date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2016/01/19
| 470
| 1,895
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have noticed that quite frequently MOOCs close their enrollment, and content is made available only for students who are enrolled. Why?
[Example](https://www.edx.org/course/discrete-time-signal-processing-mitx-6-341x-0):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ET53k.png)<issue_comment>username_1: Lacking individual interaction between instructor and student, MOOCs often have a policy that this kind of feedback is replaced by interactions with the "community" of other students on web forums. So my sense is that closing enrollments from time to time recreates traditional semesters, that is, batches up students into similar cohorts in time -- and then hopefully this serves to create a "critical mass" of respondents on the forums, who are all working through like material at about the same time, and more likely to respond to each other's questions and concerns in a coherent fashion.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: And to add to Daniel's answer, the instructors may also want to set a pace, akin to traditional in person lessons. Releasing new material on regular intervals, the are encouraging students to follow it at the set pace.
So, if you sign up, and get a new lecture every week, are more likely to watch them on time, digest the material, and keep on the course, that if you sign up and get a backlog of 30 lessons to watch, and growing.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: From the students' perspective, it doesn't make much sense to close the course. From an institutional perspective, however, it's usually just a budget and reputation concern.
If nobody official is answering questions, the course looks dead, which makes the school look flakey. At the same time, the cost of hiring someone to manage the course all the time is prohibitive. So, courses get closed.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/19
| 293
| 1,237
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am looking at an advertised Masters thesis/internship that could lead to a PhD. The first contact should be made by email.
Is there any chance it could be looked down upon if I send that first email late at night?
I live (and currently study) in the same timezone as that of the research group, and that will be made evident by the contents of my first email.<issue_comment>username_1: Officially and practically, no. Applicants often worry about things that faculty hardly have time to even think through. Your application is understandably your central focus but it can't be the faculty's with the same level of attention.
In a nutshell, on the faculty side, I really can't imagine a colleague would care about that unless there were instructions for the time etc.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As long as the application arrives on time, you do not need to worry. Sometimes, there are hard cut-off times on the advertisement, stating time and timezone; that is an indication that you need to be on time.
Apart from that, nobody would bother about the time you send it anyway. After all, you could be logged in from anywhere in the world when you send off your mail.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/19
| 619
| 2,513
|
<issue_start>username_0: For giving a research presentation, I will need to refer to papers with multiple authors. When citing in the slides, I use the convention (as does everyone else) of 'et al.' How should I pronounce this when speaking during the presentation? I don't speak French fluently, but I know that the French pronunciation is 'ai-taal'. I am not sure how this would be pronounced in the English speaking world. What is the conventional pronunciation of 'et al.' in presentations for English speakers/researchers?<issue_comment>username_1: I often just say "and others", "and friends", or just "Foo" for "Foo, et al.". People can see on the screen that there are others and refer to your references to see who those others are. No one is misled or confused if you drop the others in what you say aloud.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The standard English pronunciation can be found in a dictionary, see, e.g., [*et al*. at MacMillan dictionary](http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/et-al).
However, during a presentation, instead of reading that abbreviation, it is probably nicer to say something like: "Smith and his/her group/coauthors/colleagues published the paper [...]".
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The problem with "et al." is that, unlike "etc.," it changes depending on the gender of the other authors, which is not always easily apparent. There are actually three different forms (masculine, feminine, and gender neutral) meaning "and others" and an additional completely separate phrase also abbreviated "et al." that means "and elsewhere." One would argue you could just say the gender-neutral "et alia," but that is usually only supposed to refer to things without gender, not things with an unknown gender. Because of these complications and, as is often the case, an ignorance of the gender of the other people involved in the report, I would just pronounce it, "ett ahl."
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Another solution, if there aren't that many authors, is simply to **say all names out loud when presenting**. In my field, where papers with more than 5 or so authors are uncommon, sometimes we would use "et al." to avoid having to fit more than one or two names on the slide, but the simplest is to say all names out loud when presenting. (And afterwards you can just say "they".)
Of course, this requires sufficient familiarity with the work to know off the top of your head the name of all these authors.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/20
| 2,369
| 8,224
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am very interested in understanding the aspects of current social science research that are *generally* accepted as being problematic (by researchers and other commentators).
I regard problematic aspects as those which at least some academics regard as as sub-optimal and present as problems which a discipline (or academia in general) should endeavor to address.
The problematic nature of the concepts (i.e., names for practices) that I have listed below can be inferred from the references that I have linked to them; which draw attention to issues that the authors feel are detrimental to research (either in general or within a specific area of inquiry).
---
**Problematic practices:**
*Authoring practices*
1. Plagiarizing: researchers using another writer's words without proper citation (Loui 2002)
2. Self-plagiarizing: researchers reusing their own work without proper citation (Loui 2002)
3. P-hacking: researchers engaging in different processes until they find significant results (Simmons et al. 2013)
4. Harking: researchers hypothesizing post-results so that they appeared to have predicted something you they did not (Kerr 1998)
5. Data dredging: researchers searching through data to find anything that is significant (Smith and Ebrahim 2002)
6. Underpowered studies: researchers conducting studies with research designs which lack sufficient power (Maxwell 2004)
7. Lack of relevance: researchers conducting research that has little practical relevance (Bolton and Stolcis 2003)
8. Lack of studies which replicate other studies: researchers conduct too few studies which attempt to replicate prior findings (Ioannidis 2005)
9. Selective publishing of results: researchers running multiple studies and only reporting the most favourable ones (Turner et al. 2008)
10. Unjustified self-citation: researchers citing their own work without valid reason (Gami et al. 2004)
*Journal practices*
1. Publisher paywalling: journals make much current research [some publicly funded] becomes paywalled and inaccessible to most people (Teplitskiy et al. 2015)
2. Dissemination delay: journals' review cycles are too slow and delay publication (Smith 2010)
3. Editorial favoritism: journal editors may be biased toward accepting certain researchers research (e.g., due to familiarity, or prestige) (Yoon 2013)
4. Significance favoritism: journals have excessive preference for significant results: Most journals will generally only accept research with significant results (Fanelli 2011)
5. Self-citation favoritism: journals have excessive preference to publish papers that cite prior publications (Tighe et al. 2011)
6. Blind faith in peer review: Despite being almost universally adopted by prestigious journals, peer review doesn’t result in higher quality research and has many known flaws (Smith 2010)
---
**My question:**
Which concepts (if any) from the list above would you modify, add, or remove?
For instance, do any of the concepts mentioned have alternate names that I should know about (e.g., data dredging and harking are similar), or better, more accepted names that I should use instead?
Similarly, there any concepts (i.e., practices) that I have failed to include in my list or any which you think should be removed from the list? Maybe some research says that actually a given practice is good for academia, or there is additional research which highlights issues that I do not mention?
If you, based on your personal experiences, or opinions, can rule out, or contribute even a single concept then that would be a very valuable answer.
It would be an even more valuable answer if you could provide evidence (e.g., a published source) to argue why the concept is, or is not, considered to be problematic within social science research.
Thank you :)
---
**References:**
<NAME>. and <NAME>. (2003) 'Ties that do not bind: Musings on the specious relevance of academic research', Public Administration Review, 63(5), 626-630.
<NAME>. (2011) 'Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries', Scientometrics, 90(3), 891-904.
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>. and <NAME>. (2004) 'Author self-citation in the diabetes literature', Canadian Medical Association Journal, 170(13), 1925-1927.
<NAME>. (2005) 'Why most published research findings are false', PLoS medicine, 2(8), e124.
<NAME>. (1998) 'HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known', Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196-217.
<NAME>. (2002) 'Seven ways to plagiarize: Handling real allegations of research misconduct', Science and Engineering Ethics, 8(4), 529-539.
<NAME>. (2004) 'The persistence of underpowered studies in psychological research: causes, consequences, and remedies', Psychological Methods, 9(2), 147.
<NAME>., <NAME>. and <NAME>. (2013) 'Life after p-hacking', in Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, New Orleans, LA, 17-19.
<NAME>. and <NAME>. (2002) 'Data dredging, bias, or confounding: they can all get you into the BMJ and the Friday papers', BMJ: British Medical Journal, 325(7378), 1437.
<NAME>. (2010) 'Classical peer review: an empty gun', Breast Cancer Res, 12(Suppl 4), S13.
<NAME>., <NAME>. and <NAME>. (2015) 'Amplifying the impact of Open Access: Wikipedia and the diffusion of science', arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.07608.
<NAME>., <NAME>. and <NAME>. (2011) 'Artifactual increase in journal self-citation', Anesthesia & Analgesia, 113(2), 378-382.
<NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>. and <NAME>. (2008) 'Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy', New England Journal of Medicine, 358(3), 252-260.
<NAME>. (2013) 'Editorial Bias in Legal Academia', Journal of Legal Analysis, 5(2), 309-338.<issue_comment>username_1: **I would add:**
>
> Disguising political opinions and agenda as scientific facts.
>
>
>
The majority of scholarly work in social science has political motivations or implications. Too often the tools of experimental sciences (statistics mostly, but there are other examples) are used to legitimate what is really the author's political opinion.
Possibly, the source of this unwanted, if not fraudulent, behavior, is the push from funding sources to evaluate social sciences output the same way that experimental and STEM research is. Hence the absurd push to use statistics and show "significance" for issues were they are really not indicated.
**I would remove:**
>
> Publisher paywalling
>
>
>
Although unfashionable, that is an efficient way of funding quality publishing.
Also, for non social-science fields I think what you refer to as "data dredging" is not problematic, and actually an interesting approach. There is growing interest in computer programs mining large data sets in search for clusters, co-variance and correlation. Although it would then be dishonest to obfuscate the fact that the relationships were found that way, of course.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion "harking" and "data dredging" are sufficiently dissimilar to merit separate points. You could run the tests you had planned to run (therefore probably not "data dredging"), find results that seemed quite opposite to what you hypothesized, and then change your hypothesis when you saw it didn't line up with your initial predictions (therefore "harking"). So they're both problematic practices, but different enough to warrant separation.
I do think however "data dredging" and "P value hacking" are essentially the same thing. Both involve going way, way off the path you'd originally planned for your analysis and scrambling around to find literally anything significant, even if you had not made a single prediction about any of the tested relationships. If I had to pick one name though I'd say "data dredging," because "P value hacking" makes me think more of outright falsifying p values... which is a different issue from running a million random tests until something produces a p value you like but didn't tamper with.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/20
| 746
| 3,124
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in my second year of University in Computer Science for a Bsc and I'm getting very scared for the following reason : all jobs I'm interested in seem to ask for a Software Engineers!
I'm starting to worry I didn't make the right choice in chosing CompSci...
Should I try to switch for Software Engineer?
I have a 3 year Technical DEC (Diplôme étude collégial = Collegial Study Diploma (Quebec CEGEP diploma)) in Applied Computer Sciences and have done some side projects...
Could this help me land a software engineer job even if I only have a Bsc In Computer Science and not a Software Engineer degree?
Will I have to redo all my courses even if some are almost the same?
I'm not even sure I understand the difference between the two programs to be quite honest...
Thanks for helping.<issue_comment>username_1: **I would add:**
>
> Disguising political opinions and agenda as scientific facts.
>
>
>
The majority of scholarly work in social science has political motivations or implications. Too often the tools of experimental sciences (statistics mostly, but there are other examples) are used to legitimate what is really the author's political opinion.
Possibly, the source of this unwanted, if not fraudulent, behavior, is the push from funding sources to evaluate social sciences output the same way that experimental and STEM research is. Hence the absurd push to use statistics and show "significance" for issues were they are really not indicated.
**I would remove:**
>
> Publisher paywalling
>
>
>
Although unfashionable, that is an efficient way of funding quality publishing.
Also, for non social-science fields I think what you refer to as "data dredging" is not problematic, and actually an interesting approach. There is growing interest in computer programs mining large data sets in search for clusters, co-variance and correlation. Although it would then be dishonest to obfuscate the fact that the relationships were found that way, of course.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion "harking" and "data dredging" are sufficiently dissimilar to merit separate points. You could run the tests you had planned to run (therefore probably not "data dredging"), find results that seemed quite opposite to what you hypothesized, and then change your hypothesis when you saw it didn't line up with your initial predictions (therefore "harking"). So they're both problematic practices, but different enough to warrant separation.
I do think however "data dredging" and "P value hacking" are essentially the same thing. Both involve going way, way off the path you'd originally planned for your analysis and scrambling around to find literally anything significant, even if you had not made a single prediction about any of the tested relationships. If I had to pick one name though I'd say "data dredging," because "P value hacking" makes me think more of outright falsifying p values... which is a different issue from running a million random tests until something produces a p value you like but didn't tamper with.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/20
| 801
| 3,480
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a completing Ph.D student. I submitted my thesis 4 months ago and have recently received the comments from the examiners. But to my surprise, two examiners have provided entirely different comments. One of the reviewers has appraised my thesis and congratulated on my work while the other has given intense/critical and harsh comments saying that the thesis may need some more work to be of a standard quality. I learned that the second reviewer who has provided extended comments will be attending in person for my oral exam. Could you please give me tips on how to appear confident and prepare in the best way possible. Most of the comments seem genuine but there are comments where he is beyond the objectives of my study.
Your help would be highly appreciated.
Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: You talk to your thesis advisor and do what s/he says. S/he'll be responsible for leading (or at least framing the) oral examination and working with the examiners to make sure that you get final approval.
None of us know you or your research or the needs of your university or department, the character and reputation of the examiners involved, and so forth -- you need a local expert.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The format and nature of the oral examination vary enormously by country. username_1's description of an oral examination would be very unusual in the UK (where it is customary for the supervisor to **not** be present, except maybe at the very end when the examiners deliver their verdict).
To answer your question: you should be candid about the weaknesses in your work, and prepared to explain why you made the decisions you made. You should also be prepared to explain in detail why you did **not** pursue a particular methodology or why you did **not** give much attention to a given perspective. Examiners will almost certainly ask "why did you not consider X?" or "Y is really important; why did you mention it only once in the whole thesis?". Possible approaches to answering such questions:
* explain that your data and sources are insufficient to enable an authoritative answer;
* explain that you do not have enough space to explore the topic X in a thesis primarily about topic Z;
* explain that you were concerned that a superficial treatment of topic X might come across as too polemical/biased, and might end up being misused as a political football (or result in others attributing approaches/beliefs to you that you do not hold) -- you are determined to avoid bias, and do not feel that your research qualifies you to tackle topic X with reasonable objectivity;
* demonstrate that you realise that topics X and Y are important, but only two among many important topics that could have been mentioned -- outline some more examples A, B, C, D, &c., and explain you could not see a case for why X and Y had to be included in detail;
* explain why topics X and Y are beyond the scope of the research questions you articulated in the thesis (and promise to add a footnote mentioning them briefly, plus a few cross-references to the literature).
Part of writing a coherent thesis is circumscribing the topic whilst also signposting other potential directions.
And finally, **where you encounter weaknesses, find ways to make them interesting and turn them into strengths** (e.g.: the data were inconclusive, but they raised some interesting questions on how we define success in phenomenon P).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/20
| 1,079
| 4,685
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to get some advice about this difficult situation concerning one of my PhD students.
Some time ago I wrote already about my status: I am assistant professor in Germany and very recently I got an offer for another permanent position abroad. I accepted it and in some weeks I will move there.
The problem I have is the following: my PhD student is paid from my personal grant that will be lost the time I will move (let me say that until very recently I didn't know that I could not move this grant, in part because I was not well advised. So now I do not have margin of negotiation with my new institution). However, I have had an agreement with the Department of the old institution and they will pay him from the remaining money of this personal project that I won in a competitive way (namely, this is not money from the department, strictly speaking).
The problem goes when I propose to the department a cotutoring: this means that I would be the advisor in my new location, and the head of my group (who completely agrees) to be the second advisor here. There are plenty of agreement between universities (at least in Europe) on this form, and in my new affiliation they are very happy about this idea and they have already provided the general agreement they use.
The problem comes from my previous institution: they just say NO from administration, and they do not give any other choice for this. So: what should I do? This seems to me very unhelpful, even more considering that the money will finish at the end of the year and a coadvising would help on the search of extra money.
Also, this would mean that officially they are proposing me to "forget" of being his official PhD advisor (after 1,5 years of work, which is half of the PhD this is unfair from their part towards me...).
How should I deal with this situation?
Let me mention that the main idea for this coadvising was that in this way we could ask for funding in a coadvising setting. This is necessary as in some months the money will be gone, and we need to get extra money for him to finish (6 months- 1 year)
Thank you<issue_comment>username_1: Maybe you could get a zero hours contract with your previous institution. In that way you are still formally associated with this institution, while you do not cost them any money. That might solve the problem with the administration, and maybe even save the grant.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I find your question a bit negative. It appears that you are blaming your current university for not giving you more support as you leave for your new university. Further, and potentially more problematic, is that you appear to be treating the student like a pawn. Have you asked the student what they want? Comments like
>
> after 1,5 years of work, which is half of the PhD this is unfair from their part towards me...
>
>
>
it is also extremely unfair of you to leave a student hanging out to dry halfway through a PhD. This is a student's worst nightmare.
I think it is important to realize that first and foremost, you screwed up. You did not adequately negotiate, prior to signing a contract, appropriate support for your current student. It surprises me that you are switching from one permanent position to another, yet you did not manage to secure enough startup funds to support a PhD student for 1.5 years.
To an extent, your new department is not being supportive. While you screwed up and did not realize that some of your grant money could not come with you, they are not willing to cover a student for 1.5 years. This is potentially problematic. Do you really want to work for a department that will not cover for you when you make mistakes?
Your current department has done nothing wrong as far as I can tell. Potentially, they were not as clear as they could have been about the grant funding, but you do not tell us much about that. Your current department needs to look out for its faculty and students. Paying for a student to work at another university is generally not in the best interest of the department. This is especially true if there are adequate supervisors in the current department.
Moving forward, I would suggest you talk to the student. Find out what the student wants. They might want to move completely to the new department. Similarly, they might want to cut ties with you. Maybe they want you as a co-supervisor. Once you know what the student wants, you, and to an extent you and the student, can ask for it. As for you, expecting to get anything "back" from the student and the time spent supervising the student, is a little unrealistic in this situation.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/20
| 706
| 3,072
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have some doubts about reusing some material from Coursera for a set of lecture notes that I put online as part of the courses that I am lecturing. In some ocassions I use some Coursera material, mostly exercises that are based on source codes provided by the authors, and referenced them in my lecture notes. The question that I have is that if need to ask for permission, to the lecturer that is given the course on Coursera, to reuse his/her material or only with referencing would be enough?<issue_comment>username_1: Maybe you could get a zero hours contract with your previous institution. In that way you are still formally associated with this institution, while you do not cost them any money. That might solve the problem with the administration, and maybe even save the grant.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I find your question a bit negative. It appears that you are blaming your current university for not giving you more support as you leave for your new university. Further, and potentially more problematic, is that you appear to be treating the student like a pawn. Have you asked the student what they want? Comments like
>
> after 1,5 years of work, which is half of the PhD this is unfair from their part towards me...
>
>
>
it is also extremely unfair of you to leave a student hanging out to dry halfway through a PhD. This is a student's worst nightmare.
I think it is important to realize that first and foremost, you screwed up. You did not adequately negotiate, prior to signing a contract, appropriate support for your current student. It surprises me that you are switching from one permanent position to another, yet you did not manage to secure enough startup funds to support a PhD student for 1.5 years.
To an extent, your new department is not being supportive. While you screwed up and did not realize that some of your grant money could not come with you, they are not willing to cover a student for 1.5 years. This is potentially problematic. Do you really want to work for a department that will not cover for you when you make mistakes?
Your current department has done nothing wrong as far as I can tell. Potentially, they were not as clear as they could have been about the grant funding, but you do not tell us much about that. Your current department needs to look out for its faculty and students. Paying for a student to work at another university is generally not in the best interest of the department. This is especially true if there are adequate supervisors in the current department.
Moving forward, I would suggest you talk to the student. Find out what the student wants. They might want to move completely to the new department. Similarly, they might want to cut ties with you. Maybe they want you as a co-supervisor. Once you know what the student wants, you, and to an extent you and the student, can ask for it. As for you, expecting to get anything "back" from the student and the time spent supervising the student, is a little unrealistic in this situation.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/20
| 578
| 2,475
|
<issue_start>username_0: A lot of scientist that I've talked to are worried about sharing their ideas with too many people. They get very protective of those ideas. Here are some reasons why:
1. Ideas are harder to define on your own
2. Ideas are hard to validate
3. There is no good way of getting constructive feedback outside of my network
4. Ideas get stolen with no reference or credit to the source
5. Afraid of stupid idea
As a scientist, do you agree or disagree with these observations?<issue_comment>username_1: I disagree with the basic premise, that scientists do not share their research ideas. I, like most scientists that I know, share most research ideas quite freely, for the following reasons:
* I always have more research ideas than I have time to pursue them.
* Ideas are easy, implementation is hard.
* Sharing ideas is a good way to build collaborations.
* The more people who are interested in the ideas I'm interested in, the better it is for us all.
The only type of "ideas" that I do *not* typically share are the details of proposals that I am currently writing. The general ideas are probably shared with others, but the particular pitch to a particular call for proposals is obviously competition-sensitive information.
Now, there are some scientists who I know who are much more cagey about their ideas, often because they are insecure about their ability to have ideas and undervalue implementation and execution, and I tend to find that these people are less successful than those who share more freely.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I was a bit brusque in my comment there so perhaps I owe a more detailed answer. There are a few folks I know who like to keep their cards close to their chests when members of "competing groups" are around. I have to say I have only really seen this behaviour from the big American labs, but that might be a bias I have somehow.
It tends to be as the idea is moving towards publication, they don't want to be scooped by another group obtaining the idea, doing the experiment, and publishing the result first. It is more paranoia than anything else, although there are one or two examples where this has really happened and it caused a big stink at the time, even the editors of the journal had to get involved to sort it out.
But really this behaviour is quite rare. If you go to any scientific conference, they will talk just as much about new ideas as they talk about past work.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/20
| 1,356
| 5,563
|
<issue_start>username_0: I don't know how to ask this so please forgive my ignorance and lack of vocabulary. Consider a case as below. I just would like to know.. :
Can a PhD student who just defended their thesis, but is accused of plagiarism the day after that by his own advisor, be denied the right to correct/revise/resubmit/etc. the PhD thesis?
I think it's unfair that the student is denied the opportunity to correct/revise/resubmit/etc. with the reason being "there's no time". Long story short, the part covered by the accusation is only related to the explanation of some previous research (with difficulty in English) and the result of the defense was Successful. At least the advisor (and we generally as people in academic world) should help - at least give him/her a chance/right of resubmission/etc., not denying the student's hard work, worth and right. Many other people got the chance to at least resubmit/redefend/etc.
Any advice on what can be done also is very much appreciated.
[ADDITIONAL QUESTION]:
On [this page](https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/administration-and-support-services/registry/academic-governance/public/academic-policy/research-degree-examinations/Plagiarism-issues-in-theses.pdf), it's said that the Materials and Methods part is often given a high similarity score in plagiarism checker software. What I understand from the link is, a situation like this is acceptable; not considered as plagiarism. I wonder if this is also true for other/most universities/institutions?<issue_comment>username_1: The answer will depend on the rules and regulations of the university in question.
However, I would be surprised if the regulations gave the advisor total power to adjudicate such disputes. Usually such matters are referred to a committee at the department level or [in Europe] may be elevated to the university senate. There is usually some kind of process that tries to be fair and impartial in resolving these matters and usually the people will take it quite seriously.
The first thing I would do is read the regulations carefully, and seek advice from the head of the department or the chairman of the research student committee.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think it's relevant what kind of plagiarism this is.
If it's serious plagiarism, such as quoting large blocks of text without proper attribution, then that can be a serious academic offense. Asking why you can't just change it and re-submit is like asking why you can't just re-take an exam if you're caught cheating or why you can't just give the item back and forget everything if you're caught stealing.
Depending on your institutions procedures you might be allowed to resubmit if it's found that the plagiarism was minor, accidental or not actually plagiarism but I suspect you're missing the point.
Plagiarism in a submitted thesis isn't like a simple technical error to be corrected, it's potential wrong-doing or dishonesty to be investigated.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: There are a handful of issues here. First, an accusation of plagiarism does not make it plagarism. There is most likely a formal policy for cases like this. Things get messy if the work has already been graded and accepted. Many university polices allow retroactive punishments and universities can even revoke degrees. If, after the procedure concludes, and possibly your appeals have been exhausted, you are found to have plagarised, a penalty will be applied.
That penalty can vary substantially from a warning to expulsion. The academic misconduct panel I served on took an exceptionally harsh view of academic misconduct by graduate students and a exceptionally lenient view towards undergrads. Our university policy would not allow us to expel a student on a first offense. In the case of a thesis, we would be allowed to apply 3 penalties. The most lenient we could be would be to evaluate the thesis with the plagiarized material removed. If this caused the student to fail, they would be allowed to revise the thesis. The most harsh we could be would be to require them to submit a new thesis with entirely new work. This means an entirely new thesis project with all new writing, data collection, and analysis. In the final case, for localized plagarism, we could require the student to generate a new chapter or literature review.
My advice to you is to talk to student services ASAP about the university rules and getting independent representation. Most universities prohibit using lawyers in the process. Additionally you need to know why the accusations have arisen. Did you plagarise? Did you not understand what plagarism was? Did you make a copy and paste error? Maybe it is you who have been plagarised. Finally, setup a meeting with your advisor and another with your department chair. You need to know if your advisor and/or department are backing you or not.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: As a senior university academic, I would say that there is not really enough detail of the alleged misdemeanour to judge the severity of the case. However, if the fundamental research is unique and valid (as the successful defence of the thesis would imply it was), and a robust understanding of the area was demonstrated, then resubmission with ironing-out of over-similar sections would seem an appropriate outcome.
If this is at a UK university, approach your Students' Union for support, they will understand the norms and Regulations and have a mandate to represent you.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/20
| 1,185
| 4,230
|
<issue_start>username_0: I noticed that there are some significant variation in the salary of post-docs in Germany. The post-doc salary could be given in TVL13, TVL14, TVL15, and even TVL15U scales. This means that the net income could change from 2,000-4,000 Euros. I have currently an offer to start my post-doc with TVL-13 (Stufe 4) which gives a net income of 2,900 Euro. Is this something reasonable? What factors are important in determining the post-doc salary? and how could I change them?<issue_comment>username_1: Postdoc salary (like for any non-tenured academic position) in Germany is fairly rigidly structured. The salary is always according to the federal wage agreement ("Tarifvertrag der Länder", TV-L) and is determined by
* **pay scale** ("Entgeltgruppe"), which depends on the position, in particular, the responsibilities that are officially attached to it. (Basically, no formal responsibility means TV-L E13; responsibility for crucial infrastructure, e.g., running a big device or doing a specific analysis for all the group, means TV-L E14, and being head of a sizeable group means TV-L E15)
* **pay grade** ("Stufe"), which depends on how many years you've had this job (think automatic promotion); you start at Stufe 1, after 1 year you move to Stufe 2, after 2 more years it's Stufe 3 and so on.
