
I followed University complaints resolution process.
I complained they did not enrol me in a timely fashion.
I complained they did not send a thesis submitted for examination out for examination so the process could be concluded in reasonable time (3 months on a degree that is supposed to take 1 calendar / 1 academic year only).
I complained that they did not deliver an outcome of examination in accordance with University regulations.I complained to the Reasearch Committee and the Associate Vice Chancellor and the Vice Chancellor.
None of them seemed capable of parsing the reports of examininers / following University Regulations.
I complained to the Ombudsman. Again, doesn't seem capable of understanding that the University is required to follow regulations and doesn't seem capable of understanding what the examiners said should happen in tehir reports.
_______________
I meet with my supervisor trying to help her understand the reports of the examiners.
She says any changes done in less than 6 months aren't subbstaaaaaaaaaantive enough by definition.
She turns outright abusive in our meetings.
She brings along another panelist apparently for her protection -- but I was grateful another person was there because she was the one who was yelling and screaming at me that I wasn't done until she says I'm done.
She only suggests typographical errors for the most part.
Any changes she feels are substantive are ones that basically involve deleting a bunch of content and replacing it with a bunch of other content. Because we are at the word limit of 50,000 words and so there aren't any words left for the MPhil.
They start up about kicking me out of the University.
Somehow I get conned / manipulated into following University complaints resolution process that they threw me out of the University around April. Somehow I am appealing for them to re-enrol me.
But they are required to invite me to my graduation ceremony. We don't apply to graduate at this University -- they are supposed to send out invitations.
I don't get my invitation to graduation.
Then they start generating many copies of fake / false academic transcripts for me on this online system that New Zealand has now. They say my last Masters was conferred with Honors (but it was not. I had completed Honors year previously and my Masters research project was part time over 2 years).
They change the name on scholarships I received (which have subsequenly had their name changes) so the scholarship on my transcript doesn't match the scholarship listed in teh Academic Calendar.
The University seems to have gone into self-destruct.
I submit a thesis for examination June 30.
When my Degree should have been conferred already.
All this work from all these meetings about what substttaaaaantive means and all the abuse. All of this was just... My supervisor having fun, I guess, because it's all just time and energy and efrort that she could have spent doing something productive. But instead she decided to invest all that in abusing me. Oh yay.
The reports of the examiners came back after however many months.
The overseas examiner (Canada) says he recoomends it proceeds to oral defence, now.
I got hold of an email dialogue between someone and him and the someone was basically trying to persuade him by email that I shuould keep working for 6 months. Unfortunately, the University Calendar doesn't say tha tthe outcome of examination is required to be based on email correspondance wehre the University tries to get the examiner to change the outcome of examination from the one they actually reccommended in their actual reports.
But he seemed to think that if the University of Waikato was going to waste his time (getting him to write another report when he wrote them a report already and they chose to ignore it) then the University of Waikato could fork out for an all expenses paid trip to New Zealand.
_________
The New Zealand examiner said that I didn't do what they told me I should do in their last report. They expressed puzzlement about why I didn't do what they told me to do. They said that since I didn't do what they told me to do they were reccommending I be failed.
They said that they would be embarrassed to be associated with my thesis. They said that by that they meant that they wouldn't want to sign off on it without seeing some kind of commentary of why I did not change various things.
Of course I wrote them precisely that commentary. I wrote them a commentary on the first 3 or 4 chapters within 1 week of receiving their reports to allow for time to negotiate some of the things so that the person signing me off would feel comfortable in doing so. But my supervisor / the Dean did not give that commentary to the examiner. Instead they decided to set about extorting additional fees.
_____________
The Dean said that this round of examination was a round wehre the examiners were in agreement that the thesis was not acceptable as it was and therefore the Dean decides that my thesis is failed.
I pointed out that one examiner said the thesis should be failed. The other examiner said the thesis should proceed to oral defence. In the case of divergent outcomes the University Calendar says the Dean is required to appoint a 3rd examiner.
The Dean says 'nooooooo and you can't make me'.
I appeal that to the Research COmmittee...
I appeal that to the Associate VC...
I appeal that to the VC...
_______
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
You can't maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaake us.
Give us moooooooooooooooooooooooooore money.
More money
Give us all the money
While you explain to us what our regulations mean.
Because we aren't capable of understanding them.
We wrote a clause in our Calendar that says 'the Dean must report violations to regulations to the researh school'.
And that gives us lisence ot violate all the regulations
And have many Research School meetings about how clever we are in violating our regulations because our regulations allow us to do whatever we want whenever we want!
Hurrah!And in this manner...
No research is produced.
Not by the research school.
