I am just trying to graduate with a PhD. So I went to a conversion exam today and it SUCKS.

okay...if you actually understand then, fine. if u dont, it doesnt matter. it's just a vent.

it started with a 15 minutes presentation involving 52 slides, with interjection of questions during presentation. along the presentation i was randomly asked to clarify some terms, like what are my samples and what are the mechanism involved in toxicity (incidentally, not relevant to my study). of coz i dont know how to answer the mechanism of toxicity but i just briefed them what does my statement means. after that, the bombing begins, i was asked abt my objectives of study, and if i have completed them (yes i did) and then, they asked my why i use ready-to-eat cereals and not follow the Food Act definition LAW of PROCESSED FOOD instead. so they said my TITLE is wrong. (my impression was clear that ppl who comments on the title means they couldnt find any other things to comment on).then.... they moved on to COMMENTING on the samples and said that if Bacillus cereus were so common in milk or fried rice, why NOT do milk or fried rice. i explained that the research was funded by ministry and it's to assess risk related to cereals and apparently, they said i was wrong. and said that i dont have the ability to THINK. (a good retort would be, them not having the ability to hear nor think).

it went on to other non-related questions which I really couldnt remember anymore, because i brushed them off as it is NOT relevant to the field that i am in, FOOD SAFETY. and i was asked what is the SOURCE of contamination, which i discussed that there are probable sources/factors that affects the enumeration but i did not look into identifying the source because it wasnt in the objective. so if it's not in the objective, then shud I have the answer? NO.. and thus, the second conclusion of them saying that I'm stupid.

AND THEN, in my proposal, i said a survival study shud be carry out to understand the risk relevant to storage period, and i dont know why i was told to analyze the INGREDIENTS of cereals. i defended it that this is a risk study on consumption of cereals products and consumers, eat the entire cereal products and not one single ingredient separately. and then, i was told "MY DEAR, YOU NEED TO DO ANALYSIS ON INGREDIENTS TO IDENTIFY THE PROBLEMS. This shows me that your mentality is not a phd material and u r just a junior researcher mentality.' of course i tried to defend myself, and it failed.

then the inevitable question came, what is the general hypothesis of your research? godness. f*ck off with hypothesis. i braved myself and said that THERE IS NO hypothesis in this research, non-relevant, but 4 associate professors said THERE IS A HYPOTHESIS IN EVERY RESEARCH. and i said it is to see whether the spores are prevailing after the processes and I WAS WRONG in hypothesis identification because, if that is the hypothesis, then my entire research is wrong. i was told that to prove that hypothesis, i would have to do a study before and after the industrial processes. Yeeaaaahhh...

other (harsh) questions asked was "what are your excellence?", "why do you need to convert?", because conversion are only applicable for special/extraordinary cases, which they dont see it in me (yes, they said that to me to my face).

'what are the reasons of you asking for the conversion and WHY must we give it to you?". unfortunately, I dont know why i almost cried when answering this question. i said, i am serious about getting this phd and i can work for it. if u ask me what are my incentives then i said next year is my mom's 60th bday and i dont wanna be in postgrad school anymore, and it's just an incentive to do go all the way for her. that's all. and they laughed at me. sigh. i'm so embarassed.

and then kena again "this is your last chance to prove yourself. what are your contributions to food safety?" and as i answered, dr 1 turned away from me and laughed while dr 2 tried not to laugh, dr 3 was just looking away and i dont remember what dr 4 said.

inevitably unnecessarily humiliating myself, finally dr 1 ended it saying "we've heard enough from you and we will finalize with gso and a report. we will get back to you in due time.'
from the looks of it, of coz i failed.

i hate them now. i'm torn between cussing them into oblivion, or graciously forget about it. I think because I'm a woman, i have the rights to go ahead and vent out.

the bloody fudging committee has reached the decision of failing me before i even started. the main point of me being there was just to torture my ass, made me wait for 2 hours for their excellency to arrive, interrupt me during my presentation, and finally insulted my incentives/objectives on why I wanted to get a PhD. oh well. good lesson anyway.

Well, one thing GREAT about this is that, even THEY failed their professorship because THEY arent that great after all! HAH! SCREW YOU!