* **percentage of working week** ("Wochenarbeitszeit"), which is just what it sounds like. (A full working week is about 40 hours.)
* **federal state** ("Tarifgebiet") of the institution, because the former Western states have a different agreement than the former Eastern states. (Eastern states have lower salary, because the cost of living is (assumed to be) lower.)
Only the second point actually depends on the applicant, the rest is tied to the position and needs to be fixed before it is even announced (e.g., as a 75% TV-L E13 position) and is therefore non-negotiable. The second point is somewhat negotiable by trying to get them to recognize previous postdoc positions with similar responsibility as time on the job (although that is an administrative matter, and the possible influence of the academic staff on the administration varies wildly...)
Which pay scale and in particular percentage is reasonable is very discipline-specific. If it's a full-time position with no responsibilities (such as running critical experiments for everyone else), it seems not bad because Stufe 4 is actually comparatively high (E13 only has five grades).
If you want to get gross and net salaries from pay scale, grade and percentage, you can look it up at <http://oeffentlicher-dienst.info> (in German, [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/44699/13852) might help navigating the site).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From my experience working 4 years in Germany, I can tell you that you got a reasonable deal. I don't know about those 2900, but at least in the Hamburg region that would be around 2500 Euros net.
You can check the values of 2015 (and beginning of 2016) [here.](http://oeffentlicher-dienst.info/c/t/rechner/tvoed/vka?id=tvoed-vka-2015&g=E_13&s=4&zv=VBL&z=100&zulage=&stj=2015&stkl=1&r=0&zkf=0&kk=15.5%25)
The TV13 is the standard position for researchers (Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter), which is basically the same as the PhD students, but a higher "Stufe" because of your years of experience. If you manage to get some special responsibility or lead a small group of students ("group leader"), it could be possible to upgrade it to TV14, but that depends on your group leader.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: TVL-13 is AFAIK non-negotiable. It sufficies to cover your costs and the costs of your spouse/partner even if you live in the top cities such as Frankfurt, Munich, or Freiburg.
A net income of 2900 € is well within the range of what you could get.
Now, if you'd like to re-calucate it, beware that fighting your way through the regulations, laws and formulas could easily take you about a full week of time. Personally, I've never heard of any single case when the university miscalculated your salary; moreover, it is *not* your mentor who manages your salary, but special administarion people from the university.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/20
| 426
| 1,655
|
<issue_start>username_0: Currently I do not belong to any institution and work from home.
Now can I put the name of the last university I attended in place of affiliation in a journal paper?
I have masters degree from Linkoping University, Sweden. Do I need to ask permission in this case ?
Regards,
Umair<issue_comment>username_1: Generally speaking, you should not put any institution as your affiliation unless you are currently based there, or did the work while you were based there. In this case, unless you did the research while at Linkoping, you should **not** give Linkoping as your affiliation.
See, for example, [this discussion](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/59327/what-affiliation-to-put-for-amateur-scientist-who-is-an-alumni-out-of-school-for?rq=1).
If it helps, it's worth remembering that the "affiliation" is in many ways an "address" - it evolved out of simply giving an address at which you could be contacted, and some journals still refer to it this way. It's not unknown in some fields for independent researchers to give their home address, but it's perhaps more common just to say "independent".
If you have no current affiliation, you can simply say "Independent researcher", or similar, and leave it at that (adding an email address is good, if not asked for elsewhere in the paper).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should leave it blank, or provide the name of your independent business (if you have one).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Or you can ask, if you still have contacts there, to become an adjunct/visiting researcher, getting a proper affiliation.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/21
| 1,035
| 4,591
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are many academic writing services (editing, proof reading and writing from scratch). These services range from writing basic essays to research papers and dissertations.
I will use editing and proofreading services because my mother tongue is different from the language of thesis.
I distrust these kinds of services, can they really do job appropriately and according to suitable form? Is this considered plagiarism and can they write in an original fashion?
Has anybody used these kind of services and what are your experiences?<issue_comment>username_1: There's a big difference between paying someone to proof read your thesis (generally acceptable, and sometimes encouraged) and paying someone to write original material from scratch (plagiarism).
The way your question is worded (and from one of the comments about getting someone to "edit and write the thesis") it sounds like you are asking whether if you pay someone to write part of your thesis, will they do it well enough that it wont be detected by plagiarism software (e.g., the idea that people who write paid essays just copy and paste huge chunks from Wikipedia and random journal articles). My apologies if this is not what you are asking. But to state the obvious point, paying someone to write your thesis and contribute intellectually is plagiarism and unethical whether they do it in a rigorous or a sloppy way. It is plagiarism, because you are not acknowledging the source of the intellectual effort.
Surely if you are paying someone merely to refine your expression, phrasing and give general guidance on structuring, then there is minimal risk of plagiarism.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Using a service that edits documents to correct grammar and spelling issues, and minor awkward phrasings, is acceptable and need not be acknowledged.
Using a translation service, to translate a document from your native language into English, is acceptable, though the translator needs to be prominantly acknowledged. If you can write in English, though, it may be better to do so, because many employers in academia may be wary of applicants who have not demonstrated high-level proficiency in English.
Using a "substantive editing" service, that re-writes a document to improve its logic, flow, general structure and rhetoric is problemmatic. Such an editor should probably be named as a co-author, but if not, needs to be very prominently acknowledged. The use of such a service may not be acceptable to those evaluating the thesis.
Using a writing service, where you provide your results and they write the document without working from a strong draft from you, is cheating, and not likely to be acceptable even if acknowledged.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In my university proofreading would be somewhat. Editing would normally not be acceptable. The reason is that the thesis assesses many aspects of your abilities. That includes not only your ideas (intellectual skills), but also your ability to express your ideas clearly, and even your ability to express yourself in (in this case) English (transferrable skills).
Getting someone to read through your work and identify typo's, runaway sentences and other little snafus is normally fine (and impossible to identify as well). On the other hand if someone corrects the way you structure your sentences, paragraphs and sections that is not appropriate. If however you use university resources (your thesis adviser perhaps, and/or library services) you will not need to worry about it being acceptable. At that point it is the university that is responsible for ensuring your learning experience.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: There are two issues. The first is, if the "academic writing service" did genuinely original work for pay and let you sign your name to it, would it be plagiarism or copyright violation? In a "corporate" setting, the answer would be "no," because it was "work for hire," to which the payor owns the rights. But in an academic setting, it would be plagiarism, because you are representing work done by others as your own work, and thereby overstating your capabilities.
The second issue is, can these services produce work that is sufficiently original not to violate copyright or constitute plagiarism. The answer is usually no. The reason is, unlike the situation with a corporation that will "pay what it takes," these services usually "shortcut" to keep their fees down. But this issue is "trumped" by the first one in the previous paragraph.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/21
| 766
| 3,388
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently finishing up my second year of undergraduate studies and overall I've gotten some pretty average to good grades. Over the summer, I would like to focus a little bit on myself and my health, but I'm worried not using my time to work on some academia would be detrimental when I want to apply to grad school.
What is something I could do that would still leave me with a lot of time to focus on myself?<issue_comment>username_1: If you want to do something that will help you get into and succeed in graduate school, I strongly recommend looking for a summer research project with a professor. Many professors hire students over the summer to work on projects with them, and some institutions even provide internal "student research" support that makes it particularly easy for any professor to do so.
There are many advantages of doing such a project, including:
* Getting a taste of research in general and also in a particular area, to see if you really like it
* Summer projects let you focus on research in a way that term-time projects do not, yet can still be confined to 9-5 hours.
* You will have an opportunity to learn a lot of research-specific skills.
* You will get to exercise things you learned in your classes, which may significantly improve both your knowledge and your motivation to learn, since you will tangle with the realities of applying this knowledge, and may improve your future grades.
* You will be able to talk about research experience and may be able to get a good recommendation letter from the professor you work with, both of which are extremely valuable for grad school applications.
Now, if you prefer to do other things, self-care, etc., there's no reason that you have to do such a project. It can, however, be a lovely experience, and if you're choosing between working a research job and working a non-research job, I highly recommend making the research choice!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: @Jakebeal has given you one very good option. If you can do this, and it won't take up too much of your time, then you probably should.
Alternatively, if you have no possibilities for joining a research lab, or you need more personal time that that would allow, another option which you might consider is collaborating with a researcher to write a literature review paper in an area that you are interested in.
Before doing this you would need to i) identify what to do with the paper (even publishing it on a blog could work) and ii) someone with publishing experience to collaborate with when doing it.
You need i) and ii) resolved to make this work, but both are doable. For instance you could email, or visit researchers, and ask them to i) suggest a place you could submit a review to, and ii) to supervise you with it.
The benefits (relative to working in a lab) are that this would be less time consuming and freedom restricting (you could work on it when you wanted). You could therefore have a non research job, take a holiday or do whatever. You would still be able to potentially get a reference and would definitely get some research experience. Of course the tradeoff is that you would not gain as much as if you actually worked within a laboratory, or directly within a research team.
Please let me know if you would like any more details/suggestions related to this :)
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/21
| 555
| 2,431
|
<issue_start>username_0: I began working on a paper during my undergraduate degree in the summer of 2014. I continued to work on the same paper into summer 2015, at which time I graduated and moved to a different university to pursue a graduate degree. However, all experiments failed and my collaborators and I were unable to produce any meaningful results. In fall 2015, while enrolled in graduate studies at the second university, I realized that the question at the centre of this paper could be answered using a completely different method. I contacted my collaborators and we have been able to produce some great results.
Now I am writing the paper and wondering what I should list as my affiliation, since the project was begun at one university but overhauled and completed at another. I see four options:
1. The old university
2. The new university
3. Both the old and new universities
4. The old university, with a “present address” note
What is standard practice in a situation like this, where work is begun in one lab but completed in another? Does the re-design of the project from the second university complicate the issue?<issue_comment>username_1: Most journals understand that such complexities exist, and will allow you to list multiple institutions, so all four of your options are certainly viable.
That said, given that you have done much of your work on the paper while at your new institution, your new institution should certainly be listed as an affiliation, which means that you should be using either your option #2 (new only) or #3 (both institutions).
That leaves the question of whether the old institution should be listed or not. From what I have seen, the customs on this tend to vary by field and also by institution: you can probably make a reasonable argument for either listing or not listing the old institution. I would thus recommend talking with your co-authors to see what their feelings on the matter are, particularly if you have some co-authors from the old institution on the paper, who are the ones most likely to be upset if your judgement disagrees with theirs (in either direction).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'd list "current affiliation", and acknowledge the other institutions where you worked. If some of your coauthors still reside there, you might just leave that out (the institutions are mentioned as *their* affiliations).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/21
| 2,498
| 10,963
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in a lab in experimental psychology at a pretty prestigious research university. I have worked there for a while (this is currently my fourth semester) for about 8+ hours a week, entirely unpaid. I have worked on menial tasks (data entry), more theoretical things (experimental design for complex studies), and of course actually running participants. Despite doing all this and doing it well, I really get the feeling that my graduate student (in our lab, each undergrad is generally paired with a grad from the start) is definitely not aimed at my success.
For example, our PI told me that she would support me in my pursuit of an undergraduate research grant, but there was some miscommunication about what exactly I'd be writing it on, so she told me to consolidate my idea with my grad student's very similar idea and go from there. Grad and I met and she completely shot down everything I said (very odd, since the PI liked my idea and had told us to work together) and actually recommended I write the grant on her behalf for one of her studies that I had nothing to do with. When I pointed out that the grant was specifically for undergraduate-designed research and was not intended to be used for grad students, she gave me some weasel-y response about "that's how things are done." I didn't write the grant, because I didn't feel good about potentially taking away one of the few grants exclusively for undergrads from another undergrad who legitimately deserved it.
I wanted to apply to complete a thesis in our lab -- honestly, that was a large part of working so long and hard in just one lab. However, Grad told PI that I was having problems with communication and that I seemed "extremely stressed," prompting PI to ask me if I really thought a thesis was a good idea. The hilarious part about that is I had literally just had a meeting with Grad that week and told her I was having a great time in life, the semester was going well, etc.; in fact, Grad told me SHE was stressed lately, not the other way around. There have been no communication issues, except once I was late for a participant because a friend had a medical emergency. (The participant was still ran successfully, by the way, and this is 1 in literally dozens of participants I have ran with professionalism.)
I just am starting to feel paranoid she is out to get me, or at least to step on whoever she has to get to the top. I also was kind of expecting authorship of some kind since I have done SO MUCH on this one study (been working on it for 2 years now, from "PI and I were talking about this new idea..." to training other research assistants on the study because I know it so well) but as it draws to a close, I get the feeling that authorship isn't a thing that will happen for me. I feel I have legitimately done as much as she has, and it makes me a little angry that she will get authorship when she sits on her laptop and says "looks good" while I work with other new RAs and has never ran a single participant for her own study. This makes me feel like I could have had a better professional benefit from being in another lab, but as the deadline for formal application for Honors rapidly approaches, I feel absolutely stuck and frustrated.
Thoughts? Ideas? Am I losing my mind?<issue_comment>username_1: Regarding authorship, it's the PI who would determine whether you get authorship, so I see this as a separate issue from Grad's awful (by the sound of it) behavior. As @NateEldredge said in the comments, you need to discuss the authorship issue with the PI. However, I suggest discussing that question on its own merits and not in connection with the fact that Grad was offered authorship. Don't imply that Grad hasn't earned or doesn't deserve authorship -- that is between the PI and Grad -- or that you've worked harder than her, since I feel those are weak arguments that won't help your case, nor will they make you look especially mature or classy. Just make the case that *you* earned and deserve it. If PI brings up criticism of you that she heard from Grad, be ready to refute that criticism, but do so in an objective, factual manner and without involving your grievances against Grad in the discussion.
Secondly, with regards to the more general problem of Grad acting to undermine you at every turn, that by itself may merit a discussion with the PI, but again I advise you to separate the two issues, and perhaps deal with the authorship issue first if you feel that is more critical. When you are ready to discuss this, I suggest documenting the precise issues that you see with Grad's behavior and having that documentation ready for the discussion. Again, stick to factual, objective statements as much as possible -- focusing less (or even not at all) about how she made you feel, and more about precise things she said or did.
Finally, if you try these suggestions and the PI was dismissive of your concerns, or if experience tells you that these suggestions are certain not to work, you may want to consider taking the matter up with higher authorities, such as the department chair, or recruit the help of various support resources (e.g., student union representative, university ombudsperson). However, given your description of the problem, it sounds like it may not be worth escalating the case to such levels. It will ultimately be unproductive for you to work in a lab whose PI takes advantage of you and doesn't respect concerns that you have about the work environment, so sadly in such a situation the best option may be to simply find another professor to work with.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In reading over your description, a few things stick out to me as very problematic. My concern is not the past issues - but how you'll be able to handle future issues with people like this, because you will encounter people like this no matter where you go.
The first issue is that you do not seem to have a healthy line of communication with your PI. If the PI said, "hey, that's a good idea, write that up as a grant and talk with X for help", and X shot you down and suggested something that sounded unethical...things should not have stopped there! Directly after you should bring it to the PI, with "I did what you asked/suggested and something odd happened. Do you have a moment to talk about it?" The goal is not "telling on" someone - it's clarifying with someone who is responsible for the work done in their group and has more experience than you. Perhaps you misunderstood the grant process, or perhaps they were trying to con you into getting them a grant in a way that was fraudulent. In either case, it's the PI's role to help you, by explaining the grant system or by revising their instructions to you (and now being aware that their grad student is acting 'funny').
The second issue is your description of that odd conversation you had about being supposedly "stressed"? That sounds like a textbook description of a method called "[gaslighting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting)", and yes - it's supposed to make you feel crazy. The point is you are supposed to go "wait, why would they say I'm stressed, I'm not stressed - am I? I didn't think I was stressed..." and then you get stressed, and you start to doubt your own experience of reality. And you are supposed to start getting defensive and searching your memory for any time you screwed up to try to justify their behavior, and start talking about that one time even though no one asked about it to defend yourself, etc. See what happened there? You'll start to look and feel crazy, because no one sees the crazy nonsense you were attacked with. It's a tool of emotional abuse and manipulation. They are also seeking to do it by proxy and poisoning of the perceptions of others, which is a sign of further aggressiveness.
Add the ethically questionable 'flexibility' which appeared to have a self-serving bent to the use of multiple tools of aggression and manipulation, and you've got yourself a lot of red flags - enough to make me suspect you are dealing with someone with malignant personality tendencies. These people aren't fun to deal with and prolonged exposure is a danger to one's welfare and goals. Take this possibility seriously, and begin taking steps immediately to protect yourself.
The third concerning issue is authorship. This can feel like a difficult subject to discuss, but again this requires you talk with your PI. The relationship with this person is far, far more important than any jag-off grad student - your dealings with them is fundamentally important, as it is with any direct supervisor relationship. Authorship is not a reward for abstract merit or seniority - it's a question of "who directly and significantly contributed to this research effort", and you should not ever be a position of having worked on something for even weeks yet not getting proper acknowledgement - let alone years! Again, this is largely controlled by your PI and you must talk with them about it, not simply allow yourself to dwell in the feeling that maybe you are going to get screwed.
Overall, full and effective communication with your supervisor/mentor/PI is crucial here. If you have it, people like this get put down early and they are like cockroaches - once the light is on, they scatter, because you aren't in a position they can easily take advantage of. If you can't have that relationship with your PI, honestly the research they do doesn't matter. No matter what it looks like on paper, if the PI won't have a good opinion of you because your relationship is poor (due to a lack of communication and the resulting sabotage that becomes so easy for people to pull off), it's better that you spend your time elsewhere so you can have a good relationship and a good, solid reference.
So your task will be to talk with your PI and figure out what the issue is. If you can have a good relationship, authorship is dealt with fairly, you can bring future concerns of an important nature to him straight away, then so be it. You'll need to be careful of your issues with the grad student - don't think they'll just act like a reasonable person all of a sudden.
Once those issues are ironed out, then you can also decide whether or not you want to try out a different lab using your new found knowledge of how to handle things. When you've grown skilled in communication and relationship management with people like your PI, life goes much easier - and you'll find that people like the grad student you encountered seem to just be able to "smell" that their tricks won't work, and more often than not they just focus their attentions on easier prey. But without that core relationship building and communication, you'll be taken advantage of by every unethical and manipulative nutter you come across, and they'll swarm to you like a bunch of blood-thirsty mosquitoes.
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/01/21
| 420
| 1,729
|
<issue_start>username_0: If one has research findings in a topic *X*, and wishes to publish it in one of the many IEEE journals, which is the best way to list the journals that includes *X* within its scope?
Note that the solution to *X* might use one or more of frameworks of [A, B ..], where 'A' can covered in the scope of journal *J1* and 'B' can be within the scope of journal *J2* and so on.
The obvious method might be checking up on the keywords in IEEEXplore and look for journals corresponding to previously published papers that come up. But is there any other way?<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion, the *simplest* and *quickest* (but not necessarily the most *optimal*) solution would be to **rank** those frameworks [A, B, ...] by your favorite *criteria* (i.e., importance, fit to my research career goals/interests, fit to my department's research interests, etc.) and then perform **bibliometric search** within the IEEE journals scope, using one or more of your top-ranked frameworks as keywords. The resulting list of journals would be pretty **relevant** to your paper as well as to your most important criteria.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: IEEE.org currently has a [Publication Recommender](http://publication-recommender.ieee.org/home "IEEE Publication Recommender") tool where you input the keywords, key phrases, title, abstract etc. of your article, or the actual document of the article (in pdf, doc, docx or tex format). You can narrow the search to periodicals and/or conferences, or the date you want to publish before. I tried it with the two articles I've actually finished, and received a few good recommendations with high relevance scores for both.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/21
| 1,123
| 4,917
|
<issue_start>username_0: In some disciplines (such as theoretical computer science), it is typical to have papers where you have co-authors. Especially when the set of co-authors is large, and work is being done at different universities, it is possible that person X works on one part, and person Y on one part. Thus, perhaps you wrote and came up with one result, and another result was the result of the work of someone else. Finally, you publish that paper together.
Then, in your PhD thesis, you typically have a list of publications. From what I've seen, the author usually declares what is his/her contribution was for each publication, but this is quite vague. For instance, it might say e.g., "Publication 1 is joint work with X and Y, and partly written by the author".
So consider a particular result that appears in a paper where you are a co-author as a PhD student. My question(s) are:
1. Is it ethical to include that result in your PhD thesis, supposing that you did not contribute to the result? Perhaps you only proof-read the theorem.
2. Does it make a difference if you couldn't have come up with the result, or don't deeply understand it? Maybe professor <NAME> came up with it, wrote it, and it is using advanced machinery with several technical details.
It is nice to just say "this is joint work with Bigshot Superstar" to make yourself look good. I see it being done, but it makes me feel uneasy. On the other hand, while it seems honest, it can potentially hurt you to say "the author did not contribute to Theorem X".<issue_comment>username_1: It may be good to report results that is connected to your reports in your thesis even if you did not directly contribute to it as long as you **attribute main contributor** of the result from an ethical stand-off. **But** this would not be applicable if the concerned result is to play a major role in your dissertation. In which case, IMO, you can try to do something more or different to make up for the major result.
Apart from my views, the your thesis advisor ought to be the best person to clarify this particular doubt.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As you noted yourself, it is fairly common to have coauthors on papers written during your PhD.
But this should not prevent these results from counting towards your degree.
How this was handled when I did my PhD (math in Denmark) was that I included what was essentially a copy of a paper I wrote with a coauthor (though with notation changed to match, and actually only about half the paper as that was the relevant part for the rest of the dissertation), with a note at the beginning of that section stating that this was what it was.
I also had to get a declaration from my coauthor that he was ok with this, which also stated how large my contribution to the work was. This was then sent along with the dissertation to the evaluation committee.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My personal opinion:
* it should be perfectly clear that e.g. the result of the bigger experiment is not yours alone.
* It should be clear to the reader what the specific result of your work was
I, as a reader, would much prefer that something like this happens in the introduction/motivation chapter where the context and importance of the work for a bigger experiment/theoretical undertaking is outlined and then the specific challenge tackled has a short and crisp chapter than a weird mix.
(something which comes to my mind here would be the construction of a sensor/detector/experimental setup for particle or astrophysics)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: From the perspective of engineering/applied research, most work is done jointly and papers generally have co-authors. The lead author of each paper is generally decided in advance, so that said person holds accountability of the work. This generally translates into the lead author playing the key role in the active research component.
Lead authors list all their first-author papers in the thesis, provided that the themes are aligned. Since they are the lead author, their contribution to each paper may not explicitly mentioned.
An exception sometimes occurs, wherein a co-author ends up (eg. through a lucky breakthrough) playing a more pivotal role in the research than the pre-decided lead author. In such a case, the lead author may be shifted to a secondary position at the discretion of the supervisor. Such work (non-first author papers) are generally listed separately in the thesis, specifying the thesis-writer's role explicitly.
The take-away from this is that any results where you have contributed, and which are aligned with your thesis should be listed. The most ethical way would be to list this work separate from your first-author work. Lumping both sets of results together could be misleading, especially if you don't list individual contributions.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/21
| 926
| 4,098
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing a paper which gives an overview over semantic segmentation. My target audience are people who are not experts, but who need semantic segmentation or who want to get into this field. The aim of the paper is to provide starting points. This means I give a very brief idea and I mention papers which introduce the idea in detail.
Should I mention my target audience / the aim of the paper in the abstract? Should it be in the introduction? Should it be in the paper at all?
Are there other ways to give readers this information (e.g. I've noticed [some keywords in the titles of papers](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAcademia/comments/41ymja/what_are_typical_keywords_in_the_titles_of_papers/))?<issue_comment>username_1: It may be good to report results that is connected to your reports in your thesis even if you did not directly contribute to it as long as you **attribute main contributor** of the result from an ethical stand-off. **But** this would not be applicable if the concerned result is to play a major role in your dissertation. In which case, IMO, you can try to do something more or different to make up for the major result.
Apart from my views, the your thesis advisor ought to be the best person to clarify this particular doubt.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As you noted yourself, it is fairly common to have coauthors on papers written during your PhD.
But this should not prevent these results from counting towards your degree.
How this was handled when I did my PhD (math in Denmark) was that I included what was essentially a copy of a paper I wrote with a coauthor (though with notation changed to match, and actually only about half the paper as that was the relevant part for the rest of the dissertation), with a note at the beginning of that section stating that this was what it was.
I also had to get a declaration from my coauthor that he was ok with this, which also stated how large my contribution to the work was. This was then sent along with the dissertation to the evaluation committee.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My personal opinion:
* it should be perfectly clear that e.g. the result of the bigger experiment is not yours alone.
* It should be clear to the reader what the specific result of your work was
I, as a reader, would much prefer that something like this happens in the introduction/motivation chapter where the context and importance of the work for a bigger experiment/theoretical undertaking is outlined and then the specific challenge tackled has a short and crisp chapter than a weird mix.
(something which comes to my mind here would be the construction of a sensor/detector/experimental setup for particle or astrophysics)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: From the perspective of engineering/applied research, most work is done jointly and papers generally have co-authors. The lead author of each paper is generally decided in advance, so that said person holds accountability of the work. This generally translates into the lead author playing the key role in the active research component.
Lead authors list all their first-author papers in the thesis, provided that the themes are aligned. Since they are the lead author, their contribution to each paper may not explicitly mentioned.
An exception sometimes occurs, wherein a co-author ends up (eg. through a lucky breakthrough) playing a more pivotal role in the research than the pre-decided lead author. In such a case, the lead author may be shifted to a secondary position at the discretion of the supervisor. Such work (non-first author papers) are generally listed separately in the thesis, specifying the thesis-writer's role explicitly.
The take-away from this is that any results where you have contributed, and which are aligned with your thesis should be listed. The most ethical way would be to list this work separate from your first-author work. Lumping both sets of results together could be misleading, especially if you don't list individual contributions.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/21
| 1,553
| 6,360
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am coauthor of a review article, in which we reuse a figure from another article that is, so far, available only on the arXiv. In such a case, one would usually obtain the copyright from the publisher and acknowledge the copyright holder with a statement similar to
>
> Reproduced with permission [reference]. Copyright [year], [publisher].