Not by anybody else.It's like cancer. If people used to die from cancer then treatments that increase their life expecanacy increase the incicdence because more people are living with cancer.
They decide that they can double the size of their research school by refusing to sign people off for at least twice the time.
Medicine gave me a deadline. YOu are required to compelte a degree in the normal or standard time.
People in NZ don't know what the normal or standard time is.
They don't know what that looks like.
Because we are too used to goign at the pace of the slowest.
Then the slowest get put right up front and we give them big sticks so tehy can better beat the people around them back.
We don't want people doing things like developing the laws, developing the technologies, producing the infrastructures. We don't want the people with the capacity to do this tha tand the other thing to do this that and the other thing.
We just want to hang about in our swampy swamp swamp congraduating each other on our regulaition violations.
WE can do whatever we want and who is going to stop us!
And that is why you want to finish University? Because you want to join them?
What is it that they dooooo exactly?
ffs.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 2, 2020, at 22:03:39
In reply to Re: Universities. » alexandra_k, posted by beckett2 on January 2, 2020, at 20:02:27
I moved though things quickly.
The more they became involved in them, the worse things got.
The more I tried to... Pander... To them, the worse things got.
There is no reasoning with people, often.
People just say things that were said to them without it having done many circuits of their cortex, at all.
That is why people say various things to me -- it isn't that those things are true of me, it is that those things are true of them.
They are like parrot-birds repeating the words without them having internalised them or...
Encoding them by meaning.
I see that most people genuinely do not seem able to put the Calendar Regulations and the Reports of the Examiners together and see the obvious truth that the University is required to sign me off within 10 weeks.
My supervisor still doesn't seem to understand this.
The only reason she agreed to supervise me was because she thought she got to decide when I was done. She thought I wasn't allowed to submit a thesis for examination without her permission. Turns out she thought that every thesis she was ever examined was pre-aproved by the students supervisor.
That might be true. Different Universities have different regulations. But the regulations were sent to my examiners and there was nothing in those regulations about the supervisor being required to pre-approve a student submitting their thesis for examination.
Of course they try and bully people out of submitting. They say that they think they will be failed.
In my case someone (not sure who) emailed one of the examiners and basically suggested to them that I be required to keep working for 6 additional months.
Because that person (likely my supervisor) did not seem capable of understanding the reports.
_____________
I did look into other options...
Otago (since I was located there). A conversation with the Departmental Chair did not at all go well. He was hostile to my topic and he wasn't going to let me to do independent research.
They werent' going to let me do independent research.
Nobody would supervise me...
Because they knew that I had the capacity to do it.
______________
That's the truth of it.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 2, 2020, at 22:08:44
In reply to Re: Universities. » beckett2, posted by alexandra_k on January 2, 2020, at 22:03:39
So the people whose job it is to help are those who set out to use their power to harm.
That is why they wanted the jobs they got for themselves.
The jobs where they have the power to do phenomenal harm.
The University of Auckland... Apparently it used to be top 50. Or maybe it was top 100. In more recent years (say the last 15) it has only been going downhill...
A huge part of that is in segration away from international community.
We don't care what people have to say about quality when the people only have the quality to go on (Nobody overseas cares who's the VCs kid etc etc etc).
We think we know better...
Okay, then,
Where are the NZ Journals, then?
Where are your research outputs? What is it that the University produces? Where is it?
It is... Delighting? Thought provoking? Entertaining?
Or is there...
Nothing.
None of it.
Have you managed to bully people into ceasing production entirely.
Yes.
Ceasing production entirely.
Well done.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 3, 2020, at 15:15:12
In reply to Re: Universities. » alexandra_k, posted by beckett2 on January 2, 2020, at 20:02:27
> Your university seems like something out of Kafka. I'm sorry Alex.
It really does.The Dean said 'we try and wrap up the examination process within 3 months' before I enroled in the Degree.
So my submission date was 3 months in advance of when I needed the outcome of examination.
So my submission date was 14 September.
I told my Supervisor what the Dean said and she was like 'oh, I don't think it will take that long, if you take another couple weeks to do it I'm sure the examiners can write their reports a couple weeks earlier than they normally would'.
I was speechless in the face of this lunacy.
I am pretty sure that (at some point) I said that it was probably better to think that the examiners would do their work 'normally' rather than 'faster than normal' and get it to them 'normally'.
But my supervisor had re-defined 'normally' as 'impossibly early' and 'late' as 'normally' already and there was no reasoning with her on any of this.
I was grateful not to submit it in person.
I was fearful that the Research School might actually close shop for the day. Bar the doors. Hide.
Bring out security.
?
Lock me in a mental institution for daring to submit my work, on time?
Just how bad are things, in New Zealand?
?
?
?
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.