>
>
>
**What is an appropriate analogous phrase for an article published on the arXiv?**
From what I understand of arXiv's [help on licenses](https://arxiv.org/help/license), the default option only grants arXiv the right to distribute the article, while the copyright remains with the authors.
However, including all authors of an article in the copyright statement can make the statement very long. Perhaps one should restrict it to the author that submitted the article to the arXiv?
>
> Reproduced with permission [reference]. Copyright [year], [submitting author].
>
>
>
P.S. In this particular case, the arXiv article was authored within our group as well, i.e. we are free to choose the copyright statement. In general I assume it would be up to the authors to choose how they would like to be acknowledged.<issue_comment>username_1: The crucial points to remember here are that you have an
* ethical duty to **cite your source**, and a
* legal duty to **comply with the terms of the license under which the article was uploaded to arXiv**.
Those are your obligations, nothing less or (in my opinion) more. Considering this, after looking at the arXiv license information you linked to, it seems to me that the following language would be appropriate for at least one of the license options (I didn't look at all the options, the answer may vary slightly for the others):
>
> Figure 1. This is a very interesting figure. (Image source: [ABC15]; use permitted under the Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0.)
>
>
>
where "Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0" is hyperlinked [to this page](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), and where [ABC15] refers to the bibliographic entry for the article in the references section of your paper.
Note that (as far as I'm aware) there is no need in this case to refer specifically to copyright. I also disagree with your assertion that "In general I assume it would be up to the authors to choose how they would like to be acknowledged." As I said, you have a duty to acknowledge the source of the work and its authors, and satisfy whatever legal requirements may exist pertaining to copyright or other licensing restrictions, but no other obligations that I'm aware of to use specific language that the authors or anyone else wants you to use. See [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21521/is-it-mandatory-to-include-the-registered-trademark-symbol-next-to-the-name-of) for a somewhat related discussion.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As Dan [mentioned](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/62118/820), you have both an ethical, academic obligation to cite your source, and a legal duty to comply with whatever licence the image was made available under.
However, in general, the possibilities of that licence are somewhat broader than the CC-BY licence explained in Dan's answer.
In general, a paper found on the arXiv can be licensed in five different ways, which are explained in the [arXiv License Information](https://arxiv.org/help/license) page. Authors can do the following:
>
> * grant arXiv.org a non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article, and certify that he/she has the right to grant this license;
> * certify that the work is available under one of the following Creative Commons licenses and that he/she has the right to assign this license:
> + Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0)
> + Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license (CC BY-SA 4.0)
> + Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0);
> * or dedicate the work to the public domain by associating the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication (CC0 1.0) with the submission.
>
>
>
In addition to this is the question of whether the authors have retained copyright for the material after the arXiv posting. If the paper has since been published, chances are that they have ceded copyright to the publisher and you will need to go through the proper channels to get it. Since the question is specifically about the preprint, I will assume that the copyright of the material remains with the author. (Nevertheless, you still need to check that this is the case.)
The easiest case is if the arXiv posting has been put in the public domain (CC0 licence), in which case you do not need to acknowledge any copyright, much as if you were reproducing, say, a passage of *Alice in Wonderland*. (You still need to attribute it, though, the same as if you were reproducing *Alice in Wonderland*.)
If the paper has been shared via any of the Creative Commons licences, then you can simply reproduce it, with the proper attribution and a link to the relevant licence. If the licence is CC BY-SA or CC BY-NC-SA, then you also need to make sure that you abide by the terms of the licence: that you're publishing under a [compatible licence](https://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses/), in both cases, and that your use is non-commercial in the latter.
The most common case, however, in many fields, is the first one: the authors granted arXiv.org (not you) a license to distribute the article, and that's that. This means that, barring any fair-use arguments you wish to make, you do not have permission to redistribute the work either in part or in its entirety. In this case, what you need to do is **contact the authors and ask for permission to republish the image**.
In your specific case, however, your group is itself the owner of the copyright, and you do not need to do anything. It is not even a question of you having the freedom of choosing how the initial work is licensed: you're simply publishing the same material in different venues, which is perfectly fine. Of course, if you want to go further and license that material under a CC licence, then all the better! (Just be aware, of course, that doing so could impair your ability to publish it in some venues down the line.)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/21
| 2,446
| 10,349
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a postdoc in theoretical computer science. My position will last for about 9 months. I have a good track of publications and enjoy a lot working at academia, in particular I enjoy to solve problems and write papers in my field. But I think that it would take something like 2 to 3 years to get competitive for a lector/tenure track job.
The thing is that I'm married with children, and my wife has a permanent job. So she will not be able to travel with me if I need to do another postdoc elsewhere. Therefore, I'm considering applying for industry jobs. I do believe that some types of jobs in within the industry would also be very enjoyable. But my goal would be to keep publishing and then eventually get back to academia when my CV is competitive enough.
My only problem is: Once I go to the industry, how to keep publishing? I mean I am pretty independent and good at writing papers alone or in collaborating via internet. And I'm also used to write papers in my spare time, during the night and on weekends. So I'm not worried about the time to keep doing research. But I'm afraid that without an academic affiliation, the probability that my papers would be considered for publication in conferences and journals would decrease.
Suppose I work in some enterprise in the automotive industry, or telecommunications industry, or even as a consultant.
**Question 1)** What affiliation should I put in my papers when submitting to conferences and journals? Should I put the name of the enterprise, even if the research is not being done there?
**Question 2)** Would an affiliation outside academia decrease the chances that my papers are accepted in theoretical computer science journals and conferences? Of course I know that some affiliations such as google, microsoft, etc do not harm, but I'm considering some jobs in much less well known companies.
**Question 3)** Is it possible to go back to academia after some years in industry if I keep my publication record high?<issue_comment>username_1: Disclaimer: I'm not in your research area.
Q1: The affiliation under which you conduct your research; whoever pays for your research time is your affiliation on paper. Careful with moonlighting provisions in some contracts--not all companies will allow you to claim "on-the-side" IP creation. Also, keep in mind that in many companies you cannot publish anything related to your work without their legal team giving green light to the manuscript.
Q2: I would think not if the venue is reputable. Double-blind review wouldn't hurt (that's how my research area operates).
Q3: Yes. But you must realize that keeping your publication record high while working for a company is much easier said than done, especially if that company doesn't attach value to publishing. In my experience, pretty much the only reliable way to discern whether publishing is valuable to a company is to look at (recent) past history in the particular division you will be employed at--a publishing culture is not built overnight.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I am a good example of how it is quite possible to keep up a strong publication record in industry, as long as your job supports it. I submit [my Google Scholar profile](https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=_ZSyxZ8AAAAJ&hl=en) for evidence: I moved from postdoc to industry in 2008, and though I have contemplated (and been offered) opportunities to move back to academia, to date I have actively chosen to continue in my current position.
Likewise, no healthy scientific community will hold a prejudice against authors from industry, any more than they hold prejudice against authors from less well known universities. Unhealthy communities do sometimes have cliques that make it difficult for anybody outside of a clique to publish.
In certain cases, you can even have an advantage in research when you come from industry, as it is often useful for academics to have "industry partners" who often have a broader perspective are capable of doing things that they are not.
You do, however, need to have a job that supports publication. For that, I recommend looking into research consulting companies, rather than normal "product" companies, where you will typically have little time to publish. If publication can be part of your job, you can keep up publication; if it is a "second job," it will be far harder.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm doing what you are doing: performing a nominally research-oriented job in industry and publishing on the side. [This](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/18309/4140) and [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/48210/4140) earlier answer of mine may be helpful. To your questions:
1. You should discuss whether you should put your employer's name down as an affiliation. My employer allows this, even on work I do that is utterly non-related to my day job.
2. You being in industry *should* not matter. Hopefully. This will depend on your field - in one of my fields (forecasting), it may be a slight plus, in the other one (inferential statistics for psychology), nobody cares, because I'm only one of five co-authors, and never the lead author.
3. No idea about this.
I'm afraid that industry research positions on *theoretical* computer science will be extremely rare. Good luck finding and getting one of those!
If you can't get something in theoretical CS, you essentially have two options - either switch fields to something more applied (in which case you will need to both learn the basics of this field *and* establish a new reputation and network), or continue your theoretical CS work in the evenings. In this case, your employer will likely not pay for you to attend conferences, so you will either have to pay yourself and take vacation time to go, or forego the networking opportunities conferences offer. In addition, I have found that I'm too tired once my kids are in bed to do any scientific work, and I hate spending the time they are awake writing non-work related papers - my kids don't see enough of me as it is. Your mileage may vary.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I am an industrial researcher, and I have published quite a few papers under my company affiliation, some of it was only very remotely related to my work.
The managers actually like it, they can show how innovative the department is.
All I do is to send the article for approval, add a note that it doesn't contain confidential information as it was done outside of work.
I do this because publications are actually part of my yearly bonus. Now if I came up with something groundbreaking and marketable, I would not publish under the company affiliation, as this could lead the company to claim ownership of my work.
My company is very well-known, so the non-academic affiliation is not a problem at all.
Of course, if you work at a New Age Bookstore or a Cannabis Dispensary, publications in scientific or medical journals might raise some eyebrows.
A word of warning from friends' experiences:
Just be aware that often the applicant will be the most honest person in a job interview, don't expect them to be honest to you.
If you ask them if you can publish, they will of course tell you sure, but don't be surprised if your job later has nothing to do with research (despite them telling you so and giving you a job title like researcher) and that you will have absolutely no time to publish anything.
Publishing might even be seen negatively, because some companies see you as their property and don't want you to do anything but work (and relax during your 2 weeks vacation so you can work more afterwards).
As far as returning to academia. I've seen this happen many times. One thing to note is that contacts are just as (or more) important than publications, and if you leave the community, you will have a very hard time to go back. So you have to continue to go to conferences and try to volunteer on conference committees and similar to stay in touch with people.
Also your priorities might change, once I took an industrial job, I lost interest in going back quickly, something that I did not think possible before.
You write that your cv is not competitive enough at the moment. The problem with an industrial position is that you won't have as much time to spend on publications as someone in academia, where your only purpose in life is to publish.
So in 3 years, you will compete with people who have been running the publishing treadmill for 3 more years, and of course, they will have more papers than you.
Don't underestimate the time and energy a day job takes. While my job is actually a research job, I personally don't have the energy left to publish as much as I would like to, even though my company supports publications and gives me a bonus for it. Especially as you get older, have family obligations etc., you just won't have the energy to write anything up.
Whatever decision you make, don't be afraid of change. I was terrified before I left academia and thought about the same things you do now, but in the end everything worked out well, and I even get to write a paper now and then.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: As others have mentioned, it is feasible to use a company affiliation. The other thing you may consider is seeking an adjunct (unpaid / honorary) appointment with your current university. I used a 'Visiting Research Fellow' affiliation for a few years after my PhD as I was working as a consultant.
My articles were really extensions of my PhD work and related research done on my own time. My consulting work concerned something else entirely.
The research director or similar of your current department might be able to help identify whether you would be eligible for such an appointment and how to apply. In my case, the application was a letter to the department with an outline of the research I was intending to do.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: To get a job in industry that allows you to keep up a high rate of publications, high enough to make a move to academia later easy, is probably much harder than getting a job in academia in the first place.
You have to decide if you want to go on doing "mostly pure research", and stay in academia, or do "mostly application", and go to industry.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/01/21
| 1,836
| 7,686
|
<issue_start>username_0: Or put simply, 3-year vs. 5-year PhD?
Many programmes in UK (and EU) take up 3 years, as opposed to a minimum of 4-5 years in North America. For a masters degree holder, with a goal to stay in academia, is a 3-year Ph.D. too short to prepare one for postdocs and academic roles? Or would the extra year(s) in a 5-year programme be a repetition of the masters?
Is the short duration enough in preparing an academic and his/her career? While the additional year(s) in a longer programme costly and dispensable? This question is informed by the many discussions here and elsewhere lamenting the competitiveness and difficulty of staying in academia, especially in the UK. I am asking from a UK/EU point of view (more specifically, social science), as I am not sure if this (potentially unwarranted) concern is generalizable in other countries and disciplines.<issue_comment>username_1: There is a (large) difference between the nominal and the actual length of the degree program: Most social science PhD students in the Netherlands and Germany (the cases I am most familiar with) take 1 or 2 years longer than the nomial duration of the program (regardless of what the nominal duration is...).
As long as everybody is realistic about what can be obtained in 3 years, then 3 years is enough. The PhD program is there to teach students the basics about doing real research (imaginary/ideal world research is taught during the bachelor and masters program), and gaining experience is what postdoc positions are for. I don't think prolonging a PhD program will be all that helpful.
(Disclaimer, I took 7 years to finish my PhD, but that was still within my nominal + 2 years bound)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think it depends on what you value along with various other considerations.
I can't realistically think or, nor describe, all of the things you might value here, but I guess some of the big ones would be earnings, training, status, and freedom.
From this perspective:
A five year PhD is more likely to leave you better trained, but also likely to lead to you earning less overall, spending more time as a PhD (not quality time for most people) and having less freedom (e.g., you are trapped within that PhD). The three year PhD offers the converse.
However, all of this should considered in light of important considerations which mediate the importance of these differences, such as your ability, the complexity of the area, the quality of the job market, and the type of job you want.
For instance if you are i) a below average intellect relative to your peers in the area, ii) in a very complex area where you will need to learn a lot to succeed (relative to other types of PhD), iii) in an area where (relative to other types of PhD) the job market is poor and only the very best will get employed, and iv) interested in working in areas where a five year PhD is expected, then that increases the argument for the five year phd.
Please let me know if you would like any further clarification.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The thing about a PhD is that you should end up in roughly the same place. The length is therefore determined by where you come in. US PhDs tend to be longer than UK ones primarily because in the UK we specialise much earlier, so there is less left to do to reach PhD standard in your field.
In deciding what is best for you, the key factor will be **you**. How much do you still need to learn to complete your apprenticeship as an academic? That covers many aspects: knowledge for your research, research skills, how to write papers and give talks, personal management, career management, teaching, student supervision, probably some I've forgotten. If you have suitable funding, your PhD is a good time to learn these things while you have relatively little in the way of responsibilities. Also, at least in maths, your research record is generally considered relative to when you *finish* your PhD, not when you start.
My understanding is that the extra time in a US PhD is taken up completing taught modules/passing exams, not extra time on research. I would investigate whether having already done a masters would mean you could skip some/all of that and so shorten the total time.
Of course there are other factors to consider, finances and family often being the biggest ones. Also consider where you will be happy living, and who you want to work with. I was advised that the right supervisor is the most important thing in choosing a PhD. Personally I like to add that choice of supervisor should include preferred working patterns and personality, not just research topic, because you need to work closely with that person for a sustained period of time.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Any number of UK social science academics have PhDs from UK universities (and UK PhDs work in other countries obviously), so it's clearly sufficient in a technical sense. Apart from the coursework component in a US PhD - covered by the Masters - there are two other areas that make US PhD holders more competitive in junior academic positions, teaching experience and publications.
In the UK, teaching experience during your PhD is a sort of 'optional add-on'. There are probably opportunities as a tutor, but there might not be. It's also poorly paid and time consuming, so many PhD students don't do it. This means you don't have teaching experience on your CV.
Similarly, the US programs seem to have more emphasis on getting some publications. Whereas UK PhD students may have a conference presentation or two, but are unlikely to have much else by the time they finish (particularly in social science).
So if you are intending to apply for UK lecturer positions, you would be competitive with a 3 year UK PhD. Possibly not for US positions though you could apply for US post-docs and then lecturer positions later on if you did some teaching and focussed on publications during your post-doc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I think username_3 is the only one to hit the nail on the head so far. US and UK PhDs start from significantly different levels, due to the fact that UK degrees focus on your specialisation right from the outset, whereas the US system explores a much broader swathe of subjects, before honing in on a speciality. There are merits to both approaches, and I think that you will find that most people are partial to the system they went through. However, this has an effect if you move on to a doctorate. It would not be a great idea to move from a US undergraduate degree straight to a UK PhD programme, without first doing a masters. However, it is quite common for UK students to skip a masters, or to do one integrated into their undergraduate degree. As a result, the UK PhDs essentially trim off the course work component that usually takes up the first two years of a US PhD.
It is entirely possible to do a relatively short PhD and then do well in a postdoc and onwards from there. I am a rather extreme example of this: I submitted my DPhil (Oxford's equivalent of a PhD) thesis after around a year and three quarters. Prior to entering that PhD programme I had done a BSc in Ireland (which is similar to the UK system). I also spent around 8 months as a PhD student at a different university before moving to Oxford, but had to leave when my initial supervisor moved to another position.
There may be a disadvantage in applying to US based positions initially, since they sometimes prefer people coming from US style PhD programmes, but I have honestly not really felt held back at all by having done a short PhD.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/21
| 277
| 1,315
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied to a computer science PhD program and received an email saying the department admissions committee has recommended me for acceptance to the program. What does it mean "recommended"? Isn't it the department making the decision?<issue_comment>username_1: Not always. At some universities (such as the one where I presently work, the official decision to admit a student is made at the dean's level, rather than the departmental level. In such cases, the department recommends admission; such recommendations are almost always accepted, unless something irregular has happened in the admissions process.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes, what username_1 said is correct. The recommendation for admission means that the department has judged you an eligible candidate, and they are recommending your acceptance to the level that makes the final acceptance (Dean/Admissions Office etc. depending on the context). I've never heard of anyone not being accepted after receiving a recommendation of acceptance.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Another reason for careful wording like "recommended" may be that they have not yet received the expected funding that would support you, so they have to wait before they give you more definite wording.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/21
| 1,286
| 5,430
|
<issue_start>username_0: A friend of mine is a mathematics professor at a college in the southeast United States (where they're currently expecting significant snowfall) and just asked an interesting question that I'm reposting here:
>
> I'm currently teaching a four-week class, and next week is the final week. There is a good chance that the college will be closed Friday due to the weather, but Friday is also scheduled to be an exam day.
>
>
> How should I handle this? I cannot afford to use the last Monday as the new exam day. My initial thought is that I could post it as take-home exam with strict warnings about using resources, but we can probably guess how well that will go.
>
>
>
I'm sure that she would appreciate any suggestions you might have, and I am also curious to see what they might be.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a college level issue. The school should come up with a plan for how such a problem should be handled. It seems absurd to ask each individual professor to come up with a specific plan for his/her own students.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I think many of us are running into this. We've been back in for two weeks and I've lost four days in a four-day-a-week class between MLK and weather-related incidents (yay building flooding too!). Thankfully it's early enough I can make reasonable adjustments.
At my university, we are given relatively wide berth to reschedule and work around campus closures and based on the question, it seems the situation is similar, so here are some of the possibilities I'd see:
* Take home exam with regularly scheduled Monday
Not optimal, because they'd end up just cheating as it will be hard to rewrite a test designed for classroom-taking for home-taking in such a short time, but essay-style tests may work okay (doubt that's the case for a math course, though)
* Reschedule the test day on the weekend.
It may seem a bit dickish, but you could reschedule for Sunday and then handle the handful of no shows individually (this presumes that the weather is okay by Sunday, Saturday looks to be a no-go all over). Students will kill you on evals for this.
* Move the test to Monday and have a special session to cover Monday's material
Presuming one of the remaining days is a review-like day, cancel it to fit in the rest of the days. The review day will then be rescheduled as a special session at a time that the vast majority of students can make (perhaps consulted via a survey).
* Cancel the test and integrate into the final
This presumes there is a final. Some students may balk at this, and since it would involve the modification of the syllabus may require approval of higher ups or be subject to other university rules.
Some universities may have more codified policies that explicitly add on extra days, in which case you should modify the schedule in accordance with that policy. No doubt that a department head or dean would remind you of such a policy in advance (our provost did, which is to say, we were encouraged to hold virtual classes, but were reminded that we were free to handle the situation — including rescheduling classes outside of normal hours — in the ways that best fit our courses)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: As an undergraduate math student, I've had plenty of take home exams and final exams that were impossible to cheat on. Because they were take home, difficulty was increased, and severe punishment threatened for cheating. For my topology course we had several difficult problems we had to provide proofs for, and my numerical analysis required us to write code to evaluate the problems. Unless it's a well known theorem or problem there's really no way to google solutions.
Of course you must trust the students to be honest and not plagiarize, but it's been my experience as a student and as a grader - when people cheat it's quite obvious. And if one does manage to get one past you, really they are only hurting themselves, as they are not gaining the knowledge they'll need for their next level courses.
Hopefully you won't be forced to cancel class. Stay warm up there!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: If you have multiple assessments, I would make the missed exam optional and give students two opportunities to take the exam. Students who do not take the exam have some other assessment (e.g., the final exam) count more.
If you only have a single assessment, I would have the exam during the next scheduled session and offer a no penalty makeup exam session. I would then schedule two sessions where you can give the missed lecture.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Give the exam in class on Monday and deliver the material scheduled for Monday via an on-line mechanism. Schedule a help session during office hours (book a classroom if possible) for those who need additional help with the material delivered on line.
I'm not sure how this would work for a math course, but in my discipline (computing) narrated PowerPoint slides turned into a "video" work fairly well. I've done that a few times when participating in out of town conferences or symposia.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Be honest and realize that the administrator(s) know the weather ,time have already decided the right thing you should do. If they saw how much you struggle with this you may lost your credentials to teach in la esquela? Comprende amigo
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/01/22
| 535
| 2,002
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have an idea which I'd like to work on with a professor at my university. In my initial email would it be arrogant to ask if he's interested in working with me on this particular topic (he's published some papers on closely related topics), or should I just say that I'm interested in generally doing research with him? I really do want to work on this particular idea but also don't want to come across as trying to tell him what to do.<issue_comment>username_1: I think that most professors like to hear about ideas that their students have to work with them.
I would simply send him an email telling him that you have an idea that you want to work on, and that you think he might be interested in.
Probably best if you talk about it face to face as most professors are too busy to read long emails.
Some thing like this:
>
> Dear Prof X
>
>
> I am contacting you as I recently had an idea for a research project
> on topic x.
>
>
> I really enjoyed working with/learning from you on x [something he
> did, e.g., a class], and I am very interested in x [something he
> researches].
>
>
> With that considered I was wondering if you would be interested in
> working with me on this project?
>
>
> If you would like to know more, I would love to have a meeting at a
> time that is convenient for you.
>
>
> Kindest regards,
>
>
> [Your name]
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A small point about language: in the U.S., in mathematics, it might be more tactful and less presumptious (also) to not ask about "work with me", but "advise me on" [the project you propose]. At least to my perception (=old guy) this leaves many more options for the precise relationship. E.g., experienced people can often and easily give helpful advice without really actively participating. At the same time, depending..., they might find interest in doing so. Or, at the same time, they might see that it's better to let you do it yourself... etc.
Upvotes: 5
|
2016/01/22
| 1,626
| 7,160
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm curious about what strategies, approaches and/or methods people (successfully) use in academia for motivating colleagues to adopt innovative research collaboration mechanisms, workflows and/or tools. Please share your experience or point to proven range of approaches.
The following is in lieu of background information. Currently I'm leading a university project for developing a software platform for scientific research and e-collaboration in a particular scientific domain. Earlier I have installed, configured and publicized another software platform with a goal of increasing research productivity and make scientific collaboration and reproducibility easier within our group and beyond. Unfortunately, after initial decent interest of some people, most of them (and the rest) went back to "doing business as usual". I understand that researchers are busy and are under a lot of pressure to meet/exceed expectations and due to career advancement demands. I don't want to shove innovation down people's throats, but, at the same time, I'm quite frustrated that people do not see (or don't want to see, or don't care) significant potential benefits of some new ways in doing research and/or scientific software development in academia.
Considering the high visibility of my current project, I started thinking about / trying to come up with novel strategies and approaches to **motivating** colleagues in academia toward adopting *innovative methods/tools* (i.e., Agile) through *emphasizing* their **potential benefits** and/or **lost opportunity** in research productivity and other aspects, when such innovative methods/tools are not used.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I'm quite frustrated that people do not see (or don't want to see, or don't care) significant potential benefits of some new ways in doing research and/or scientific software development in academia.
>
>
>
Have you considered that those benefits may simply not be there, at least not to the extent that you hoped for them? One PhD student building a scientific prototype for a conference is not the same as building a product, and many ideas, concepts, and processes that are great for building a collaborative product on Facebook scale may simply be dead weight or even counter-productive for a PhD student in his daily development work. Frankly speaking, if people actually tried your new way of doing things but then went back to "the old way", this is at least some serious indication that there may actually be merit to the old way beyond pure inertia. People typically don't revert to an inferior way of working on purpose after trying something new and better. Have you actually talked to people why they went back?
Anyway, if you wanted to sell your agile ideas to me, the core question to answer would be:
**What are concrete, plausible scenarios how your ideas would help *me* personally?**
Stay away from lofty but abstract concepts such as code quality, reproducibility, code reuse, etc. Explain how each researcher individually can profit. What sort of embarrassing bugs and mistakes can be prevented? In what sense can each researcher individually save time? What new papers can be written that we could not easily write the old way?
This requires you to understand extremely well how your colleagues are currently working and what their current pain points are. If whatever way they currently build software is efficient and reasonably bug-free for them, I highly question you will be able to convince them to do e.g., TDD "because that's what industry does". If they are usually able to reproduce their experiments well enough, you won't be able to convince them to set up Docker containers for everything in the future, just because Docker is the current hot shit.
If you actually have access to them, explain cases of *"lost opportunity in research productivity and other aspects, when such innovative methods/tools are not used"*. The important part here is that those cases are (a) real, or at least plausible based on the experience of your colleagues, and (b) damaging to me personally. For instance, it will be hard to convince PhD students to invest time setting up a code based / infrastructure purely for the sake o the next generation of students.
*(and, of course, stay far away from ever implying that my scepticism for your ideas is because you see the bigger picture and I don't)*
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The best way to illustrate the value of new tools is to effectively use them yourself. If you are an active researcher and you are twice as efficient as your peers, then your peers might ask you how you manage such a torrid pace.
It sounds like you are not an actual user of your own tools. Moreover, it sounds like researchers demonstrated a willingness to try your tools and were not impressed. I would advise concentrating your energies on figuring out why these researchers chose to go back to "business as usual". You are most likely to succeed if you start from the premise that they know how to do their jobs effectively.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm a former consultant, and having people like what you provide is key to a consultant's life (doesn't mean I'm right, and it's quite a long while ago for me). It sounds as if you're looking at the wrong end of the chain of steps of how a new product is ideally rolled out - reception, and feedback by users of the finished product. On top of what other answers have stated, you appear to have skipped the 0th stage.
When you are tasked to implement a new tool, you are likely given broad ideas of what the tool is to achieve. But you'll always run up against people being used to old tools, and both liking them and loathing them for some of their aspects. To ensure buy-in, or at least make it more likely, you should push for an interview stage before you start with any work on the tool. Get a solid understanding of the current situation by spending time with the old tool, then prepare a questionnaire for (some of) its users. Tell them that you have been tasked to create a new tool, and strive to make it as useful for them as possible. For this, ask, among others, about
1. What is essential to you in any such tool?
2. What would you like to see again which you currently have, with as little change as possible?
3. Which aspects of the current tool do you loath?
4. Which additional features would you welcome?
5. (assuming you are already considering options, solicit feedback on them)
6. Is there any cross-integration with other tools this tool should have?
There are obviously many more question to ask, but a lot depend on the project at hand.
I would then also ask for one of the later users as a during-project contact with who you share progress to get some in-development feedback. And after roll-out, a training session, and going from desk to desk to help people get set up, will help.
While you can never guarantee that a tool will be willingly adopted, adoption will be much less likely if its users do not feel that they have been involved in its development.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/22
| 1,451
| 6,488
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm giving a presentation at an undergraduate conference. There are awards given for the best talks. The focus of each talk is what the student has been working on for their research project.
What, in general, do the conference judges look for when they evaluate a talk? Is it the general quality of the presentation? The significance of the results? The way the presenter answers questions from the audience?
For context, it is a physics conference and the talks are short (10 min). In the past, the judges have been graduate students or physics professors at different universities.<issue_comment>username_1: yes! :)
When I'm involved in such things, I usually take all into consideration, when applicable. If the prize is decided before the presentations, you can't judge the presentation.
Specifically for undergrads, I tend to focus on **how** the research was conducted rather than on the results obtained. I don't usually expect groundbreaking originality from undergrad research, but I do want to the "proper path" being taken.
That means:
* a proper bibliographical revision, where you correctly put your contribution among the literature;
* a well developed methodology, where you explain and justify all the choices made during the project;
* a decent analysis of the results, focusing not only on the results but considering also the behavior/interpretation of what was done (undergrad students love to say high probability numbers without the proper analysis)
* A deep discussion of the contribution, including the pre-requisites for it to work, how, why and when it fails. This last part is usually omitted even by more experienced researchers, deemed 'not sexy'.
In short: I want to see that the undergrad now knows *how* to do research properly...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I apologize for the length of my reply, but I think this is a really great question that I discuss with undergraduates and even grad students all the time, and want to use this as an opportunity to share some of my thoughts with you.
I completely agree with the points that username_1 made in his answer. However, I want to add one general tip with you that I have found to be extremely effective in my experience both presenting talks and posters as well as judging them.
The way I see it, when undergraduate talks/posters are judged, there may or may not be certain specific criteria against which you will be evaluated, but there are certain important subtleties in how you *conduct yourself* when talking about your work that will almost always affect your evaluation whether there is specific criteria or not. Let me clarify:
As username_1 mentioned, there are many important technical factors that are commonly taken into account when judging presentations, but aside from this, I believe that one of the most powerful tools to get great scores on research talks is to demonstrate some passion and interest into the work you are presenting.
This is typically the biggest problem with undergraduate presentations. Undergraduates are often not very well-versed in the big picture of their research project and therefore end up simply presenting what they did and what data came of it and what they think it means (or what their advisor told them it means). There is rarely any visible interest in the work, or evidence of creative thought on the part of the student, and this is the biggest factor that separates a great undergrad talk from all other undergrad talks.
No matter how dull your research talk may or may not be to you, when you stand up there in front of all those people, make sure to talk and act like you're the most excited person in the room about the work that you have done. This gets people's attention, in my opinion, above all else. Some great ways of doing this are:
* Never, ever, ever, ever, ever read from your slides, especially your
title. Always come up with a great "prose" way to describe your whole
project and then your data.
* Try to look at your slides as little as possible, unless you're pointing out something on a figure. Look at the
audience, glance around the room. In a scientific forum setting,
simple presentation skills often directly translate into command of
the material being presented.
* A great way to prevent yourself from doing the above is to not have
many words on your slides, this keeps people interested and keeps you
from reading to the audience. Many undergrads believe that their research cannot be presented without many words on the slides, but there is almost always a creative way to do this.
* Question yourself, and question your research. This does not
mean you should tell the audience that your conclusions are not
accurate, but rather avoid being too rigid in how you describe your conclusions. Avoid words phrases like 'definitely,' 'clearly,' 'this means that,' 'we discovered,' or any version of the word prove/proof/proved, unless used as a technical term such as 'mathematical proof.'
* Always talk about your work in terms of what it could mean for the
future, For example, talk about some interesting data that you
couldn't yet explain; offer several possible ways to frame your
conclusions; try to add a few "next steps" to your presentation (and not as a list on the last slide, but work it in in a few places as you talk about your work).
* If you anticipate a question or questions from the audience that you
will probably not know how to answer, bring it out in the open as
part of your presentation, and say that you are still working to
understand that particular part of your project.
Some of these things may seem trivial or obvious, but these are probably the most common "mistakes" undergraduate students typically make when giving oral presentations. I say "mistakes" lightly because it is obvious that sometimes the student simply does not get the proper guidance from their advisers, either about their project, or about how to present the work properly, or both. In these cases, of course, acting like you truly love your project may not be possible because it may not be true.
But either way, what it boils down to usually, coming back to something username_1 said above, is that at the undergraduate level, the expectation is less on whether the results are impressive, but rather whether you can demonstrate that you are a good researcher, and that you have done the most with the results that you have.
Good Luck!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/23
| 584
| 2,562
|
<issue_start>username_0: What is the new fashion of arxiv.org to silently put a submission on hold for many months?
When I wrote to moderation email, the question was ignored.<issue_comment>username_1: Based on your comments, I understand that you have put several papers on arXiv. Usually, technical reports or drafts above-the-average get accepted. This one being turned down might have something to do with your *new fashion* of below-the-average writing.
Not every submission to arXiv is guaranteed to be accepted. Maybe you should revise your work and submit again.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Since lots of other people are getting their work published on arXiv right now, and [other answers show that arXiv is generally quite fast at handling holds and responding](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/14511/22733), it is unlikely to be a general policy. That leaves one of two basic possibilities:
1. You have fallen through the electronic cracks: some database fault or the like knocked your submission off of the moderators' queues and your email is going into their spam filters, so they have no idea that your submission is on hold.
2. Something about you and/or your submission is causing your submission to be continually deferred while the moderators take care of other business.
It certainly could be #1, in which case I would advise sending another email from another account, politely inquiring as to when you are likely to hear whether your submission is accepted or rejected.
Regarding #2: having no idea about your submission, I cannot speculate on whether it is the problem, but I suppose that it is possible that you have submitted something extremely borderline: hard for them to decide how to categorize and also unclear whether to reject.
If it was just about your submission, however, you probably would have received some response to your email. If, on the other hand, you are being rude to the moderators, then it's possible you are not getting a response to your email for that reason. Even in this case, it is unlikely to be an intentional decision (if that were the case, they would probably just reject you) and more likely a case of people just deferring the problem case to the bottom of their triage list.
The recommendation of how to proceed, however, is essentially the same as #1: send another *polite* email inquiring about when you are likely to hear whether your submission is accepted or rejected. If you don't hear back in a few days, ask a colleague to send email on your behalf instead.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/23
| 355
| 1,502
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently finishing my undergraduate degree, and I am working on my CV for graduate school applications. After High School, I spent ~1.5 years traveling, mostly by myself, and with no notable employment.
Do I write this in my CV? If so, should I just mention it or say anything further about it?<issue_comment>username_1: Honestly, if I were you, I simply wouldn't list my high school dates on my CV. Lots of applications don't, and I've never seen this be a problem or concern. Given that you now are getting an undergraduate degree, the graduate schools won't care much about it. I doubt anyone will pay much attention if you do write in your date of high school graduation and simply don't explain the gap, but why even bring up the topic?
**EDIT:** Just to clarify, I wasn't suggest you list your high school without dates, but that you just leave it off entirely. I would say you definitely don't want to list it once you've entered grad school. When applying to grad school as an undergrad, I think it's fine to leave it there, but don't expect anyone to think it's important.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Many people take a gap year between highschool and college and between college and grad school for various reasons (walkabout, military service, family care responsibilities). Unless it's significant for either your personal growth or is notable for another reason (length of time > 5 years; etc.) there's simply no reason to mention it.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/24
| 638
| 2,579
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a 3rd year aerospace engineering undergrad with an inclination to pursue graduate studies in dynamics and control (ultimate goal of PhD). Until last semester, I had a lazy attitude towards my studies which earned me 3 Bs over the span of my undergrad studies. Last semester, this laziness, personal over-commitment, and poor prioritization culminated in a 'C' and 'B' in two core classes--both of which were in my strong suits of structures and dynamics respectively.
This semester, I have the opportunity to retake the structures course. Should I retake it?
My primary reason for retaking it is that I'm confident I can get an 'A' (I aced every quiz when I studied) and show mastery of a fundamental concept (FEA). However, my reasons against it are:
* It'll take up time that I can dedicate to research for my u-grad thesis
* I'm planning to take a more advanced structures course next spring (though **this** won't show on my transcript since I'll apply to schools next fall)
* Retaking the course barely improves my GPA (3.817 vs. 3.811)
* My professor suggested that I review and streamline his course notes for future classes
I'm not worried about the B dynamics course. I'm meeting with my prof this week to discuss a way to move forward (I think I'll be grading or providing mini-recitation lectures). However, I don't know what to do with the structures course.<issue_comment>username_1: Honestly, if I were you, I simply wouldn't list my high school dates on my CV. Lots of applications don't, and I've never seen this be a problem or concern. Given that you now are getting an undergraduate degree, the graduate schools won't care much about it. I doubt anyone will pay much attention if you do write in your date of high school graduation and simply don't explain the gap, but why even bring up the topic?
**EDIT:** Just to clarify, I wasn't suggest you list your high school without dates, but that you just leave it off entirely. I would say you definitely don't want to list it once you've entered grad school. When applying to grad school as an undergrad, I think it's fine to leave it there, but don't expect anyone to think it's important.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Many people take a gap year between highschool and college and between college and grad school for various reasons (walkabout, military service, family care responsibilities). Unless it's significant for either your personal growth or is notable for another reason (length of time > 5 years; etc.) there's simply no reason to mention it.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/24
| 792
| 3,064
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm looking for a database of funded grant proposals with abstracts for various DoD components (e.g., DARPA, AFRL, etc.), similar to the one for the [NSF](http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/).
The [Federal Business Opportunities (a.k.a. FedBizOpps)](https://www.fbo.gov) website exists, but it doesn't list the abstracts, the information it does give is not really useful, and the search capabilities on that site are kind of clunky.
Does such a database of funded grant proposals with abstracts for
US DoD components exist?<issue_comment>username_1: I recommend you to review the following two **databases** (other sources might be available as well):
* [Federal grants, affiliated with US Department of Defense (DoD)](http://www.grants.gov/search-grants.html?agencies%3DDOD|Department%20of%20Defense) (I see only *posted* and *closed* grant opportunities, but couldn't find how to get the *funded* ones - see the other source below.)
* [USA Spending Map](https://www.usaspending.gov/transparency/Pages/SpendingMap.aspx) (Here you definitely can get **funded** grant opportunities - just select Agency: DoD, Award Type: Grants, Fiscal Year and other parameters, if any. This database is also nice, because it offers options to either download data sets, or use its RESTful APIs.)
P.S. Should you become interested in DoD *contracts*, that information is available [on their website](http://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: For most DoD contracts, there is no database or similar system that allows you to get any sort of abstract. I know this because our research librarians, who track this sort of thing and are quite good at their jobs, have told me definitively that this is the case.
If you really want information about specific projects, you could file a [FOIA request](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_States)), using something like the USA Spending site referenced in username_1's post. Note, however, that the intricacies of DoD contracting mean that it may be rather difficult to actually tell which contracts are associated with which programs: for example, many DARPA contracts are actually not concluded by DARPA, but by other DoD organizations acting on their behalf. [FFRDCs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federally_funded_research_and_development_centers) and other sorts of special cases further complicate matters.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: You can search <https://dodgrantawards.dtic.mil/grants/#/home> and find DoD awards from 2014 to current.
"This website contains publicly-searchable descriptive abstracts of DoD grant awards from December 9, 2014 (the date of passage of the Act), along with other grant award information. Members of the public may conduct searches using a variety of fields and/or keywords, and view or download the results. For more information on the DoD grant award data available from this website, please see the frequently asked questions (FAQ) section under the Help menu."
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/24
| 408
| 1,256
|
<issue_start>username_0: <http://emjd-dc.eu/files/2011/11/emjd-dc.pdf>
Here, one of the admission requirements is, A Master's degree corresponding to 300 ECTS.
How is that possible?
A Masters degree is at most of 2 years. 2 years = 4 semesters.
1 semester = 5 courses = 5 \* 6 = 30 ECTS.
Then, 4 semesters = 30 \* 4 = 120 ECTS.
Where does 300 ECTS come from?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm guessing ECTS is the [European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System](http://www.studyineurope.eu/ects-system). From that page, a bachelor's degree is worth 180-240 ECTS credits, and the master's is worth 60-120.
It sounds as though the institution you're interested in wants a master's degree and at least 300 ECTS credits. From the linked page, it's possible that you could have a master's but still only have 240 ECTS.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Of course it is possible. bachelor degree is 180 ECTS, plus master degree 120 ECTS it is European Credit Transfer system or Bologna process declaration, when EU established some common core system for all member states. ( countries ) If you are still applying for ULJ, or anywhere in EU, ( maybe not England since they are not strict part of BP ) They have 180 ECTS plus 120 for master.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/24
| 1,621
| 6,917
|
<issue_start>username_0: So far as I understand, Ph.D. programs in the United States have entrance requirements and exams, but when you enroll in one, you start process of becoming a "Ph.D. candidate" first, which in the end will lead to defence of your thesis and becoming a Ph.D.
Before becoming a "Ph.D. candidate" you are usually in this system as a "Ph.D. student" until you defend your proposal.
Before defense of your proposal, "Ph.D. students" should prepare for a comprehensive examination, but basically this is depends on your advisor, who will set a rules of how this examination will look like. In my case, preparation of manuscript allows you to qualify for a Ph.D. and you become a "Ph.D. candidate", while some other professors give a test or an oral examination.
Why is this first period of a Ph.D. program not counted as credit for part of your thesis? Why does credit counting start from moment of your thesis proposal approval?<issue_comment>username_1: Every United States institution is different and sets its own rules, so there is no single universal answer. In the typical US system, however, there are three different requirements that are effectively orthogonal:
1. The student has to take some sufficient set of classes
2. The student has to pass one or more qualifying tests of some sort --- the details of these tests are radically different from institution to institution, but typically involve one or more elements of the following:
* Being grilled on their knowledge by a panel of professors
* Taking a difficult written test
* Writing a formal research survey or proposal (sometimes of their proposed thesis work)
* Presenting a piece of research (their own or others') and being interrogated on it
* Doing very well in certain classes
3. Carrying out research and writing a thesis dissertation on that research. This also often involves presenting this research and being interrogated on it in some sort of public defense.
The first is also generally sufficient to earn a Masters degree, so if the student fails in the second or third, then they are often given a Masters instead of a Ph.D.
In sequence, however, the order is often not strictly fixed, and there is no broadly adopted terminology to differentiate between people who have fulfilled different parts of their program. I, for example, have known people who had to scramble to fulfill one of the first two requirements to prevent their graduation from being delayed because they'd been letting them slide while working on their thesis.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Why is this first period of a Ph.D. program not counted as credit for
> part of your thesis? Why does credit counting start from moment of
> your thesis proposal approval?
>
>
>
Credits earned before the student advances to candidacy are typically counted towards credit hour requirements for the degree, but not counted towards credit hour requirements for the dissertation research itself.
For example, a 90 credit hour PhD program might consist of 60 credit hours of coursework and qualifying examinations followed by a 30 credit hour dissertation.
You might ask why a specific number of dissertation credit hours is required. If a student can prepare and publish the research in a short period of time then why require them to register for more credit hours and spend more time as a PhD student? One reason for this is that the university charges tuition for these credit hours (which might be paid by the student or might be paid by a grant or some external source.) Another reason is that it provides the appearance of quality control.
It is also typical to require the student to go through some formal process of proposing the dissertation topic before starting to earn credit hours towards the dissertation. Without it, students could simply register for dissertation credit hours without any specific approved topic in place and fiddle around on random projects that don't contribute to the actual dissertation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: You have made some generalizations in your question that are not, necessarily, accurate.
>
> Before defense of your proposal, "Ph.D. students" should prepare for a comprehensive examination, but basically this is depends on your advisor, who will set a rules of how this examination will look like.
>
>
>
This may or may not be the case at any given institution. For example, where I got my PhD, the doctoral comprehensive exams were highly standardized, and varied only by sub-specialty, not between advisors.
>
> Why is this first period of a Ph.D. program not counted as credit for
> part of your thesis? Why does credit counting start from moment of
> your thesis proposal approval?
>
>
>
To be blunt - because it's a requirement to *start* your thesis.
In some ways that *is* counting it as credit. If you consider "Graduate with a PhD" as the end goal, then it is credit toward that process. But a thesis is a singular, somewhat indivisible unit of work - you either have, or have not, written your thesis. There's not really "credit" involved in the traditional academic sense of the word - you're not accruing hours, etc.
There are however, many ways where, if you mean more informally making progress toward your thesis, it's very likely your comprehensive examination may help. First, it may herald the end of classes - and this "credit" to begin working on your research as an exclusive focus. Second, in many cases, the subject of the comprehensive exam, and elements of it, may play directly to the questions of your thesis. For example, I have met people who, in studying for their comprehensive exam, essentially collected the literature review section of their thesis, and others who, in writing a "mock grant" as part of their comprehensive exam had made significant progress on the framework of their thesis.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I can contribute something regarding terminology that I hope will help clear up some confusion.
First, I'll outline how things work at at least some institutions in the US:
* You take courses
* You take some long, difficult, timed, paper and pencil exams
* You look around for a topic. When you've found one, and have been working on it for a while, and generally when you're at approximately the half-way point, you present your research proposal, live, to your committee, and answer questions the committee members throw at you, in a oral exam.
* You work on your topic some more and start writing it up. When you're done with the formal written thesis, you defend it in another oral exam.
You are a PhD student the whole way through, until you graduate. But you get "admitted to candidacy," in other words, you become a "candidate," when you pass the first oral exam -- the one where you presented your proposal and answered oral questions.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/24
| 1,515
| 6,386
|
<issue_start>username_0: In Germany, it is common for students to hold “Tutor” positions, which entail a weekly teaching class (e.g., 90 minutes) and the correction of exercise sheets handed in by students.
I would like to list such a position in my CV, which is in English.
What English expression should be used for this type of work? Is *teaching assistant* suitable?<issue_comment>username_1: Firstly, even in Germany there are different word for this. Besides Tutor there is also wissenschaftliche/studentische Hilfskraft, HiWi (short for Hilfswissenschaftler but has apparently different meanings in other contexts) or Übungsgrupperleiter, for example, and the usage of these words may even vary between different parts of the university and their usage among students/faculty/administration is not always consistent.
However, I think the most widely used term in English speaking countries is **TA (teaching assistant)**.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> What English expression should be used for this type of work? Is teaching assistant suitable?
>
>
>
Yes, this is pretty much exactly what it is. If you want to be particularly exact, you can write "Undergrad teaching assistant".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The word *Tutor* was borrowed from German into English and is just as valid when used in English as when used in German. It means exactly the same thing in both languages.
The reason it does is because prior to adding *tutor* as a new word to the English language, there existed no English word that carried a definition that closely met the specific nature of the German definition of *tutor* and since the word was easy to pronounce it was readily adopted into English. In fact, the word *tutor* is a classic example of the dynamic beauty of the English language as an uncapped, ever expanding language.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: An English term for someone who only corrects the exercise sheets of students in a class taught by someone else is **grader.**
An English term for someone who teaches a "satellite" class and grades papers from that, or the main class taught by someone else, is **teaching assistant.**
A "tutor" is someone who goes "one on one" with students. In this regard, the (American) English term is different from the German term.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It seems that tutor is a term that varies in meaning between English speaking countries. Teaching assistant is clearly a common term in the United States, however, it is rarely used in Australia.
In **Australia**, the word "tutor" can be used in a similar sense to what you describe in Germany. I.e., many larger university subjects are divided into lectures and tutorials. Typically the lectures are taken by a PhD qualified academic and presented once for all students. Tutorials are typically more interactive taking place in a classroom (e.g., having 5 to 30 students or so). Tutorials are commonly delivered by students doing their PhD and these students typically mark the assignments of those in their tutorial, and such students are commonly called tutors.
In Australia, the context is used to guide the meaning of the word "tutor". At the secondary level, private tutoring would probably be implied, but in the university setting, probably the classroom setting would be the default assumption. You might say that you are "doing some private tutoring" or "one-on-one tutoring" if you meant to distinguish tutoring outside the classroom.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: As mentioned by others 'Teaching Assistant' is probably the most accurate job description. The course itself would be known as a 'Recitation Course' or 'Recitation Section' in American English.
On my own CV, I have Übungsleiter (exercise leader) while I was in Germany, and 'Recitation Instructor' for my very similar American position.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: As a person who has worked in a professional on-campus tutoring environment with many professionally trained and *[CRLA](https://www.crla.net/) Certified (levels 1 through 3)* tutors, I must object to the loose definitions of tutor being used for **American (and Canadian) tutors**. I cannot however speak to the definition/role of a tutor in other anglophone countries.
First, a tutor is not a teacher/instructor at all. In fact one of the key guidelines of tutoring is to *avoid* presenting material that the student has not seen before. The role of tutor is to help the student to help themselves become better students, with the ultimate goal of eliminating the need for a tutor. Tutors respond to learner questions and needs, offering strategies and helping the student to find the answers for themselves.
Second, a tutor is not a mentor or coach. These roles are far more involved that tutoring and often go beyond the academic arena.
Third, a tutor can work one-on-one but they also can work with small groups of students. Some tutors also lead groups in what is called "Supplemental Instruction" (what you might call "satellite classes") but even CRLA acknowledges that SI is not tutoring.
There are many other aspects of being a good tutor but these 3 points are sufficient I think to help correctly define what a properly trained tutor does.
---
As for the use of **"Teaching Assistant"** per the original Question, I think that is fine for the college/university environment. However, be aware that the term became somewhat corrupted when it was borrowed by some of our basic education (elementary, middle and high schools) institutions. The role of a "TA" in those schools is more accurately called an "Instructional Aide" (IA) which is also known as a "paraprofessional" and the role often involves much more interaction with the children as well as assisting the teacher. Some IA's are even assigned to work one-on-one with children having special needs.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: You could say teaching assistant. But teaching assistants can do lots of different things. If the person leads a weekly 90 minute work session connected to a lecture course taught by a professor then I would say more specifically "work session leader"; or "section leader" if there are several such sections connected to the same larger course. If the 90 minute sessions are a course by themselves then the person teaching them is a teacher.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/24
| 1,263
| 5,481
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am supposed to be admitted to a M.A.Sc. graduate program in engineering at a reputable Canadian university. I am now communicating with my potential supervisor about the potential plans for my research... and here is my concern:
My background and enthusiasm have been shaped around applications research and implementation of the acquired control techniques within the realm of robotics, whereas my supervisor has a more theoretical viewpoint. When we had started to communicate, he did assert that we would determine the research theme, according to our common interests and overlapping subjects. But today, I have received an email from him, consisting of an idea for research that is considerably theoretical.
I am not really attracted by that subject, since it does not cover my desired research field, considerably. I might notify my idea, frankly, but I am afraid of confronting him and creating any dissatisfaction from him.
He is eager to hear my viewpoint, and I have no idea how to transfer my perspective, efficiently, such that any misunderstanding will be avoided.
Have I right in this case, or have to do whatever my potential supervisor is saying?
I have not yet met him, face to face, but I know that he is, amazingly, kind and able to track what's going in my mind. How should I declare my opinion about the concern, such that he would not consider my clarification as a disobeying?<issue_comment>username_1: A successful project profits from both supervisor and candidate being interested in the same question. If you really dislike the topic, you should try to convince the supervisor to accept a different question. He will then, if he is amenable, try to convince you of a variation of his, you will amend it, etc. until - hopefully - convergence.
However, you may find that the supervisor is simply not interested in your direction. This can happen, even if he likes you. That's fine, and then you either have to find somebody closer to your question of interest or compromise.
That being said, it seems that you are talking about an MA Sc degree. This is considerably shorter than a PhD, so, depending on the details of the situation, it may be easier for you to find a compromise.
If topic really matters for you, however, you need to think hard whether you want to go into a field which you have qualms in.
I am not sure about what the ethical consideration of a "theoretical topic" as opposed to a practical one could possibly be; be is as it may, I would avoid bringing this up, as it may insinuate that you cast doubts about the ethics of your prospective supervisor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I sometimes find it helpful to think about research focus as having three entirely distinct aspects:
1. Passions: the core "gee whiz" that is what really draws you to research (e.g., in your case, swarm robotics)
2. Techniques: the methods and skills that you actually use in your pursuit of a research project (e.g., discrete-event methods, domain-specific languages, control theory)
3. Applications: the societal issues that (e.g., environmental issues, civil security, traffic, elder care)
There are often many different techniques that can be used to pursue the same passion, and many different applications that can be used to motivate its development.
These pieces can combine in different ways, and at different times in one's career, different elements will be on top. It's most satisfying when your passion is on top, but there are times when you need to focus on one of the other areas, e.g., to develop or apply skills in order to advance yourself to where you can get back to your passion, or to work on application-specific elements that are necessary in order to make your passionate work relevant. These may be passing detours that you need to take and return, or they may turn out to be more interesting than you thought and to lead to new passions of their own.
Where you are in your career, right now, I would suggest not being too picky about maintaining focus on your passion. If you can see ways that the other things you do might be later related back to your area of passion, then I would suggest taking that detour. You don't need to let go of your passion, and you can keep looking for ways do satisfy both elements, but right now, at the Masters level, you probably need to focus on the techniques aspect of research.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: All things are negotiable... unless, conceivably, your sponsor-professor's research money is explicitly tied to a specific goal.
Also, as in the other answers and comments, it would surely be profitable to you in the larger picture to broaden your expertise in directions that your sponsor thinks would be productive. His/her experience should translate into insight and perspective that you yourself might not yet have.
And, responding to a particular point in your question and comments: I don't think that different "specialties" are as disjoint from each other as you seem to worry. Work in a "different specialty" might indeed be very helpful to you in gaining new understanding of your "current specialty", maybe seeing possibilities for innovation that you hadn't seen before, due to "being in a rut".
Also, although the immediacy of generating publishable research has its appeal and reward, some enterprises (e.g., education and acquisition of insights) have a longer cycle time.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/24
| 757
| 3,238
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am refereeing a paper (a good one) for a mathematical journal. The author repeatedly writes like this: "we can't do", "we don't know" etc. He is not a native English speaker, and this paper is his first paper in English.
**Question.** I am going to ask the author to change "can't" and "don't" to more formal "cannot" and "do not". Is that a right thing to do?
I am not a native English speaker either....
(Since a referee is supposed not to disclose their identity, I ask the question anonymously.)<issue_comment>username_1: My experience has typically been that the more formal mode, with no contractions, is preferred for most scientific publications. It is not a terribly strong or important custom, however, and in one of my more high-profile multi-disciplinary publications, I actually found the copyeditor introducing contractions into my writing!
In short: worth mentioning, but not a big deal. As a reviewer, you might say something like: "I found the contractions distracting, and would advise removing them" but I wouldn't recommend being much stronger than that in your statements.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Leave copy-editing to the copy-editors, unless the issues with the writing affect understandability. If the journal has an opinion on whether contractions are acceptable, the copy-editors will deal with it.
Honestly, I don't (sorry, do not) see why the contractions could be a problem. They're (sorry, they are) completely comprehensible and it seems that your only objection is that you think there's (sorry, there is) a rule that says you can't (sorry, cannot) use them in formal writing. There is no such rule.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: These matters will usually be regulated at the level of the journal's style sheet, which oftentimes will respect conventions of the journal's publisher. There are many other related issues apart from the use of contractions: single versus double quotes, British versus US spelling, etc. All of these technicalities are best left to the editors, while the referee should focus on the merit. Unless of course the journal's referee report form (if there is one) explicitly asks for comments in this area.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: In mathematics writing, a small reason to avoid contractions is that the apostrophe vaguely suggests mathematical notation, so having this occur in the natural-language part of a paper impairs skimming/reading. A slight extra, needless cognitive load.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: Technical writing is often an aspect of a professional engineer or science researcher as I have been both and proper writing style or grammar is so important that not practicing it tends to appear lazy or may leave ambiguity in key ideas all of which tend to discredit the paper or the author. Although the use of contractions are not ambiguous they are supposed to mimic how some conjunctions (word pairs or word groups working together) are often used in casual speak so I say absolutely yes make those corrections. This is supposed to be a technical paper not a talk about a movie scene you liked. I am certain the author will appreciate learning from them.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/01/24
| 1,499
| 5,668
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate school applicant and am considering requesting a meeting with a professor while I'll be visiting a city near their university town.
The current e-mail format I have in mind goes roughly as follows:
>
> Dear Professor X,
>
>
> I am a graduate school applicant at University A. Before this I
> graduated from University B and have worked with Professor C\* on some
> research projects. I am visiting City D for the next two weeks or so
> and I would be delighted if you could meet with me for a few minutes
> to discuss your latest work on topic E. I've been very interested in
> topic E and have been spending time trying to learn more about it, writing up
> some notes on this and related topics along the way (which you can
> find on webpage F).
>
>
> Thanks for your time. (signed, me)
>
>
>
\*Professor X has coauthored many papers with Professor C and they still collaborate frequently.
My question is that would you as a Professor be responsive to an email of this nature? What improvements or extra information would you suggest to add that would make you more likely to grant such a request to meet? Is there something in the above which would make you not want to meet?
Other info: I have never had any contact with Prof X before this. Prof X is a big name and an extremely active researcher in the relevant field.<issue_comment>username_1: Ok, putting myself in your shoes, I would probably do things like this.
First, if possible, I would try to get a positive introduction from my professor. I think that you should try to see if you can get this introduction before you proceed as the willingness of professor C to support you will be crucial. More than likely Professor X's decision whether to work with you will be based on whether Professor C says good things about you. If Professor C doesn't seem like he will have good things to say then Professor x will almost definitely not want to work with you, and you might need to revaluate whether it is worth your time to pursue meeting with him.
Assuming you do end up deciding to go ahead with the email, I would send something like the email below. When doing this make sure you give the Professor a lot of notice as they sometimes have hundreds of emails to deal with.
>
> Dear Professor X,
>
>
> I am sorry to bother you as I am sure you are very busy. [optional but
> shows your consideration and respect]
>
>
> I am a graduate school applicant at University A. Previously, I worked
> with Professor C\* on some research projects at University B. [Add
> lines with information about the projects' outcomes, e.g., are they
> soon to be published/ how did they go well?]
>
>
> As part of my work with Professor C\* I became very interested in topic
> E, particularly your work [example/reference]. You can read some of my
> notes about this and related research on website F.
>
>
> I am contacting you as I would really like to
> discuss your latest work. I will be visiting City D from [Add when you
> are going to arrive] for approximately two weeks and I would be
> delighted if we could meet during that time. However, I can also
> understand that you may be too busy to accommodate me during that
> short visit, in which case I would be very happy to skype, or talk over
> phone at sometime in the future.
>
>
> Please let me know if either option would be acceptable - it would be an honor to speak with you.
>
>
> Thank you for your time. (signed, me)
>
>
>
Shortened version:
>
> Dear Professor X,
>
>
> I am a graduate school applicant at University A. Previously, I worked
> with Professor C\* on some research projects at University B. During this time I became very interested in topic
> E, particularly your work on [example]. You can read some of my
> notes about this and related research on website F.
>
>
> I will be visiting City D from [Add when you
> are going to arrive] for approximately two weeks and I would be
> delighted if we could meet during that time. Please let me know if this is possible - it would be an honor to speak with you.
>
>
> Thank you for your time. (signed, me)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> My question is that would you as a Professor be responsive to an email of this nature?
>
>
>
Yes, quite likely.
>
> What improvements or extra information would you suggest to add that would make you more likely to grant such a request to meet?
>
>
>
It's perfect as is. Maybe remove the "a few minutes"--hopefully discussing research would take a bit more than that?
>
> Is there something in the above which would make you not want to meet?
>
>
>
No, although before responding I would probably take a look at your application.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: @Penguin\_Knight's comment is the best advice in this situation: **ask Professor C to introduce you (via email with you in CC) to Professor X and mention that you will be in town and would like to chat**. Professor X may not have time to read all the messages she gets from students and other people she doesn't know, so there is always a chance your message -- not matter how well-crafted -- may be overlooked. But a message from a coauthor will immediately stand out and is sure to be read carefully.
This is a very natural thing for Professor C to do (assuming she has a positive opinion of you and your work); you should make the request politely but you don't need to feel that it is a huge favor.
If you leave a good impression, this introduction and the subsequent visit will usually drastically improve your chances of admission.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/24
| 1,182
| 4,962
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm 46, 20+ years of industry experience, some teaching experience, decent MBA and strong undergrad scores. GRE is okay, working on improving my quantitative score. I'm open to going anywhere in the world (English as a primary language at the school), but I need full time funding. My goal for a PhD is research, publication, and teaching. (I have several research ideas that I've started over the years, and I love teaching.) Are there any schools/regions/countries that are known to be open to older candidates with possibly lower GRE scores? (AACSB accredited preferred)<issue_comment>username_1: As far as I know, there is no PhD program in the United States for which it is legal to discriminate based on age. Nor is it just a matter of legality: at least in the circles I run in (I have done graduate admissions for the PhD program in my department at a state university) this is not just a technicality: holding a candidate's age against them would be viewed as grossly inappropriate behavior. I have never seen even a hint of it. My field -- mathematics -- is different from yours, but it is also one in which there is little a candidate could do in between their undergraduate and graduate degrees that would be viewed as clearly advantageous by the admissions committee. From what I know, this is not true of the business community. There are very few 22 year-olds enrolled in MBA programs; some prior real-world business experience is preferred, and there are prestigious "executive MBA programs" for older candidates who are already successful in the business world. So I would guess that many applicants for a PhD in business/marketing are over 30. Professionally speaking, what's the difference between 30 and 46? Not much. I honestly don't see why anyone would care.
The bit about low GRE scores is a different matter. You should check to see which GRE scores are taken seriously by admissions committees in your area. Assuming that any of them are (a reasonable guess if they require them), I strongly recommend that you take the time to improve your scores substantially rather than try to look for programs that will take inferior students. Remember that most US PhD programs take at least five years to complete. It is really worth it to spend a year or two making sure you get into the best possible one.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: While age is normally not a factor when applying for a PhD program, there are very few scholarships for PhDs in Business or Marketing out there. Governments and NGOs normally deprioritize funding for business research. Most universities do not offer PhD programs in these fields and most of those that do, do it for profit. Many business schools offer PhD programs, but I've never seen one offering a scholarship (and I looked for them!). Since the field of business is kind of popular around the world, a lot of bright students compete for those few scholarships that are available.
If you are willing to travel for it, you can find a Business school in Europe offering PhD programs quite cheaply. I paid for my PhD program in Business Economics in Ukraine. It was about $5,000 for 3 years. You do not have to go that cheap, but I am sure you can find a program for under $10k in Eastern or Central Europe. You can also go to Asia. It will be really easy to find a well paying job there too so you will come out debt-free with a lot saved up after several years.
You can look for business schools and universities offering PhD programs in different countries just by googling universities in *country* (e.g. universities in Czech Republic or business schools in Greece) and then look at their websites for relevant programs. It will take a couple of weeks, but you will learn a lot about what is out there.
Doing a PhD at a lower level business school or in a less developed country is mostly a solo task. There won't be much of quality scientific supervision. But Google Scholar is out there, so is Stack Exchange and tons of scientific journals, which do not care where you are or how old you are. And, of course, if you pay for your PhD program, your experience is only an advantage. They may learn something from you or invite you to teach at their institution.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: As <NAME> pointed out in a comment to another answer, business/marketing is more suitable for a Doctor of Business Administration degree.
I am a 59 year old DBA candidate; in my programme, age is generally taken to be a sign of experience - in other words, I know what I am talking about.
There are several DBA programmes based in British universities that work by distance learning: I work full time and do my research activity in my spare time. This may solve your economic problems (the cost is 4000GBP per year, once one has passed three preliminary exams). There is no requirement for a GRE score; the MBA is sufficient for acceptance.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/25
| 1,045
| 4,409
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am appearing my Ph.D defence in a few weeks. I am in need of some starting phrases or words which I can use while responding to the questions from the examiners. There could be difficult questions which are beyond the objective of my thesis, the examiner could point out a better methodology or I might have missed some of the most important papers in the field and so on.
I need a list of some starting phrases for responding the examiner's question.
I am clear about my objectives and the contents of my thesis. Just need some speaking tips.<issue_comment>username_1: Trying to prepare for any academic examination via stock phrases which are not related to the content of the subject is a very poor idea. You are never expected to know everything about your subject or be able to answer every question related to your work. When you do not know something, an ideal answer is "I don't know, but..." What follows should show that you know *something* related to the question and/or have some ideas about what you would do in order to learn the answer that you do not now possess.
I don't mean to be harsh, but in my opinion "while preparing for your PhD defense" is a bit late to be learning the above lesson and in particular that "polite and impressive phrases" will please no one. If I were on an exam committee and saw someone answering in this way, it would make a much more negative impression on me than a crisp, honest "I have no idea" (with no "but..."). If someone said that, then 90% of the time I would drop the line of inquiry and move on to something that they do know. If someone tried to blow smoke in my face, I might well try to wring an honest admission of lack of knowledge out of them. Please consider yourself warned.
**Added**: The clarified version of the question changes things a bit. I would still advise against memorizing specific phrases, as I think that could come off as trying to obfuscate (which, as above, would be very bad). It sounds like the OP may just be a bit nervous about an important presentation given in a non-native language. I certainly hope it is the case that the OP has given academic presentations before and has answered questions from faculty before. I would recommend that the OP talk to his advisor, to get some feedback about the format of the defense and to get some practice answering questions. In my opinion *the precise words used to frame an answer to a question* are not very important, and the less framing material and the more direct the answer, the better. But the OP can try out answering questions with his advisor, and if there is really some formal deficiency, his advisor can help him remedy it. **This is part of the advisor's job.** Getting stock phrases from the internet from those who don't know the OP or the subject of his thesis seems quite likely to backfire.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to <NAME>'s excellent answer, I would like to offer a second piece of advice. When you are feeling nervous or "put on the spot" by questions, an excellent first step is to begin by ensuring that you have understood the question. You can say something like:
>
> "If I understand correctly, you are asking [paraphrased question]
>
>
>
and then go on with your response. This both makes sure you are clear about your communication as well as giving you a moment to steady your nerves and to think about your response.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> I need a list of some starting phrases for responding the examiner's question.
>
>
>
No you don't, what you need is good arguments to back your research claims - their validity, their novelty, their applicability/importance and so on.
Having said that, some universities have certain rules of protocol, e.g. examiners begin their questioning by reciting "By the permission of the esteemed [position-holder-here] and by my right, I will address several questions to the candidate" or something along these lines. It might be the case that there's some ceremonial opening for your reply. That kind of ceremony - like the robes, and hats, and the "procession" etc. are of symbolic but not material importance. Find some official involved with organizing the examination and have them tell you about the ceremonial procedure.
But again - it's the substance, not the form, which matters.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/25
| 2,208
| 9,508
|
<issue_start>username_0: We have solved an important mathematic problem that has not been solved over 10 years. I want to publish a paper about this topic soon, but my supervisor impede me, and he is reasoning that the quality of paper is not good enough. I am concerned that he may publish a paper about the mathematic solution, without mentioning me as an author, to claim that he is the first person to solve the mathematic problem. Is this action legal?<issue_comment>username_1: Collaborating with someone you don't trust is no fun. I *do not* speak from direct experience -- I have certainly trusted and remained on positive terms with all of my collaborators. Yet even under these favorable conditions there are (most) often some conflicts with one's collaborators: e.g. (i) they are dragging their feet / pushing you forward impatiently, (ii) including sloppy and inaccurate / pedantically correct and overly lengthy text, (iii) pushing for publication of a modest partial result / never being satisfied with what has already been obtained, (iv) shooting way too low / way too high in the choice of journal...and so forth. If I thought that my collaborators truly did not have my best interests at heart...yikes. This goes doubly when there is a significant differential of power / seniority among collaborators: there can be a fine line between giving your junior collaborator the benefit of your additional experience and insisting that they do things your way.
I'm very sorry to hear that you are worried that your advisor may try to steal your joint work. If your question is really whether it is in any way ethically acceptable or appropriate for him to do so, the answer is easy: **of course not**. However, that you ask shows either great inexperience / mild paranoia on your part or is a sign that the collaboration is dangerously in the "no fun" range. I looked at your profile and saw that you are a PhD student at a quite reputable research university in the US. Moreover based on your username I suspect that you are either one of two students with that name in a certain department (not the math department) at that university, each with the same advisor, a young faculty member with an impressive CV. Obviously I can't promise anything, but in all of my experience a faculty member with a CAREER grant is not someone who would want or need to steal their student's work: not even close, and not on their worst day. (As an aside, the fact that I suspect that I have identified your advisor whom you are one step away from accusing of stealing your joint work is not great, and you should think about being a bit more circumspect.)
I advise you to concentrate on improving the interpersonal aspects of your collaboration: try to understand your advisor better and vice versa, and try to shore up trust. If you really can't do that, it's time to find a new advisor. Though I don't know the situation, based on the fact that you've given no convincing evidence for your suspicions and some other clues, my guess is that you are rather new to research (at least of this kind or at this level) and that as you "learn the ropes" your suspicions will be assuaged. If you have made a significant mathematical (note: not "mathematic"!) breakthrough, then indeed you should proceed carefully and patiently and not rush into publication. If the paper is not well written -- according to standards that are difficult to meet or even fully grasp for most graduate students -- that can affect its reception and jeopardize its suitability for publication in a top journal.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **It is much more likely that this paper really is of low quality**, and your advisor is trying to help you. Listen to what they have to say, and make these changes they suggest. You're supervisor has very little to gain (and quite a bit to lose) by stealing your work. I'm assuming you're a Ph.D student, and your advisor is the one stopping you.
While it might not be illegal, stealing a student's work would be very unethical, and not in the prof's best interest. The prof would be an author. He/she will already get some credit for it anyway. No prof is going to risk his or her (tenured?) position just to be sole author.
If your advisor is truly trying to steal your work, then you'll have email trails and first drafts to prove you came up with the idea.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As a student, it is sometimes difficult to understand the subtle nuances of presenting a paper effectively. What you feel is a great paper with groundbreaking results may not seem to your advisor (with his higher levels of maturity and experience) to be exactly of publishable quality. Generally speaking, advisors in any field would act in the best interest of the student. Moreover, in this case, since he himself is a co-author, he would also have his own interest in mind. A senior professor would definitely have high standards of quality and would not want to be associated with a paper unless he is assured of its quality. I think you should just relax and trust your advisor. I'm quite sure that a few years down the line, you'll be glad that you did not rush into publication and followed your supervisor's advice. Possibly, if you work on polishing your paper some more, it will stand better chances of being published in a top-tier journal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It depends on what country you are working in. If you are in the US or another country with a strong rule of law and high academic ethics standards, then it is *extremely* unlikely that your supervisor will steal your research. If you are in a developing country with dysfunctional legal system, then yes it is possible. I worked in a post soviet country for a brief period of time and my grandparents were scientists in the Soviet Union. Theft of intellectual property there was common place. My grandfather's colleague republished my grandfather's thesis in English and got a fellowship in the US with it. Not much my grandpa could do from under the iron curtain.
The first thing that happens before someone steals your idea is that she becomes convinced that it is, in fact, HER idea. Of course you are a young scientist and your work is not of the high quality yet and you need to improve it. Just make sure that when you are working on it, your supervisor is aware that it is YOU who are improving it. With that being said you should work on it actively and don't forget about it until someone else finishes it up.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Just to complement the already good answers provided, I'm fairly surprised no one mentioned this possibility: in mathematics, is fairly frequent that one *thinks* has proven something, when an error is lurking somewhere in the proof.
What that means, practically, is that your advisor might feel he needs more time to make sure the proof is indeed correct.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: If you are extremely worried that you work not receive credit. Look into your Universities Intellectual Properties contact. As a student you have agreed to the universities definition/beliefs on Intellectual Property/Original Authorship. If you used any advanced equipment provided by the University to solve, or invent, most universities take some credit in discoveries. If it was for a class project, then most likely your university receives some credit, if you presented this as a project paper, your university might get some credit. If your really concerned, take your scenario, and apply it to your Universities rules regarding said issue. Only you know if the advisor helped, or if this was a project paper, or a team effort. Also their are many things to show this solution was yours if he tries to publish. First revamp your draft, then shooting a email to the adviser asking he/she to give you feed back on the paper. Make it clear that this is your discovery, that He/she had nothing to do with it. Anyone that sees said email and attachment need to understand that your the original author just by skimming over it. Most importantly, make it subtle as well. Don't make it blatantly obvious as to what your goal is. Make sure the advisor can't pull you aside to task about the email. You want a response. This will be highly incriminating should original authorship belong to you alone. Follow this method with a backup. I would suggest taking this paper, and mailing it to a close family member. Ensure they do not break the seal when it arrives. It will receive a date stamp via the U.S. postal service. Then to prove it you have said mail brought forward and opened when needed. You can also open a date deposite box with most banks for around $15/month. Put a copy of your paper in there and don't go back. You can prove the document was written before any other published papers. The bank will have a log of when you first when in there upon setting up your box. Only accessing the box when you first created it shows that what ever you out there has been there since said date.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: I agree with the already good answers. If this situation really bothers you, a possible action could be to write a paper draft with your name on it and [timestamp](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6726382/is-there-a-way-to-digitally-sign-documents-to-prove-they-existed-at-a-certain-po) it. You most likely wont need it, but you have a way to protect your work.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/25
| 494
| 1,909
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am sending in an article to a ScholarOne journal: should I mark my prefix Dr. or Mr./Ms. if I have an M.D. but not a Ph.D.?<issue_comment>username_1: First, note that the title that you give to a ScholarOne manuscript handling system probably doesn't matter at all --- more than anything else, that is in there to avoid offending *you* if you are particular about being given your title. The actual publication of the paper will typically omit titles, so putting in the title just regulates what the system will call you in email.
That said, Dr. is a correct title to use as an M.D. In fact, many people will argue that opposite, that it is Ph.D.-holders whose use of the title is dubious!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't always use the prefix, as it has no relevance when I'm, for example, out drinking with friends. But I do sometimes use Dr. with my name, for several reasons. Sometimes it is just fun. Women actually like to call me <NAME> (I could never get a single one to call me Master after I got my MPA). It is just a sign of respect. But sometimes if I am discussing an issue dealing with economics, my Ph.D. field, I will add Dr. to ward off trolls who think they know all about economics and want to educate me about how I'm wrong.
It also made a difference in my work. On one job, my company bought out a competitor and absorbed some of their workers. One supervisor in the modeling department where I worked used to insist that his methodologies were superior to others we were using, which was not true. In order to push his models, he always had to point out that the top modeler on his team had a Ph.D. I kept my mouth shut for a while, until one day in a meeting he made a big issue of it, and my boss said "Well, I have a Ph.D. on my team also, <NAME>." That guy was really embarrassed and shut up and never brought it up again.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/25
| 1,910
| 6,923
|
<issue_start>username_0: I checked the salary scale for a W3 professorship position in Germany. The annual income is about 75K Euro which seems pretty low for someone managing about 20 people. Is there any other payment beside the base salary? For example, some additional payment from DFG/EU projects or for supervising students?<issue_comment>username_1: No, in general there isn't. The catch is, that the salary you quote is the base salary and this is negotiable. The actual salary can be considerably higher.
If you are a post doc and get your very first offer, then it may happen that your offer will be the base salary. However, if you manage to build up a group of 20 people that you supervise then there will be no problem to negotiate a higher salary. Exact numbers on how high the salary can be are hard to come by (Germans tend to not talk about salary too much and professor's salaries are usually highly confidential). I don't know a an upper limit of the salary both for W3 or W2 but I know that raises can be that high that some W2 professor makes more than another W3 professor. A monthly raise of a few hundred euro is not rare and I suspect that a raise higher than a thousand euro is also not rare. Here is [some article](http://www.tagesspiegel.de/wissen/nach-dem-besoldungsurteill-was-professoren-wirklich-verdienen/6214218.html) that quotes average W3 salaries between 6.300€ (about 75k€/year) and 7.500€ (about 90k€/year) (depending on the state) which indicates that there are still higher salaries. [This article](http://www.tagesspiegel.de/wissen/professoren-besoldung-die-unis-haben-erhebliche-spielraeume/6200980.html) says even a raise higher that 5.900€/month is possible (i.e. about 100% on top).
Moreover, as a professor in Germany you may have "Nebeneinkünfte" but I can't say too much about that…
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As [Dirk writes](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/62242/4140), W3 only gives the *Grundgehalt* (base salary), which varies by state. As a public servant, you will automatically get a few hundred EUR on top if you are married and/or have children (*Familienzuschlag*). Note also that in some states (Bayern, Hessen, Sachsen), your W2 or W3 *Grundgehalt* will currently increase in two steps after 5/12 or after 7/14 years.
You can supplement the *Grundgehalt* with various *Zulagen*. These are pay increases, not one-time bonuses. You can get *Zulagen* either for a set period (*befristete Zulage*, i.e., a temporary one), or for the rest of your working life (*unbefristete Zulage*).
* You can negotiate so-called *Leistungszulagen* (a performance bonus), for instance if you manage to get lots of third-party money, publish a lot, or supervise a lot of dissertations, or similar things. You typically discuss multi-year targets with your dean and/or university president or chancellor.
* Some German states (Brandenburg, Bremen, Hamburg) currently give you a non-trivial *Grundleistungszulage* without any preconditions.
* You may get *Funktionszulagen* if you hold particular offices, like being the dean or managing a larger group, or managing a specific institution or institute.
* If you get an offer from a different university, you will start haggling with both the new university and the one you are at. Both usually want you, so both will offer you a *Berufungszulage* (a "job offer pay increase", at the university that extended the offer), or a *Bleibezulage* (a "staying pay increase", at the university that tries to keep you). In contrast to industry, this kind of haggling is normal. (In industry, if you get an outside offer but stay in exchange for a higher salary, your manager will usually assume that you won't stay much longer.)
As a brand-new professor, you may be able to get a small initial *Berufungszulage*, but most other *Zulagen* will only be negotiatable after a few years.
The [*Deutscher Hochschulverband*](http://www.hochschulverband.de/cms1/english.html) is a good place to look for additional information. This is basically a union for professors and almost-professors in Germany, and they offer coaching to their members. Very much recommended in your first (and subsequent) salary negotiations - they know what you can reasonably demand and what not. A membership is definitely worth the dues. They also publish the pay scales [currently here, in German, although this link will likely rot over time](http://www.hochschulverband.de/cms1/fileadmin/redaktion/download/pdf/besoldungstabellen/grundgehaelter_w.pdf).
In addition, you can get additional money from outside sources:
* You can have consulting contracts in industry. You will usually need to clear this with your university, and your outside commitments will likely be capped at 8 hours per week or similar, but this can of course still mean serious money.
* If you are a professor at a medical school or a *Universitätsklinik*, you will be able to see private patients and take home some of their payments, although this has been getting less lucrative in recent years, with the clinic keeping a larger cut from younger professors. You could set up your own practice on the side, but this would again be subject to limitations set by your employer.
* As [Wrzlprmft notes](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62240/do-professors-in-germany-have-other-payment-than-their-standard-salary#comment148040_62240), you can get a little money out of the [*Verwertungsgesellschaft Wort*, or *VG Wort*](http://www.vgwort.de/startseite.html) - see some [information in English here](http://www.vgwort.de/international/information-in-english.html). It essentially disburses monies as payments for people using your copyrighted works (they get their money from various sources). It's a very German institution. This will usually not be a lot of money, especially if you publish with a lot of coauthors. [Here is what Academia.SE knows of VG Wort](https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=VG+Wort).
* However, if you do publish a book, you will be able to keep any payments from the publisher. This will again usually not be a lot, and it's not specific to Germany.
---
Finally, note that a professor in Germany is a [*Beamter*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beamter) (public servant). This means that you pay far less in social security contributions, since you by definition can't lose your job (so no joblessness insurance contributions), and the state will pay your pension (so you don't need to contribute - although saving for your old age is still a good idea). The state also pays for part of your medical bills and those of your dependents (*Beihilfe*), and since you are a good risk (see above on not losing your job), you will get good deals on remaining health and other insurance policies. Bottom line: out of 75k EUR, you will take home a larger fraction than if you earned the same amount in industry.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/25
| 322
| 1,306
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am confused about which tense to use in presenting my results in a paper.
"In this study, we created a mathematical model of the herding behavior using the A-algorithm. The goal of this mathematical model is to allow the ..."
1. Am I correct in using the past tense "created" in the first sentence?
2. Notice that in the second sentence I shifted to "is" instead of "was".
When do we use past or present tense in the results portion of the paper? Your insights will be of great help.<issue_comment>username_1: In a paper, actions taken are typically in the past, while goals, interpretations, and conclusions are still valid in the present.
Thus, the juxtaposition of tenses in your example is entirely reasonable: the creation took place in the past, while the goal remains the same in the present. You could also, if you wished, place the goal in past by tying it to the creation, e.g.
>
> Our goal in creating this model was to allow the ...
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If it were me writing this...
I might just omit the: "The goal of this mathematical model is to..." altogether, and instead just say "This mathematical model allows..."
But I cannot see the whole sentence so can only give a limited suggestion here.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/25
| 413
| 1,734
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose I do the research for my thesis from 2013 to 2016, and do the write-up of the dissertation in 2016.
If during write-up in 2016 I discover new related work (published during 2016), is it eligible to put it into the related work section of my thesis? Or should this related work have already existed in the beginning of the thesis to be part of its related work?<issue_comment>username_1: Of course, you should include anything that is relevant regardless of when you started your thesis.
I have even seen dissertations that cite work that is unpublished or still under review.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the section is called "Related work", it should include work that is related, regardless of when it was published. If the section is called "Related work that was published before I even started my PhD", then it only needs to include work that is related and which was published before you started your PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I literally added a recently published paper to the "related work" chapter the same day I printed the definitive copy of my thesis. Luckily, it didn't contradict or change anything fundamental.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: If you have a separate related works section, you can definitely include all relevant literature in that section, irrespective of the publication date. In fact, you can even include unpublished work in a thesis, mentioning that it is accepted for publication. However, if you are including a recent work in your literature search section, you should be more careful. Ensure that the work does not contradict or fill in the research gap that you have addressed in your thesis.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/25
| 478
| 2,032
|
<issue_start>username_0: I looked into an article published rather widely in the media, but on a fairly marginal topic (perceptions of grammar use), so noone will die or ever bother to replicate or correct it.
The contents of the paper looked dodgy in analysis and setup, but more than anything else, the statistics look very suspicious and possibly erronous or at least probably mistaken in assumptions. I contacted the corresponding author for their data, and their editor for an overview of their data sharing policies. No answer from either for more than a month.
What can I do? Is there maybe an online web-environment, where I could flag potentially dodgy studies for further discussion? If the contents are as dodgy, what leverage is usually in process for a retraction to happen? Thanks!
The question is about this particular paper, but this kind of thing can come up a lot. If this was a paper in my own specific area of interest, I would maybe write a public answer, but as this is not, I'd just point it out to other interested parties.<issue_comment>username_1: A good way of posting comments, anonymously or not, with a good chance that other people will read them and react is [Pubpeer](https://pubpeer.com/). Although not all fields are covered, you can post your criticism on many articles. Sometimes authors react, sometimes publishers take action, sometimes nothing happens.
>
> what leverage is usually in process for a retraction to happen?
>
>
>
A good list of the cases where Pubpeer comments lead to retraction can be found on the Retraction Watch website:
<http://retractionwatch.com/?s=pubpeer>
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> IMHO, Ignore it and move on
>
>
>
With the outbreak of many journal publishers and reviewers of diverse levels of experience to review them, you would find many such papers being published today. As a researcher it would be up to you to determine which paper seems **verifiable** and of proposed results are **reproducible**.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/25
| 1,112
| 4,595
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my field (I am a condensed-matter theoretical physicist) it is such a normal thing to put papers on the arXiv, that people sometimes look at other people's arXiv list of papers instead of their publication record to get to know what they do, etc.
It just so happens that a few years ago I did a PhD with a supervisor that does not like the arXiv that much (he apparently had some conflict with some authors of a paper that was very similar to one of his papers, but one was already published while the other was just an arXiv preprint -or something like that). As a result, from my list of less than 20 publications, there are four of them from my PhD that are missing on the arXiv.
I was thinking of submitting the latest versions I have of them as arXiv preprints now, four years after their publication. For this I already have the agreement of all co-authors (including my supervisor), and all the journals involved seem to allow to put preprints of the material they publish. Do you see any problem with this? I fear that some people might take it as a way to advertise as new something that was already published a long time ago (though I would of course give the full reference to the published version). There may be other issues I am not aware of. The reason why I would like to do this is that I am applying for fellowships, positions, etc. and I am afraid some of my (best) publications may go unnoticed if somebody looks me up on the arXiv.
Thank you,
Stephen<issue_comment>username_1: So long as you clearly indicate the origins of the paper, including the publication details, there should be no problem, as you're not "hiding" that the papers aren't new. Another way to help offset this impression is to make sure all the papers are posted as close to one another chronologically as possible. (That is, it's unlikely that someone would have, say, four new papers to publish on the same day.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, this is in general OK. The main limitations on posting old papers to the arXiv are (1) copyright considerations (i.e. you must either hold the copyright, or have permission from the copyright holder to post the e-print) and (2) the approval of your co-authors, or at least the corresponding author, which can put you in a hazy gray area if you can no longer find them or they explicitly deny it. You seem to be OK on both counts.
The criteria for publishability on the arXiv are lower than a journal, and there is no previous-publication requirement or disbarment. From the [arXiv primer](https://arxiv.org/help/primer),
>
> Material submitted to arXiv is expected to be of interest, relevance, and value to those disciplines. [...] Submissions are reviewed by expert moderators to verify that they are topical and refereeable scientific contributions that follow accepted standards of scholarly communication (as exemplified by conventional journal articles).
>
>
>
There is no requirement that work be unpublished; indeed, post-publication posting is an integral part of the [self-archiving, green open access](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-archiving) model in the post-print variety, often with a specific [embargo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embargo_(academic_publishing)) dictated by the publisher.
That said, each community uses the arXiv in subtly different ways, and someone who repeatedly posts old papers may get called out on it (either positively or negatively!), so if you're nervous, find someone in your field who is very active on the arXiv and ask, or simply look for precedent - it's a bit tedious but not terribly hard. For example, [arXiv:1601.06054](http://arxiv.org/abs/1601.06054), first published in June 2014, is currently on the cond-mat front page.
One thing you should do is make sure that your metadata is pristine and complete, and to get it right the first time. This includes the DOI and journal reference - you're not there to hide anything, you're there to make your research more accessible and discoverable, and the way you do that is by having good metadata. A comment saying that this is a late posting of an old paper would not go amiss - it will defuse the people who see the posting and think it's new and would otherwise be disappointed or annoyed.
And, of course, if you're looking to make your research discoverable online, think carefully through your online presence - arXiv, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Academia.edu, Dissemin, Mendeley, or whatever services you choose to use - and make sure that they're all what you want them to be.
Upvotes: 5
|
2016/01/26
| 488
| 2,075
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a Master in Computer Science and I am applying to some Canadian Universities for a PhD...
After contacting to a supervisor, I got a positive reply, however he asked me:
"Do you have your own funding to support your PhD study?
What and how should I reply? On one hand having some financial support is quite vital to me, but on the other hand I don't want to lose this opportunity (I may work in order to support some of the costs!)<issue_comment>username_1: Just answer the question honestly.
If you have your own funding, say so.
If you do not have your own funding, say so.
If you do have your own funding, there is really no problem.
If you don't have your own funding, it may be possible to arrange some for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You should just give a clear and honest answer to the question. In fact, in this case, you have no option but to be honest. If you do not have funding and say that you have or can arrange for some funding, you will be in a problem later. On the other hand, if you are honest, the professor might guide you on where you can procure funding. I can understand your apprehensions of losing on the opportunity, but if that is the worst case scenario, you will have to accept it. If neither you nor the professor has funds for the project, the "opportunity" that you are talking of will anyways not be successful.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Depending on where you are in the world, this may less be a real question of finances and more a question of intellectual freedom and general freedom to pursue relevant research in the track.
With own funding, there are no responsibilities to third parties and the stresses involved - and there are no possible conflicts of interests regarding the subjects one can research.
It also frees up the timetable, as most provided funding has a limited period for which it will be provided. If one were to tack on another year of research for the benefit of the degree and the field it is much easier to do so with their own funding.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/26
| 860
| 3,449
|
<issue_start>username_0: I run into a situation where the logical division the material in the thesis I'm writing forces me to create sections of very different lengths. Matters are further complicated by the fact that the short section does not naturally divide into subsections.
Is this bad style to divide material like that? If so, what are some good techniques for correcting it?
Also, should the shorter section have exactly one subsection, or should it not have subsections at all?
---
The layout I have right now looks perhaps somewhat like this:
Section 1 (where I prove Theorem 1)
* subsection 1 [10 pages]
* subsection 2 [10 pages]
* subsection 3 [10 pages]
Section 2 (where I prove Theorem 2)
* subsection 1 [10 pages]
* ...
* subsection 4 [10 pages]
Section 3 (where I prove Theorem 3) [8 pages total]<issue_comment>username_1: In short, for your particular case,
>
> It is OK
>
>
>
Each section of a thesis should bear a logical coherence connected to a single topic. Each subsection would relate to subtopics. There is no hard and fast rule stating the distribution of volume of pages for sections of a general thesis. But it would be advisable to consult your advisor for any other guidelines set by your University.
Just to ease mind and get a clarity for what and how to include sections,
you may envision your thesis like a tree structure with the root being your main title of research on which you write an abstract about. Then you diverge to branches of topics that your research is built upon. These might become your sections. Each topic is bound to have subtopics which might further divide amongst themselves giving rise to subsections and sub-subsections (if necessary).
So if you have a topic that is not much connected to the topics under the existing section, it ought be presented as a separate section *per se* -- even if the content is comparatively smaller to that of the other sections.
But if you still *feel* that your sections might look better when balanced, there is always something you could add to; algorithms could always be expanded and well explained, figures can be textually illustrated more and results can be thoroughly discussed. In such ways, you can extend the overly small section to a more pleasing volume (provided you do not exceed your page limit if set so by your University/advisor).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There's typically a great deal of flexibility in your thesis presentation, and as long as the lengths don't disturb you or your committee, there is no reason to force your work into some [Procrustean bed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrustes#Cultural_references) of perceived length balance.
In my own thesis, the number of pages per chapter were approximately: 12, 4, 8, 8, 36, 12, 44, 16, and 6 pages, respectively. While there may have been problems in the document, chapter length was not one that either I or anybody who encountered it ever had any complaint around.
In short: let the sections be the length that is best for them, and don't worry if they are different.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: There is simply no problem here. You're writing an academic paper, not a poem. There is no expectation or need that different sections have the same length or the same number of subsections. If you're in doubt, just read some other theses and other academic papers, and you'll see this for yourself.
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/01/26
| 1,014
| 4,041
|
<issue_start>username_0: Here's the situation I am in:
>
> I have written a paper. I need to decide whether to submit it to GREAT [insert conference/journal name here] or to GOOD [ditto]. I would prefer to have a GREAT publication, rather than a GOOD publication. However, GREAT is a long shot, while GOOD is very likely to accept my paper.
>
>
> **Should I try submitting to GREAT or just submit to GOOD?**
>
>
> I'm thinking that I may as well try to get into GREAT. If it gets rejected, I can still submit to GOOD. So what's the harm?
>
>
>
Is there anything wrong with this thinking? That is, are there costs (other than time and effort) to being rejected from GREAT? In particular, does it look bad (in the eyes of reviewers/editors/PC members) to have a paper rejected?
For context, I am in computer science. I'm submitting to conferences and the accept/reject notification date for GREAT is before the submission deadline for GOOD. Thus there would be no delay in publication if it gets rejected by GREAT versus directly submitting to GOOD.
I think the probability that GREAT accepts my paper is around 15%. What is an appropriate threshold for trying to get in?<issue_comment>username_1: Do you have a *great* paper or a *good* one? In the latter case, it's waste of everybody's time to send it to the *great* conference. If the paper is (in your opinion) *great* then it might be worth a try, even with an acceptance rate of 15%, depends how the rest of your publication record looks.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Without knowing all of the details, it's hard for random Internet strangers to make the call. You should only go for the GREAT conference if you meet all of the following criteria:
1. You've actually got a chance of making it in
2. You can resubmit to a GOOD conference if it's rejected
3. Someone else isn't likely to publish a similar result before you have a chance to resubmit
4. You don't need a publication on your CV right now
Even if the GREAT conference rejects it, you might get some valuable feedback that can help you make it even better. Personally, I'd take a shot at the GREAT conference if the chance was 15%, but the top conferences in my field get called crap shots anyway.
EDIT:
To expand my answer based upon changes in the question: There is nothing wrong with submitting to a conference if you think your paper stands a non-negligible chance of getting in. No one's going to black-list you for aiming high.
The only issue I can imagine is that a reviewer is working for both the GREAT and the GOOD conference and you don't update your paper to reflect any changes they suggest in their first review.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Why don't you send a pre-submission inquiry to the GREAT journal and see whether they seem interested in your paper. If they show a reasonable level of interest, you can submit and keep your fingers crossed. If they feel that your paper is not novel enough or not suitable for their target audience, they will say so. In that case, you will be able to save some time and submit to GOOD directly.
I had a similar experience recently. I had submitted my paper to a top-tier journal. Luckily for me, the editor was very prompt, and said that my paper was not suitable for their target audience. She, in fact, directed me to a couple of other journals whose target audience would benefit more from my paper. I was lucky that I did not lose more than a couple of weeks in the whole process, but had I sent a pre-submission inquiry, it would probably have been quicker.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: If all your papers are accepted by the first journal you sent them to, then you are aiming too low.
If having this paper published **right away** is important (for example, you are coming up for tenure or promotion soon), go ahead and aim low. On the other hand, if you have more time to spare, aim higher. Occasionally you may get into the higher-rated journal. That will be good for your career in the long term.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/26
| 479
| 2,113
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in economics and I try to finish and send a paper to an international conference but the version that I will send will be a very preliminary version.
I see sometimes in my field that there are papers in which people write under title a little note that the current version is a "Preliminary Version".
I know that most papers sent to conferences are always not complete but I wonder if it is good to write "Preliminary Version" below the title of the paper.
I ask this question myself because it is sending directly a signal to reviewers and I can not expect how they will react to this note.
Two possibilities : 1) If they like the main idea of the paper, they would be more tolerant for accepting it.
2) They could be more harsh as the author has already wrote on the paper that it is a preliminary version, with thinking that author has not completed it yet.
PS. The papers sent to this conference are blind copies.<issue_comment>username_1: While things may vary between fields, I would expect that a paper with 'preliminary version' is an unpublished (at least not published at an official venue) paper, that the author already wants to make available.
It is generally acceptable to publish 'preliminary results'. E.g., in a large cohort study that runs for several years, it is not unheard of to publish intermediate results.
But 'preliminary version' gives the impression that the paper itself is not finished. Such manuscripts will not be published by any serious journal or conference. Therefore, including this in your title will certainly reduce the chances of being accepted.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my field (one of the social sciences), where conference papers are usually regarded as work in progress that at a later stage will be send to a journal (as opposed to computer science, where 'publication in a conference' often is the goal), it is not uncommon that people include a statement like "Work in progress, please request most recent version from the authors before citing". I've done that several times, in fact.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/26
| 2,065
| 8,959
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will graduate soon from the doctoral program. I will apply for multiple postdoc positions. The results of the one that I really think is great for my career will be probably announced later than the others. If I accept an earlier offer, and later learn that I could also get the one I desire the most, then I will really regret. However, I don't want to risk by refusing an early offer, since at the end I may get nothing.
Do you have any recommendations for such situations? Have you ever experienced this dilemma? How did you manage it?<issue_comment>username_1: This can be difficult. If you get an offer with an uncomfortable deadline, I would recommend bringing it to the attention of departments which you prefer (and/or individual faculty at those departments).
This is not guaranteed to push them to make a faster decision, but it could.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: *NOTE*: I do not have any experience in applying a postdoc position; but this comes to my mind:
I logically guess that, there should be some time between the date that the university calls applicant and tells him that he passed evaluation tests and his application is accepted and the latest date that the applicant can inform the university or research institute that he will accept and register for his position.
I recommend you to take care of these dates and time gaps.
Maybe, when you are in the gap time that you can register for another institute where you are less interested in working; the more preferred one inform you that you are accepted and you may register there.
Another option may be contacting the institute you are applying to or the professor with whom you will be working (your mentor) and ask whether you can delay your registration/attendance or not. They may assist their applicant in some emergency conditions.
*Please note that, I am not really sure whether it is ethical or not to decline your application after it is accepted by a university; or whether it is ethical to apply for more than one institute at a time. However, I have the sense that it is applicant's future and opportunities, and he can apply to many job positions simultaneously.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It is perfectly ethical to *apply* to several positions at the same time. It is a different thing if you *accept* and then decline later on (as they may plan for you to come at that stage); still it happens, but it's not ideal.
The fairest solution is, once you get an acceptance from the first batch, to ask them to wait for a certain period - they may not like it, but you agreeing to getting interviewed is not a promise to join them and they have the option to deadline you if they need a quick decision. If you are strong, they may be more flexible in that respect.
You will not get entirely around this dilemma of balancing your and their legitimate interests.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This is an typical situation in application process with no perfect solution available. I is totally ok to apply for several positions at a time. The institutions are also talking to several applicants in parallel. But after signing a contract, it is not a nice gesture to revoke this w/o reason (even if notice periods would allow this legally). The institute has set trust in you and canceled the application of others. How would you feel if, after you have signed at an institute and canceled other applications, they would say : "Oh sorry, we got the confirmation from somebody which is more suitable to our business targets. Thanks for your time and good luck."
Below are some ideas on how to handle the dilemma. It is up to you, which one you want to follow:
* Accept that in life you have to make decisions at time when you don't have all pros and cons available. It's is not like finding a solution to an exam, where the data available clearly defines which answer is *correct* and which is *wrong*.
* Accept that, even if if you would have all offers available at the same time, you cannot say which offer is the best. Many unexpected events might happen at one position or the other: Your project might get canceled during your work. Your professor might change department. You might meet your future spouse.
* If you are really sure which is the best position for you, but the confirmation from this position has still not arrived: Contact this potential employer and explain your situation. You are really interested in this position, but you have also agreements from other institutes so you need to make about the alternatives an decision. Is it possible for your target employer to give you an confirmation earlier? If the employer is really interested in you, they will try to shorten the decision time. Otherwise there is the risk that they lose you.
* After signing a contract, withdraw all applications to other institutes. So you save them work. Additionally you avoid you dilemma, when you get an positive reply, but have signed already elsewhere.
* Attention: Only be sure to have a job after you have signed a contract. Don't rely on verbal promises only. Things might change easily: The project start might be delayed by 1 year. Or the nephew of the CEO might be interested in the position ...
* Asking for time (e.g. 1 weekend) to think it over an recent contract is ok. But at durations longer than 1 week, the employer might become impatient.
* A bit more time can be gained, if you ask for some small modifications on an proposed contract. The employer might need some time (eg. 1 week) to issue a new contract. Anyhow this point (and the previous one) shall not be exploited too much. The employer might get the impression that you are not really interested and hire an other candidate in the meantime.
* If possible, you can try to reduce the risk a bit, by smart timing of the applications. First send them out to one or two institutions which are not in your main target area. The benefit here, is that you have the opportunity to get some more training in the application process. You become more confident in interview situation. Second try your number 1 choice. You can hope for earlier feedback if there is an opportunity for you. With some delay you could contact departments which are a good fallback solution, althrough not the main target. The idea here is that you are not forced to early to decide to take or leave an offer here. If your number one declines, you might get some positive feedback from these good fallback solutions later.
Of course this strategy has to be adapted to time restrictions, and the application deadlines for the adverticed positions.
* Career is not only defined by your first job. Of course this first job already gives you an direction in industry you will develop. Further corrections here might be energy and time consuming. But the final result, if you become an owner of an multinational enterprise, an university professor, or simply an employe w/o significant career step depends mostly on personality.
* Potential employers prefer candidates who appear to be authentic. Don't try to play to much games with them.
* Trust your gut feeling.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: I can answer this question from my experience
of applying for multiple postdoc positions
and accepting one of two offers.
A few years ago, I applied to around 6 postdoc positions.
The professor for one of the positions gave me an interview,
and gave me an exploding offer for position A with a one week deadline.
At the time, I felt that position A was the best fit for me,
so I was going to take the offer
and just withdraw from the other positions.
However, my PhD advisor advised me
to follow up with my other applications, just in case.
Upon his urging,
I sent a follow-up e-mail to each of the other positions
to which I applied, basically saying
>
> I was wondering if there are any updates regarding my postdoc application? I would like to work with you, so I wanted to let you know that I just received an offer for another postdoc position, which I have to decide to accept by *the date*.
>
>
>
After I sent these e-mails, a few of the faculty told me that
they would not be able to make a decision quickly
and so would not be able to give an offer.
One of the faculty decided to give me an interview,
and eventually gave me an offer which I accepted.
I am thankful for my PhD advisor's advice
which led me to a position B which I felt was
a better fit for me than position A.
I am also thankful that the faculty at position A
gave me one week which was a reasonable time frame
for me to contact the other positions
and to work out an offer which I eventually accepted.
**TL;DR**
When you receive a firm offer,
you can politely let the other recruiters/faculty know
that you need to make a decision soon.
If they are interested in you,
that may spur them to act more quickly
to give you and interview and offer.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/27
| 1,439
| 5,134
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there any research/study/survey/dataset that looked at how often the reviewers correctly guess the identity of the authors when the review is double-blind?
I am aware that the answer is likely field-dependent, or even publication venue dependent. I am mostly interested in computer science, machine learning and natural language processing, but curious about other fields as well.<issue_comment>username_1: Probably every time. Anyone that admitted to breaking the blinding though would probably face some serious negative repercussions, and so I wouldn't expect anyone to speak up or respond to a survey that would allow a good study to be done. I've never deliberately broken the blinding on a double-blind review, but I've certainly received papers that were improperly blinded where the true authors were obvious just from looking at the title page, so I had to send them back to the editor/program chair as unreviewable.
I know of no studies about this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I consider it my duty as a reviewer *not* to get distracted by irrelevant data like authors, so I just check the paper as is. I'm sure that with a bit of guess work (and a fast search or two) I'd be able to identify most of the authors, I deliberately try no to do so.
Most areas are really closely knit, you'd be able to identify a colleague by manierisms in writing, approach elected, results used (and papers cited). And give a good shot at identifying students of colleagues, at least up to advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: After many program committees, I've come to the conclusion that we grossly overestimate our ability to guess authors based on the content of a double-blind submission.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Conferences in programming languages are moving toward double-blind reviewing, and since the idea is debated, people are collecting some evidence, including actual peer-reviewed papers.
In particular, even when reviewers believe they guessed the authors, it turns out they are sometimes/often incorrect, as [username_3’s answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/62348/8966) suggests. In the citations you’ll find actual numbers; I won’t attempt a literature review myself.
Links
-----
* [A short FAQ](http://pldi12.cs.purdue.edu/others/dbr-faq.html)
* This points to [this literature review](https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/mckinley/notes/snodgrass-sigmod-2006.pdf) (done as an editorial in SIGMOD, a database venue):
* This in turn cites [Fisher et al. (1994)](https://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1994.03520020069019), published in the *Journal of the American Medical Association* — hence, a peer-reviewed publication where reviewers understand statistics well:
* There are also reports from program chairs evaluating statistically double-blind reviewing, by (for instance) [surveying PC members for correctness of their guesses](https://www.cs.umd.edu/~mwh/papers/popl12recap.pdf).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: The following paper presents findings from a recent investigation at three major Software Engineering and Programming Languages conferences (namely, ASE, OOPSLA and PLDI 2016).
*<NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>: [Effectiveness of Anonymization in Double-Blind Review](https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.01609). CoRR abs/1709.01609 (2017)*
During the review process, the reviewers were urged to provide a guess if they thought they knew an author of the given paper.
On the percentage of papers where a guess was made:
>
> For the three conferences, 70%–86% of reviews were submitted
> without guesses, suggesting that reviewers typically did not believe
> they knew or were not concerned with who wrote most of the papers
> they reviewed.
>
>
>
On the correctness of guesses:
>
> When reviewers did guess, they were more likely to be correct
> (ASE 72% of guesses were correct, OOPSLA 85%, and PLDI 74%).
> However, 75% of ASE, 50% of OOPSLA, and 44% of PLDI papers
> had no reviewers correctly guess even one author, and most reviews
> contained no correct guess (ASE 90%, OOPSLA 74%, PLDI 81%).
>
>
>
On the effect of reviewer expertise on guessing:
>
> We conclude that reviewers who considered themselves experts were more likely to
> guess author identities, but were no more likely to guess correct.
>
>
>
On the effect of (correct and incorrect) guesses on paper acceptance:
>
> We observed different behavior at the three conferences: ASE submissions were accepted at statistically the same rate regardless of reviewer guessing behavior. [...] OOPSLA and PLDI submissions with no guesses were less likely to be accepted (p <= 0.05) than those with at least one correct guess. PLDI submissions with no guesses were also less likely to be accepted (p <= 0.05) than submissions with all incorrect guesses.
>
>
>
Summary:
>
> We find that 74%–90% of reviews contain no correct guess and that reviewers
> who self-identify as experts on a paper’s topic are more likely to
> attempt to guess, but no more likely to guess correctly.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/27
| 858
| 3,361
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm applying for a postdoc. I passed my PhD viva in the UK, and was given minor corrections which I've submitted. What is my status? Can I say PhD (pass)? Or something better?<issue_comment>username_1: This is always a tricky time period. Trying to make such a complicated situation clear in a single line on your CV is impossible. Write something on your CV that suggests that you have not completed your PhD yet (you do not want to mislead people), but that you are very far along (submitted, defended, passed with minor corrections, etc). Then in your cover letter use a sentence or two to explain the the situation. For example:
>
> My thesis on Under Water Basket Weaving was approved by my examining committee and my PhD will be awarded in May 2016. I have already published 6 articles from the thesis and based on discussions during my viva voce, I am currently revising portions of the dissertation for 2 further publications.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: All of what follows applies only to the UK context, since that is the one mentioned by the OP.
This is not exactly on-topic, but I thought it should be pointed out: for certain bureaucratic purposes, you may wish to find out from your university exactly when the PhD is "officially conferred", once you have had your corrections approved. The date of conferral *might* affect things like cut-off-dates for grants, although I do not know of actual cases where anyone lost out because of this.
For instance, I think in some places they might now use the date of the "congregation" a.k.a. graduation ceremony as the date on which the PhD is conferred. On the other hand, I recently had cause to double-check the rule at the place where I received my PhD, and found that according to the rules at the time
>
> ... a Newcastle University qualification is deemed to be conferred on publication of the pass list. The degree is no longer conferred at a University congregation, and the date which appears on the parchment is the date of the pass list, not the date of a Congregation.
>
>
>
Presumably by now you'll have been put on the pass list and notified.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Have you received a notice that your corrections have been approved and you have fully passed?
If not I would suggest putting something like.
PhD (passed subject to minor corrections)
If your corrections have been officially approved I think you are safe just mentiong the PhD without further comment on it's status.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: If you have completed all the requirements for a degree but your degree has not yet formally been conferred by the university then you are a *graduand*. This term is not used very often but it is technically correct for both the UK and US systems. For some examples of its use see <https://www.google.co.uk/#q=graduand+site:ac.uk> (UK university websites) and <https://www.google.co.uk/#q=graduand+site:edu> (US university websites).
It's also worth noting that as [username_2's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/68228/52346) points out, at some universities your degree might have been considered to have been conferred automatically when your corrections were accepted (in which case allow me to be the first to congratulate you, Dr StopUsingFacebook!).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/27
| 1,056
| 4,072
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently an undergrad student and have found a recent paper, published in Nature a few days ago, that represents a huge breakthrough in its field (I'm active in that area, so I'm aware of it), but has barely been reported elsewhere.
One of my professors is doing research in a related, but not the same area. I was thinking of sending him a short email along the lines of "It seemed like this might be of interest to you, so just for your information: There has been a breakthrough in [area] recently, published at [link to Nature online], in which ..." and one or two sentences about the content.
It is nothing that requires a lot of thought to understand, and the fact that it happened at all is more important than the details. One can easily understand most of it from the abstract.
Would such an email generally be considered more of an annoyance, or acceptable?
**Update:**
Thank you all for your helpful answers and also the many interesting comments. I have sent him an email and received a short reply.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, send it. We all like to get links to papers we might have missed. I would leave out the "breakthrough" part. He may have seen it (or even reviewed it), but there is no harm in sending it along to either him or his entire research group.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: [EDIT: due to an interesting mix of positive and negative reactions, I have provided additional context, mainly for robot readers. I am not against emails, but sometimes words can be more efficient, see at the end]
Providing useful information to others is a great quality. It shows you care. To know that you have provided useful information to a person requires feeback. [Feedback](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feedback#Biology) is an central concept in biology. A good information "should" be provided to the right person, at a right time, with an appropriate medium.
In our time of email avalanche (I get about 20 emails a day with a link to read "for my information"), may I suggest you to do something less virtual:
1. print the paper, read it carefully, pick an important piece of information so that you can talk about it easily
2. when you meet your professor (at the end of a lecture, dropping by his office), ask whether she/he has 5 minutes to talk about a paper you have found
3. convey your information: "I read that... and thought this paper was in your scope of interest". If the professor seems interested, and did not read it, or only browsed it fast (as I do most of the time when someone only send me an email with pdf link withoout more context), offer him/her the "physical" paper if interested.
4. if your professor does not have time, do not insist. You have proposed something, now it is up to the professor for the next move.
You may have a more direct feedback than with an email lost in a mailbox.
A final personal note, from a fellow PhD, [a long time ago in a galaxy far far away](https://www.google.fr/search?q=A%20long%20time%20ago%20in%20a%20galaxy%20far%20far%20away&oq=A%20long%20time%20ago%20in%20a%20galaxy%20far%20far%20away&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.209j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8). When he wrote a email to his advisor, and the advisor found the mail too long, too complicated for the purpose, he replied with 6 letters:PLSSPK. Meaning: "please, speak".
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: In the absolute worst case scenario I can imagine the professor's response could be:
"who's this little upstart sending me papers in my own field? I know very well what's going on!"
Of course this is worst case, I would never expect this to happen... but it might. If you wanted cover all your bases and minimise your chances of appearing like a "little upstart" (this is probably only a tiny chance to begin with), you can always phrase your email as requesting an opinion:
"I came across this paper, I wonder what your thoughts are?" or "what do you think the implications of this paper could be?"
It's an especially useful tactic if you are cold-calling.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/27
| 1,305
| 5,449
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a last year student of a degree in mathematics ( and another in physics) in Spain.
I'm starting graduate education next year and I need some advices on how to improve my chances to get into graduate programmes.
Here in Spain the grading system is based almost entirely in exams in which I'm not very good at. I will explain this, since I don't want to sound like I'm complaining.
I have some concentration issues while working under pressure so I loose stupid points that matter a lot in the academic world. Somehow it is very hard to me to detect mistakes in these situations and fix them.
I'm writing this because working on my own I managed to get quite a high level in some topics that I'm interested in. This could be confirmed by some teachers that spent some time talking with me.
I think I could function in academia for a number of reasons:
* My supervisor thinks my thesis is promising and advanced.
* I participated in summer schools (research oriented) having really good results. Some speakers are willing to write a recommendation letter for me.
* The few hand out problems that I get to do here usually are marked as A.
* Classmates rely on me when the need to understand some subject related to my interests. They appreciate my way of thinking.
I'd love to learn how to show this in my applications. How can I tell the universities that maybe I'm better than what my academic record says?<issue_comment>username_1: The best thing you can do in this situation (I was in it before!) is to:
* Focus on your research experience -- any of it and all of it. Bonus points if the field of that research is the same as the one you are applying to. Focus on this extensively in your SOP. Speak with your former colleagues about that research; was there anything publishable in there? That is a huge help, although by no means is it expected for applicants at this level.
* Get into contact with all prospective supervisors well before you apply. Read a lot about their work (or read enough that it seems like you know a lot). If they're willing to talk to you, ask them questions. You could even arrange to visit their lab, if they have the time (I wouldn't frame this as "can I come visit" and more as "I'm going to be in city x in the near future, and I was wondering if I may meet with you and ask you some questions, if you have the time"). The point of this, besides just familiarising you with the nature of the PhD, is to get your name stuck in their minds. You will come across as enthusiastic, interested, and competent. And when applications come around, and they're looking at those piles of papers and deciding which one of those piles looks the nicest, or whether they want any of those piles at all, you will have an advantage. It may or may not be enough to make up for a bad record, but it's better than nothing!
* Get some good letters of recommendation, from your research colleagues as you said. Remember, a neutral letter of recommendation is harmful, so choose your referee wisely. When you do this, provide them with a summary of the PhD work so they can write you a letter highlighting the skills you have demonstrated in their lab which are important or helpful for the specific PhD for which you are applying.
If you have trouble with exams but you're otherwise good, you sound a lot like me when I was an undergrad. I'm outrageously dyslexic and I got a serious case of tunnel vision / panic attacks in exams. What I lacked there, I made up with research during every summer of my degree. So a 'meh' academic record is not a death sentence. It just means that it would be smart for you to cast a wide net, and don't over-invest in any one application. You may be disappointed if you shoot for the highest prestige, and you should prepare for that (as should anybody who applies to them) --
I think in your situation, a person who is bad at exams but good at science would be an easier 'sell' for an experimental PhD, if your field and research interests allow this.
And finally, whether to address your 'shortcomings' in a SOP is debatable. For my applications in the UK, I was encouraged to mention a struggle with depression and a close death in the family in order to explain my okay-but-not-great average. For my application in France, I was told to absolutely never do this. I suppose this is probably a function of culture. You should ask people in countries x y and z what they think about this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Abellán,
I grew up and attended college in Spain myself, then jumped to the US for a Ph.D. and been here for 20 years already. So I know the Spanish system well and have first-hard experience with the transition.
Your best bet is the recommendation letters. You really have to make sure that they come from people that know you well and that can speak at length and in depth about your qualities and potential. Letters from Spain don't always go to this level of depth; it would be best if your letter writers have had prior experience with this (of course not at the expense of their knowledge of you).
Letters are *very* important--the most consistently underrated component of an application by the students in my experience.
@lafemmecosmique's advice is very good. The best way to make your letters look outstanding is to do outstanding work with the people that will write them.
Good luck to you.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/27
| 861
| 3,993
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently received reviews on a paper that I submitted to an Elsevier journal, with 2 reviewers. One had some minor comments and recommended minor revisions, while the second reviewer recommended full rejection and was very vehement about it.
The second reviewer's concerns were basically that he believes that one of the databases used in the paper (which is used in many other studies published in this journal) is completely invalid, but to back up their claim they posted links to a bunch of blog articles. Overall though, they were very disparaging of the paper in almost every possible way because of that.
The editor gave the paper a "major revision" decision. While I feel like we can respond to the comments, it doesn't look like the second reviewer would be convinced regardless of what we respond if he believes that database is invalid. I've also read that if a paper gets a "full reject" recommendation from even one reviewer, the probability of it being accepted is basically zero regardless of what the other reviewers say.
Any thoughts on how to proceed?<issue_comment>username_1: I have successfully revised a paper with a reject from one reviewer, through a major revision, into an accepted article. It is definitely possible. I would write your best revision and include a very strongly (but politely and professionally) constructed and worded cover letter directly addressing the reviewer's points including the fact that using blog posts as counter evidence is outside the norms of the field. If the reviewer can point to peer-reviewed academic publications that support their negative points, then that might be sufficient evidence to reject the article, but otherwise, that evidence isn't very strong.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The one deciding upon the acceptance or rejection of your paper is the editor, not the reviewers. In an extreme example, you do not need to fear that your paper is rejected due to a review saying nothing but:
>
> I recommend to reject this paper because of fish.
>
>
>
The editor would just blacklist the reviewer and request another one. Of course, reality is more complex, but you can assume that editors put less value in reviews that show little effort from the reviewer’s side, resort to questionable arguments or seem entirely unbalanced in their assessment. In addition, if the authors convincingly address a reviewer’s critique, this will also go into the decision.
Regarding your particular case: **If the negative review had fully convinced the editor that it is impossible or very unlikely that you salvage your paper, they would have rejected it,** which they obviously didn’t. Moreover, if the journal accepts many publications using this database, the editor should be very worried if he is convinced by the reviewer’s criticism of the database. It may very well be that the editor just wants you to respond to possible minor criticisms from this reviewer and give some argument that your choice of data was valid.
Thus revise the paper as best as you can, addressing as much criticism as reasonably possible (i.e., stay true to your assessment of reality and do not change your claims *just* because the reviewer wants you to). In the response letter, address the reviewer’s or blogposts’ criticism of the database, which you usually should be able to do. There are a few exceptions from the latter, e.g., if you are just using data from another field as a benchmark for a method (in which case the validity of the data is not that problematic for you paper anyway), if the argument is based on extensive studies (in which case you can resort to arguing that these studies shall be peer-reviewed), or if there is a considerable gap between data acquisition and evaluation in your field (in which case, it’s not your responsibility to sort out these problems). However, if you cannot respond to the criticism at all, there may be indeed something wrong with the data.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/28
| 987
| 3,534
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a hypothetical question, but I am assuming that if there is a research field out there that has not been discovered, it will, in theory, be possible for an article to be written without containing any references.
The reason I ask this question is because I see that a good number of published articles seem to cite other works just to cite them and less often is it the case that the cited works add anything to the paper.<issue_comment>username_1: No, it is not possible to be coherent without citing prior work which gives the context. And, specifically, might give progress toward whatever goal. Nothing makes sense in a vacuum. Indeed, a great part of "expert-ness" or "expertise" is understanding of the state-of-the-art, the context, that we human beings have arrived-at, have managed, by a given date. To be ignorant of this, or to ignore it, is a sort of professional incompetence.
EDIT: apparently some fraction of the people here interpret my remarks as "commercial". I can only guess that this refers to the impact-factor game, but I did not at all mean that. Rather, as reader, I would be unhappy if a writer gave no indication of prior work of a similar nature. Also, regarding "context", I do not mean "application to marketable products", for example, but scientific or intellectual context. How did the situation arise, and why might I care?
(The notion that "in mathematics, many theories [sic] exist for years without any use..." I think is misleading. Namely, people had reasons for doing what they were doing, in the first place, whether those reasons were tangible or not. And "use" can be tangible or not. I would claim that claiming that context doesn't matter is just a form of obliviousness to context. But tastes vary, I hear...)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I know of *exactly one* peer-reviewed research paper with no references at all.
>
> <NAME> and <NAME>. [The complexity of cutting paper](http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=323274). *Proceedings of the [First Annual] Symposium on Computational Geometry*, 316–321, 1985.
>
>
>
Here is a screenshot of the references section:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vZfAw.png)
According to [Google Scholar](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?bav=on.2,or.r_cp.&bvm=bv.112766941,d.amc&biw=1135&bih=764&um=1&ie=UTF-8&lr&cites=15810688824892562151), this paper has been cited 29 times.
So yes, it is possible, for the right value of "ground-breaking", but *extremely* rare.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It is **very** rare. Because chances are there are similar works, at least on some abstract level. A similar approach on another field, a similar problem solved in another way, similar methods for a different problem...
Remember that one item in every review form relates to the adequacy of the literature review....
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Are you asking for a paper that *cites* nothing else, or more broadly doesn't even acknowledge that anyone earlier had worked on related ideas?
A famous example of the first case is Einstein's "Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper," the paper in which he introduced special relativity. An English translation is at <https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/>. It has no bibliography. The first footnote suggests a work by Lorentz could have been a reference, but it was not.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/28
| 440
| 1,827
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know that the number of publications is just a number, but it can be used as measure for progress in academic career.
What is the highest number of publications you have seen for
a postdoc fellow before assuming a tenure-track position?
an associate professor before promotion to full professor?
I mean, have you even seen a postdoc fellow with more than 100 papers or an associate/assistant professor with more than 200 papers?
I just wish to get an estimate in chemistry.<issue_comment>username_1: I could give you some reference in chemistry.
I know people which finished their PhD with a single paper, and I know professors who got their position with some 7 papers, with strong competition.
About the maximum amount, it depends. Let's say it this way: we can be more or less efficient with our work, but I believe that only professors and people making small and easy contributions to papers can afford to have more than a few papers (at least in chemistry or physics) per year.
I, like most of you, have received (spam) messages from students asking me for a PhD position and claiming that they have 30-50 publications. Some people also counts proceedings, posters, and almost even stack exchange posts, as publications. Also, many groups have "Quid pro quo" policies, where every time someone publishes a paper, includes the names of everybody.
If someone (non professor) tells you that he/she has more than 100 papers, check how many authors are on them on average. Or, pick one and ask him/her very technical details about it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Compare Euler (I believe he published thousands of outstanding, groundbreaking papers) with some others who published almost nothing, like Weierstrass.
There just can't be any "standard" number of papers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/28
| 402
| 1,778
|
<issue_start>username_0: I created an algorithm for predictive analysis based on text. I'm making a paper out of it. I have the textual data my algorithm was tested on and compared with other algorithms tested with the same textual data. Should I post a link of this data in my paper or should I just state that I have tested it and here are the results?<issue_comment>username_1: If you can make the data set available to the community in some way, you are doing it a good service, because it will allow other people to use your dataset for comparison and for their own new works. If they find it useful, it will also help you, as the people who use it will cite your paper as the source.
I would thus say that yes, if you have a good way to either post it online or attach it to your paper as supplementary information, this this is a good thing to do.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Unless there is a compelling reason why the answer should be "No", I think it's best scientific practice to share your data where possible. Some possible reasons why not might be because there's identifiable or confidential data within it, the "data" won't actually help replicate your results, or there are practical concerns, like having to find a way of hosting a profoundly massive data file.
Nothing about your circumstance seems to fit in those categories - a body of 1000 Tweets should be fairly easy to store somewhere online or with the journal, and it's hard to argue that Tweets are confidential, given their very nature is to be read and shared on the internet.
As someone else has mentioned however, you need to get an IRB approval, or at least an exception, before publishing. Ideally this would have been done much earlier in the project.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/28
| 1,404
| 5,101
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have performed 21 different experiments, which I have repeated 3 times in total (63 samples gathered).
I plan to compare data using a bar plot. For bar plotting, I initially decided that I will calculate the mean over every 3 samples, and I will graph this value. However, along with the mean an important thing to state is also the standard deviation. I really do not want to include standard deviation on my graph as it will blur the results to the reader.
Of course, I can just put standard deviation into table, but this will be completely useless to regular reader.
Seeing other papers I sometimes spot that researchers do not really state how the values was gathered. Should I then assume they have conducted measurement only once?
Would it be ethical to not inform the reader that I plot the mean on my graphs? Any other suggestions are welcome.<issue_comment>username_1: I have run into exactly the same situation, where I wished to plot means but not standard deviations, in order to show the data in a less cluttered manner. How I dealt with this problem was:
* In the main text, put the plot that I felt most communicative, i.e., with only the means.
* Attach the more cluttered plot that included the standard deviations as supplementary material, so that all the information was available to the reader if they want it, and it's clear I wasn't hiding anything.
* When discussing the figure in the main text, explain exactly what I did and give a pointer, something like "Only means are shown here, for clarity; full information is in Supplementary Figure XX."
In short: you can present things as clearly as you like, and also should not try to hide anything.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: *Don't* do this.
Here is some random data with 21 experiments A-U, each one repeated 3 times. In both cases, the experimentwise means (indicated using red crosses) are identical, but the within-experiment standard deviations are very different (1.0 in the top graph and 0.2 in the bottom one). R code is below.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/k50op.png)
Just seeing the experimentwise means is very misleading. In the bottom case, the experiments seem to be pretty different, and you could start interpreting the differences between them. In the top case, it's rather obvious that the difference *between* experiments is dominated by the variance *within* experiments. Put differently: the proportion of variance explained by the experiments is very different between the two cases.
This is a crucial piece of information. Do *not* leave it out. Leaving the variability out does not "blur the results to the reader" - the variability may be *more* important than the means.
In particular, remember that most readers will only look at your graphics, and even if they do read the text, the main thing they will remember will be the graphic. If you only put the means there, readers will remember the means. They won't remember whether the standard deviations were large or small compared to the differences in means.
So: look for a way to visualize *both* means and variability. For starters, don't use bar plots. Use, for example, dotcharts as I did. With your small dataset, you can without problems plot all your data, plus means.
If you want to emphasize the means, you can do all kinds of things involving colors, shapes or sizes. For instance, I used smaller grey dots for the observations so the means (larger red crosses) stood out more. And I used vertical lines to indicate experiments, and these lines are a lighter shade of grey than the dots.
Note that the human brain is better at interpreting *positions* (as in a dot chart) than *lengths* (as in a barplot). Nor should you use so-called "dynamite plots", that is, bar plot with "whiskers" that indicate standard deviations (or standard errors of estimated means - one problem with dynamite plots is that it is not always indicated whether whiskers give SDs or SEMs, and these are very different things).
See [here](http://biostat.mc.vanderbilt.edu/wiki/Main/DynamitePlots) and [here](http://emdbolker.wikidot.com/blog:dynamite) for more on dynamite plots. [This earlier answer of mine](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/18756/4140) gives a few more options for visualizing data.
---
[R](https://www.r-project.org/) code:
```
experiments <- LETTERS[1:21]
set.seed(1); means <- runif(21)
obs <- list()
set.seed(1); obs[[1]] <- matrix(rnorm(63,0,1),ncol=3,byrow=FALSE)
set.seed(1); obs[[2]] <- matrix(rnorm(63,0,0.2),ncol=3,byrow=FALSE)
opar <- par(mfrow=c(2,1),mai=c(.8,.8,.1,.1))
for ( ii in 1:2 ) {
obs[[ii]] <- obs[[ii]]+means-rowMeans(obs[[ii]])
plot(c(1,21),range(unlist(obs)),type="n",xlab="Experiment",ylab="Observation",xaxt="n")
abline(v=1:21,col="lightgrey")
points(rep(1:21,3),as.vector(obs[[ii]]),pch=19,col="darkgrey",cex=0.8)
points(1:21,rowMeans(obs[[ii]]),pch="+",col="red",cex=1.5,font=2)
axis(1,1:21,experiments)
}
par(opar)
```
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/28
| 796
| 3,337
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a Computer Science PhD student aiming for an Academic career. One of the options I am considering after I receive the degree is to apply for a W1 professor position in Germany (Junior professor).
My question is very specific to Germany. Is there a chance I can become a Junior professor without being fluent in German? Most of the job postings I come across are actually written in German. Some of them do not mention German knowledge as a requirement, but it could be that it goes without saying.
I know that many courses, particularly in master programs, are taught in English. So I am sure there is a capacity to teach in English. But I am wondering if there is a culture of preferring and only accepting German speakers. Because if that's the case, I should start putting back up options.
Obviously I could work on my German. But my question is assuming I did not reach the required level of German until the time I start applying for Junior professorship.<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on the position, but in general full German proficiency is not required for German professorships.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: You can certainly apply. I don't think German language proficiency will have a major impact on your chances, as long as your research record/profile is good and you are able to at least understand some German in case a student asks in German. Computer science students usually need to be able understand at least some English...
I disagree with earlier posts that you would be "expected to give undergraduate-level lectures". On the contrary, they would usually prefer you to give smaller (=specialized) classes until you have some more experience... Sometimes, you can find this in the advertisement.
However, **German academia is very competitive**!
We do not have a lot of professor positions, and it appears quite common to take 6-12 months to fill a position (make that 12-24 months for full professor positions)... according to Times Higher Education, Germany has the **worst student-to-professors ratio** ([source](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/excellence-by-numbers)). You may say, the German system is very efficient. We have few professors, yet we have a very high output of very educated people!
As far as I can tell, you need to:
* be the best match for their plan
* have had some third-party funding
* have a strong track record (papers in top venues, awards, 100+ citations)
* have been at different universities
* have some teaching experience
* convince them in person
So don't be surprised if you don't hear anything back (not even an invitation to present) on your first applications. Maybe you will get a **negative reply after a year or two**, when the new professor has arrived at his position. Maybe not even that. So, **do not wait for an answer when you apply**. Continue sending applications and making backup plans.
There is a reason why Postdocs ("Mittelbau") complain a lot in Germany (according to a recent study, even 50% of Junior Professors consider quitting academia because of the lack of perspective - most junior professor positions are currently not tenure-track). They do a lot of the work (both in research and teaching) and usually have only up to three years of work contract.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/28
| 617
| 2,651
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am new to Github and I want to upload some scripts that I developed during my research. One of the scripts requires the use of a small external program (not mine) whose source code is included as supplemental material in a journal paper. Can I upload the program and/or the source code of that program?
The journal is Computers & Geosciences.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to your question depends entirely on the license of the "small external program (not yours)". Where did it come from? Find its source and read the terms of the license.
If it's an [open source license](https://opensource.org/licenses) or a [free software license](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html), usually you are permitted to redistribute it so long as you preserve attribution and license terms in the code header. If it's a different type of license, then it will depend entirely on the content of the license, which acts like a contract between the author and yourself.
UPDATE w/ JOURNAL SPECIFIC DETAILS:
The Journal of Computers & Geosciences is published by Elsevier who has an [open access publishing option](https://www.elsevier.com/journals/computers-and-geosciences/0098-3004/open-access-options) for authors. If the paper in question was published as open access, and its chosen license was `CC-BY`, then that gives you permission to reuse the work (including the attached source-code) so long as you provide attribution. If the article in question wasn't published as open access, then you'll have to contact the authors or locate another source for the code that has clear licensing terms.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Unless the source code comes with a licence that explicitly allows you what you want to do, you have to get the permission of the current copyright holders to be on the safe side. These may either be the authors of the article, the publisher or both – depending on what copyright transfer happened between the authors and the journal.
However, it is very likely that the authors are fine with you reusing their source code; this may be one of their intentions for publishing it. Authors that have a problem with this, usually do not publish their source code. As a reusing of the source code raises the chance of the paper being cited, the journal is likely to endorse what you want as well.
Thus it is unlikely that anybody sues you, but on the other hand, if you write a mail asking the authors and the journal for permission, you are likely to get a positive answer (and they may consider to equip their code with a permissive licence next time).
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/28
| 1,646
| 7,041
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have an issue with my supervisor: he likes to write papers in MS Word and I like to write in LaTeX. We have had issues with editing and formatting, since it is difficult to do it, while working on different platforms.
Does anyone have any advice on how to resolve this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: In the end, once the paper is published, nobody will worry about what software was used to generate it. The software is just a means to an end.
So, if your advisor has a strong preference for Microsoft Word then - regardless how you feel about that preference - if you can't easily convince your advisor to use LaTeX you should switch to Word. There are much more important things to worry about, and there is no reason to make life difficult for your advisor for something so unimportant.
Converting your paper from LaTeX to Word is not likely to produce ideal results, as you have noticed. By the time you go through and fix things, you might as well simply work in Word from the beginning. In other words, the "efficient" way to do this is to convert the content in your head as you are writing it in Word, rather than trying to convert the content to Word after it is written.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think you have two options:
1. Learn to use Word. It may not be ideal, but this is probably not going to be the last time you are faced with a need to use it, or some similar editor.
2. Offer to do all the editing. Give your professor .pdf files or printouts to comment, and then incorporate the changes yourself.
====================================================================
I faced this situation the other way round when I was a PhD student. I had been using MS Office as long as it had existed. I had no trouble at all editing equations, incorporating charts from spreadsheets, formatting text etc.
My advisor preferred LaTeX, so I learned LaTeX for smoother collaboration.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Maybe it is possible to make your advisor use a wysiwyg latex editor. I think <http://www.bakoma-tex.com/> could be an intermediate solution.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: You should simply stick with using LaTeX and not bother about any problems this gives with formatting. The last thing you want to do is learn using MS Word just to get this paper finished, as working with MS Word can be extremely awkward if you are dealing with technical mathematical text. Formatting issues are very minor issues and should be given low priority. Stick to the subject and stick to any requirements of the IEEE journal by using the correct LaTeX templates for the journal and forget about your advisor's preference.
This then means that you have your LaTeX version and your advisor has a Word version that may look slightly differently, but content-wise are equivalent. That's not a problem worth worrying about, it's a massive waste of time to do so.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I've used Microsoft Word since 1989 and Word for Windows 1.1c! (1.1a shipped, but was not functional.) I've observed several things over the years, including that the even number version of Word for Windows are the good ones: 2, 4, 6, 8 & 10!
I always sent people the output in a PDF file, so the editing issue never comes up. Otherwise, how would you know if you were editing at the same time somebody else was editing?
I've tried a number of conversion programs from various editors with very limited success. Might as well say it doesn't work. Even if you got it to work for one version of Word, Microsoft changes the format slightly, so the conversion won't work with the next version of Word.
Therefore, the less said, the better: We've got the master copy. We publish in PDF format for portability. All changes go through us!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: Overleaf allows simultaneous editing in RTF and latex. It's ideal for collaborations
<https://www.overleaf.com/>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I have my students use both: Word and LaTeX. In the early stage of paper writing, I prefer MS Word because of its commenting tool, and allows me to teach my students academic writing. I have my students paste the latex source code, and any rendered figures and tables into MS Word. The resulting Word doc then looks pretty standard, except for the occasional LaTeX commands. I assume your supervisor could simply be taught to ignore all LaTeX commands and be asked to focus on the contents. In the later stages of paper writing, I then ask my students to supply the .pdf (rendered version) as well. Once the paper is relatively stable, I edit the .tex only. In your case, I assume once your supervisor is happy with the contents, he/she can then work off the .pdf.
I use the above process with my collaborator, who is a MS Word person. I basically asked him to 'stay away' from the backslash text. Thus far, it has worked out fine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: For my PhD studies (in medical physics, YMMV) I used [lyx](https://wiki.lyx.org/) as a happy medium. Lyx has a LaTeX engine but exports as Word, albeit imperfectly. In my experience one can open a LaTeX document in Lyx, spend less than ten minutes reformatting the tables, and export to a Prof as MS Word. The Prof can then mark it up with sticky notes or track changes, which can then be applied by the researcher to the original LaTeX.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Generally, the advisor rules. Yet, the advisor may learn from the student, especially if the student is wise often to show the benefits. And the issue depends on the purpose: to write paper, to prepare slides and posters, for a thesis? The amount of collaborative work varies with the topic.
Some benefits of LaTeX are nice-looking formulas, great non-standard or forein characters, macros, easiness of collaboration with versioning systems (svn, cvs). So, depending on your field, you might first check whether LaTeX is of help in your domain.
Now with recent pdf editors, it is becoming much easier to comment on a document, and the text editing is quite simple. So now, when I collaborate with non-LaTeX users, I take charge of the editing, offer "input-like" spaces for their parts written in Word. I generally convince them with the quality of the reference section.
Recently, I have been using interesting LaTeX packages, like `\usepackage[draft]{changes}` or `todonotes`. The first one is great at showing edits, replacements, additions. And just by changing it to `\usepackage[final]{changes}`, you get your final text. The second one is fantastic to show, in the document, what is left to do, what is done, and is great for an advisor who see the work in progress. Such packages can convince others that you definitely know what your are doing, with method, and leave you in charge.
So, if you have some free space, my advice would be to stickk to LaTeX, and if you can share the directory with your advisor, he can comment on the .tex and on the .pdf
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/28
| 1,644
| 7,279
|
<issue_start>username_0: A collaborator sent me an abstract he's submitting to a conference, listing me as a co-author (middle position, implying not a major contribution). It's for a conference presentation, not a manuscript, and it will not be published in e.g. a supplement or anything like that.
I've spent a fair bit of time with him discussing and planning the project, I'm listed as a co-PI on the grant, and I expect to provide important contributions later in the project, but at this point I haven't specifically contributed, in any hands-on way, to the exact work described in the abstract.
I thanked him, made some minor suggestions about the abstract, and suggested that he didn't need to include me as I hadn't contributed enough yet. He replied saying that he was happy to include me.
The work is fine and I have no concerns or reservations about it. We're roughly at equal career stages and neither of us is new, so neither of us is looking for extra prestige etc. If we cared about fine balances, I'm probably helping him more than he's helping me in the project, but I'm happy to do it. I have made significant contributions to the overall experimental design and planning, and it's not ridiculous to be an author, but it is for a smaller contribution than I consider authorship-worthy.
Should I continue to battle to be taken off the authorship?<issue_comment>username_1: This feels like a question of ethics rather than just etiquette, because based on etiquette it's somewhat expected that people offer co-authorship to those who in their eyes spend a significant amount of time and effort on the project, whereas you are asking whether it is ethical to not protest being a co-author when you do not feel you have contributed enough to deserve it.
Since it's subjective, you could also ask other people in your area whether they think it's reasonable for you to be a co-author. If they do, then since you also think you have contributed a fair bit of time and effort, then I don't think you have a moral obligation to get yourself removed from the authorship, despite it being less than what you feel deserves it.
After all, your main moral obligation is not to give a false impression due to appearing as a co-author, so if people generally have the correct impression then there is no ethical issue, in my opinion. Your viewpoint may differ, in which case you should just do whatever you think is right.
Note that if I were your collaborator in question, I would feel that anyone who contributed a non-trivial part deserves to be a co-author, but at the same time I would respect their wishes if they insist on not being named. That said, your collaborator may be different, or find it uncomfortable to exclude you, which you've to take into account as well.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Besides ethics, another thing to consider in insisting on being taken off the author list is the "human factor". In general (or at least judging from my limited experience), refusing to be listed as co-author implies that you want to distance yourself (esp. in the context of a more collectivist culture), either because you find the research quality unacceptable to your standard, or because you do not wish to be academically associated with colleagues that have dubious reputations. Of course, as you explained in the question, this is not the real reason in this case. But the problem is, your collaborator offered you authorship because he felt that you had contributed enough (and judging from his reply he was not persuaded by your reason). Thus your refusal could very likely be interpreted as a gesture to distance yourself. If conferences are not a big deal in your field, this could be especially irritating to your collaborator (regardless of whether such feelings are justified) if you insist on what at most seems like a minor ethical breach.
In sum, you should consider the bigger cultural context, general practice in your field, your collaborator's personality, and your communication skill in making the decision.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I am relatively new to science so my answer is from a perspective of a young scientist. It seems to me you contributed enough to be one of the authors so you certainly can be included. Sometimes a beginner can spend months working on something and accomplish less than an experienced scientist can contribute within a few minutes by a good comment or suggestion. Ultimately, it is the results that count, not the amount of time and effort spent.
If you *also* happen to be an expert in what the conference presentation is about, then you should be included as one of the authors. On top of acknowledging your contribution to the research, it tells everyone that there is another scientist out there who knows a lot about the particular subject. Other scientists and students can then contact you for advice, recommend you as a reviewer, or even choose you to be their PhD supervisor. So excluding yourself from authors may also seem a bit unethical as hiding your expertise from the world.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: My answer is based on experience in the field of applied mathematics. I'm assuming (as stated in the question) that there is no written publication involved -- just a talk.
Don't worry about claiming unmerited credit
-------------------------------------------
You *have* made some contribution. **Coauthorship on a conference presentation carries almost zero significance for purposes of evaluation**. It's not something you list on your CV, no matter how "early career" you are. Usually, if you are not already well-known and the results are not earth-shattering, then nobody will even remember, five minutes after the talk, that you were a co-author.
When to insist on being removed
-------------------------------
Obviously, coauthorship of the talk has some significance to you and to the presenter. Since the presenter has already made it clear that he wishes to include you as coauthor, I would only insist on being taken off if:
* The scientific work or the quality of the talk is so bad that **you think it will reflect negatively** on you; or
* Your involvement is so minimal that you **couldn't say anything interesting** about the project (if asked by someone who attended the talk).
It doesn't sound like either of these conditions apply, so my advice is to let it go.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: Here is a simple perspective on the matter:
Co-authorship implies a contribution to the work, which doesn't necessarily mean adding actual data or making figures for the paper and so on. If your colleague feels that the discussion with you was productive and helped his process in understanding the problem and coming up with a solution, then I imagine he wants to list you as an author.
Most of the work towards a scientific publication happens in our head, so contributions to our thoughts need to be equally acknowledged and recognised as the more practical ones.
Although, at the end of the day, it really comes to the individual sensibility about authorship. If you feel like you shouldn't be in the list, it's fair for you to ask to be pulled from it.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Andrea
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/28
| 1,006
| 4,320
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a graduate student, I have recently supervised an undergraduate with their thesis work in co-operation with my own supervisor. I took care of the daily in-detail supervision, and my supervisor had the "grand overview" of the project and where it should lead to. This went on for almost 7 months.
Today, in roughly 3 hours, is the defense of the undergraduate. However, my supervisor hasn't asked me for my opinion on the thesis that was handed in. Actually, since it was handed in 2 weeks ago, I haven't been asked about it at all. The thesis will be evaluated by an external referee and the supervisor at a public defense today -- if it wasn't for the undergraduate student telling me, I wouldn't even know that the defense was today!
I find this weird, and to some extent unprofessional. As the main leader and supervisor, they should, in my opinion, discuss the thesis with me to hear my opinion and include me in this process. After all, I did help with the "brute work".
Part of me wants to let my supervisor know that I feel a little left out. On the other hand, I don't want to be difficult. What do you think I should do?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, supervisors should "acknowledge" their students more. We often forget to tell people when they are doing well and only point out mistakes.
Your supervisor should have most definitely acknowledged your help with the student. He should have thanked you for helping out with the student and ideally given you feedback about your supervision.
As for comments on the thesis, depending on your official role and the rules of the university/department, he may not be able to talk to you about the grades of other students. That said, he could acknowledge you to let you know that. If he is allowed to discuss the grades, it can be a learning opportunity to talk about the process. That said, grading is generally not a fun part of the job, and he may simply be "protecting" you from an aspect of work. It is not out of place to talk to him about the thesis (either the final product or grade). He will let you know if the conversation goes someplace it should not.
The one place that he should most definitely try and acknowledge you is to the external referee. Something as little as "a lot of this project was managed by my PhD student <NAME>" can help your networking.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I can think of three possibilities, in addition to username_1's "oversight" possibility, which are not necessarily exclusive of each other.
* He doesn't want your opinion because he needs and wants to form his own, independent opinion of the work in order to execute his function at the defense. The (lead) supervisor bears the brunt of the responsibility and blame if poor, or outright bad, work is brought to a defense. Some people may simply be cautious that the opinions of others may confuse their own in such a situation, and so avoid them until they can process them more objectively.
* University and/or department rules may specifically prohibit you from "being a part of this process." In my oral qualifying exams as a graduate student, it was specifically prohibited for anyone other than my committee from being in the room. No students, no friends, no other professors, no one at all. My Ph.D. defense was an open defense that anyone could attend, which is standard across universities and countries. You may wish to consult the policies of your university concerning the defense of an undergraduate thesis.
* Either you were there for nothing more than to make sure the lab doesn't blow up—in which case there is no expectation that you have a substantive opinion on the work, and so no reason to ask you—, or you were there to monitor the quality of the work done (as well)—in which case it was part of your job to report significant issues, as well as just reporting on progress in general, bad or otherwise. As the saying goes: "No news is good news." If you said nothing bad about the work, or barely said anything at all, then he already has your opinion. If you'd been reporting good and bad things (if any) regularly, then your supervisor again already had your opinion.
In any case, asking your supervisor about the matter in a calm, reasonable way should get you an answer.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/28
| 364
| 1,577
|
<issue_start>username_0: Spring break is coming up and I plan on taking that week off to go traveling in Europe. Do I ask my supervisor/advisor for permission or do I just inform them that I am doing so?
Do I do it via email or face to face?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Preferences on this issue vary widely, even within departments. Since it sounds like this is the first time it has come up for you, the simplest thing is to ask your advisor about the preferred approach. Something like "I'm hoping to go away over spring break, I just wondered what the procedure is and whether I need to formally book the time off?" If you feel awkward about asking your supervisor directly (though I don't see why you should), you could try asking others within your research group what they normally do.
The only situation in which I would think you would need to ask permission (as opposed to just let them know) is if you are doing experimental work that is time-dependent and would need to be covered in your absence. But if that was the case I imagine you would have considered those issues when you started the experiments.
Unless your supervisor is very hard to get hold of, I should do it in person.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Your contract should include some official vacation time. Doesn't it?
So, it should be your right to take those days off, and your supervisor shouldn't be able to say no, unless it interferes with your work, such as lectures, lab schedules, ...
But it is still nice to keep it cool and ask politely, better in person.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/28
| 627
| 2,636
|
<issue_start>username_0: I asked a professor to write a reference letter for me and he agreed to it; however, the deadline is coming up and he has yet to submit the letter.
As I am not experienced with the process, I wanted to ask if, based on your experience, it is typical for professors to delay submitting references to the last minute.<issue_comment>username_1: I cannot speak for the US, but in the UK the submission of the reference is not too time critical and becomes relevant only after shortlisting.
However, be careful not to nag the prof too often. You seem to know that the prof hasn't submitted it - if you speak to them in person, you can ask them about it. I would expect a reminder a few days before the deadline, and, if not confirmed, on the day of the deadline should be enough.
It's not clear what "constant reminding" means in your case, but it would really depend on the prof - usually they know it is important to write references and will not forget. If they forget, they are unreliable, but I am not sure constant nagging will help there.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You don't articulate how you know it is written, but is it possible that it is in a partial state of completion and awaiting edits? I would not pester but do send a reminder a day or two before the deadline.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: A deadline means two things: 1) you may not submit after it; 2) you need not submit (too) ahead of it. The importance of the latter cannot be overstated when you're juggling with many such deadlines.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I find that the approach of most people I know people to letters of recommendation falls into two general categories:
1. Do them very quickly, so that you don't have to think about them any more.
2. Forget about them until nearly the deadline, and then submit them at the last moment or slightly after (once reminded).
Lots of people, including lots of professors, fall into category #2. The question is, how do you make sure the letter is on time without being a pest? To this end, I recommend giving three reminders:
1. A week before the deadline
2. 1-2 work days before the deadline
3. On the day of the deadline
This balances respect of the person's responsibility (not too many) with minimizing the chance that a last-minute reminder will be too late. It's the same sort of frequency that I use for reminding people about seminars and other things where you want to balance between awareness and annoyance. One might tweak the formula a little, but the general principle of increasing frequency near a deadline is the key.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/28
| 1,952
| 8,328
|
<issue_start>username_0: Together with a colleague from a different university, I wrote a paper that has passed peer review in a respectable journal and is currently in press. The topic of the paper is very far removed from our usual research areas; let's say that my colleague is a chemist but the paper is about history (all details changed). We collaborated and wrote the paper in our spare time.
Now my colleague spoke to some university administrators and was told not to use university's affiliation on any papers that are written in the spare time / are outside of his or her direct responsibilities. As a result, my colleague wants to remove their affiliation from the paper.
I should add that my colleague is a senior researcher employed by the university, and that it is quite a well-known university in Western Europe.
**My question is: How weird is that? Is such a policy common?**
I was under impression that universities are only happy when their affiliation is used, and unhappy if it is *not* used.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally the opposite is true in the United States -- the university wishes to have jurisdiction over all work done using university resources -- which includes the laptops and computers we use. Since faculty are [exempt employees](http://topics.hrhero.com/exempt-vs-non-exempt-employees/#) presumably we have no "free time," but instead work 24x7 for the university (except for the summer months for 9-month employees). So basically any idea that I come up with from August to May of the calendar year and that I use my school resources to work on, is the property of the university unless specifically disclaimed.
Just ask your patents and licensing office to sign a document saying that your university hereby releases you of all possible intellectual property and inventions that may come out of your paper (even if it's in History!) and see if they change their tune.
---
Note also that many American universities require their faculty to fill out a "Faculty Activity Report" every year that details all of their publications (as well as service/teaching work). The university uses it internally to determine promotions and retention; but it also forwards this data to organizations such as the [National Research Council](http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/Resdoc/) -- that determine university and department ranking using criteria such as number of publications.
Thus it is in the university's best interests (both for IP and for ranking purposes) to capture every single faculty publication that it can. So I would think your scenario would be implausible for most R1 universities in the USA, at least.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: **tl;dr**: Endorsing such paper bears high risk and promises a low reward.
**Long answer**:
Not many academics these days write outside of their narrow scope of expertise. Clearly, there is no general policy or practice of how institutions deal with such rare situations as they occur; every administrator probably comes out with an *ad hoc* solution based on their personal understanding of what's appropriate.
I can think of several reasons why a University may want to disassociate from a Paper written by a Professor in a new Field.
* The Professor may think they have made a breakthrough in the Field, whereas in fact (s)he only scratched a surface of a subject, or understand it completely wrong. One example is [Fomenko's New Chronology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)) but I'm sure there are more.
* The Field may be highly controversial by its nature (e.g. politics, social science, religion) and Professor may lack understanding how to present the argument in a way which avoids potential conflicts and accusations. The University does not want to be involved in potential scandal, and avoids it.
The higher *risks* of endorsing the Paper come together with a reasonable low *reward*. It is less likely that someone completely new to the Field come out with a suggestion which will have a transformative effect. Unless the Professor articulates that they firmly decide to move to this Area (change Departments, attract new research grants, develop new programs, supervise new PhD students), the University does not really benefit much from the Paper.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I have certainly never heard of any such policy. It makes no sense. The university is giving away free good publicity for being named on another research paper. And an individual faculty member being successful by authoring another paper is also good for the department, the university, and everyone who's in this together. The policy simply makes no sense unless the paper is so bad that it would reflect poorly on the university (which doesn't appear to be the case here).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Let's call a spade a spade here:
* **This policy is not common.** I have never heard of a faculty member in a developed country being dictated to in which area to publish or being limited in using their university affiliation only when publishing in certain areas and not in others.
* **This policy is not logical.** Let's see, who is more competent to judge if a faculty member is qualified to produce high quality research on a subject?
(a) The faculty member and the editor and referees of the journal they submitted their paper to; or
(b) some clueless university administrator?
Simply put, this policy ignores centuries of history that have developed academia into the bastion of creativity and free thought that it is, and proved that the academic model is one of the best models humanity has discovered for creating new knowledge. (Yeah, yeah, to the cynics among you, go ahead and feel free to kill me for this comment, and bring up everything that's wrong with academia nowadays...).
* **This policy is not surprising.** This story establishes that there is at least one university somewhere in Western Europe that has at least one policy-maker who is, let's say, not the sharpest tool in the shed. I am shocked, I tell you. Shocked.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: A point that has not been directly raised in earlier answers and/or comments: while one's tenure or other confirmation does confirm one's competence in a certain bailiwick, it does not confirm universal competence. There is a well-known fallacy, with various insulting-to-unfortunate-individuals eponyms, that (exterme, let's say) competence in one arena begets competence in ... any other that might be desired. Well, duh, that's obviously not going to be universally true, although there might be instances of instances...
I do not know the particular "institutional" motivation for inhibition of "affiliation", but if I were "the decider" for faculty (and affiliates) doing "research" for which they have no detectable credentials, I think I'd be entirely happy to have my institution's name not linked. (Don't get me wrong, the ideologies and philosophies of ... apparently ... most of these institutions are venal, etc., but, still, manifest crackpottery doesn't help anyone, truly.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: How about this real-life case: A tenured professor in Electrical Engineering, publishing papers about "Holocaust's truth". Should he use the University's name while being introduced as a speaker on the subject of Holocaust?
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: The university actually doesn't have the right to make such demands. If an author is affiliated with institution X then mentioning that in the article is just a statement of fact, it's not meant to be interpreted as an endorsement of the paper's content by the university. So, the author should ignore this request from the university.
The university will, of course, take measures against employees who during work or in their free time engage in activities that have a negative impact on the university's reputation. But that's not the case here. Consider also the case of giving an interview on radio or t.v. on some topic that may be totally unrelated to your work at university. There is then, in general, no reasonable case for the university to demand that your affiliation with them should be kept a secret. It would be a different matter if you were employed by the CIA.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/28
| 344
| 1,397
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in between jobs and want to send a quick note to a journal. However, I do not have any lab to pay the ridiculous publishing fees, is there any way I can ask the journal to waive the publishing fees? Is being unaffiliated sufficient grounds for this?<issue_comment>username_1: This surely depends on the journal, and probably on your specific case (I don't imagine it's common to have a blanket waiver for authors without affiliation). Many journals do provide support to authors without funding. For instance, look at the PLOS FAQ #4:
<https://www.plos.org/publications/publication-fees/>
>
> Publication Fee Assistance is intended for authors who demonstrate financial need. [...] PLOS considers applications on a case-by-case basis.
>
>
>
Try looking at the webpages for journals you're considering for such information. If you can't find anything, you can try contacting the journal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Being unaffiliated is not always sufficient grounds for a fee waiver. However, most journals do consider waiving off the publication fees if the author is genuinely not in a position to pay the fees. You should write to the journal explaining that you are currently unaffiliated and do not have sufficient funds to pay the fee. If the journal is convinced, you might get a partial or complete fee waiver.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/29
| 1,616
| 6,374
|
<issue_start>username_0: **My situation is very strange.**
I have completed a sociology PhD from a well-regarded university. As I was a part-time candidate and holding a full-time job in the private sector, I guess my supervisor did not impress on me the importance of publishing. In addition, the university has no requirements to publish in order to graduate (though all academics there, including my supervisor, have strong publication records).
I cannot blame my supervisor entirely because I should have known better (but doing it part-time outside the university environment and in a role that puts no importance to academic research are the main reasons for my current situation).
I am now realising that lack of publication is severely restricting my career aspirations. For instance, I want to pursue university teaching (one of the main reasons for me to do my PhD) but I have not had any luck so far because most roles require "a proven / demonstrated record of publication" etc. Another example is that I want to establish a credible standing for myself and a list of publications would certainly help in this regard
I can point to various "research" I have done in my current role but they don't count as research in an academic (peer-reviewed) or formal sense.
As I have graduated now, I am no longer affiliated with any university. To make matters worse, my supervisor is mostly out of country doing research etc., so he is largely uncontactable. I can use my company's name, but it is a small obscure firm in the overall scheme of things. My PhD is in the field that I am currently working in, so I can get some credibility in that sense.
I have thought about open access publishing (in reputable journals) and turning my PhD into a book but unsure about them.
**QUESTION:** How do I rectify my situation of no publication?<issue_comment>username_1: Summarising details from the comments, the final verdict would be
>
> Start publishing now!
>
>
>
If you did qualify as a PhD in a reputable university, you should have the ability to publish a peer-reviewed paper. And so it seems that there is no excuse out of this way. As stated by @GEdgar, academic affiliation is not a primary requirement for paper publication. The only way to rectify would be to start framing your manuscripts today.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A PhD thesis is also a publication, and it should have been peer reviewed as well. It might be published by the university's library, or a third party, but if I want to read your thesis, I can. That means that it is public.
About publishing old papers and affiliations: Your affiliation should be the one that provided you with resources to carry out the research. [Also mentioned here.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11841/what-affiliation-to-put-on-an-academic-paper-for-alumni-authors) You can also provide the new one by adding some footnote with "Current address:".
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I can point to various "research" I have done in my current role but
> they don't count as research in an academic (peer-reviewed) or formal
> sense.
>
>
>
Not know what "research" you exactly work on I can't give a 100% assurance. But based on my experience in biomedical science, I can 99% assure you that there is a journal for everything. Try to widen your scope a bit and talk to your colleagues who have been publishing.
Another 1-stone-2-birds method is submitting some abstracts on what you're working to some generalist conferences and specialist conferences. Go present, make some connections, and ask around tips on publication and collaboration. You've graduated now and are a grown up academic, try go make your own things happen instead of dwelling on "when I was a PhD I didn't this and I didn't that," because that is not going to move you to any positive direction and is not healthy for you.
>
> I have thought about open access publishing (in reputable journals)
> and turning my PhD into a book but unsure about them.
>
>
>
If you have a thesis, instead of going to this pay-to-publish book publishers, consider breaking down your thesis into self-contained chunks and modify them into journal articles. It's a much more efficient use of your past work and considerably more rigorous and better-regarded than a book.
[Writing Your Journal Articles in Twelve Weeks: A Guide to Academic Publishing Success](http://www.wendybelcher.com/writing-advice/writing-your-journal-article-in-twelve/) by Belcher is a well-paced guide for newbies who have not gotten the publication rhythm. I'd recommend studying it as if you're in a course, and work towards your first publication goal.
>
> As I have graduated now, I am no longer affiliated with any
> university. To make matters worse, my supervisor is mostly out of
> country doing research etc., so he is largely uncontactable.
>
>
>
Largely uncontactable or *perceived* largely uncontactable? Have you tried perhaps e-mail? International phone call? Ask his/her assistant when he/she will be back so that you can make a visit or local phone call? Does your supervisor have any "protege" with whom you can collaborate?
>
> I can use my company's name, but it is a small obscure firm in the
> overall scheme of things.
>
>
>
So what? Review process is usually blinded and the reviewers will not know your affiliation. If you lament that you're working in a small unknown firm then either:
1. Go work somewhere else that you can be proud of, or
2. Make your company known.
In addition, usually you're eligible to claim the previous affiliation if you publish your thesis as articles because you completed those works when you were a student there. Check with your company on this policy and check with your former supervisor.
Knowing what you lack and trying to make up is a tremendous strength. Drop the shame and guilt, what's done is done. As an educator myself I can only feel happy if my students want to publish their work, and I'd be more than happy to help. If your supervisor is a typical educator who happens to be well published, he/she will appreciate your inertia. It's very important to make the decision as soon as possible, *To write and take the dive, or not to write?* Once decided then go for it, never doubt this decision again, and keep your passion going.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/29
| 2,071
| 8,073
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm starting grad school in the Fall and what worries me isn't the material. I'm good at my subject, I know I will be fine. What worries me are the stresses. Grad school is stressful. Even the impending stress is stressful.
I am planning on studying more of my subject before entering which is the easy part, the hard part is learning to cope with the stress. Can you recommend a book, meditation practice, etc.?<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, congratulations for getting the offer!
My suggestion is that you shouldn't rely on books or instructions, but more on the social aspect of this amazing experience. I am sure you will meet many other grad students, and my best advice is to learn first hand from their experience, especially since you will share the same institution and probably in some cases office and laboratory.
What you can do if you are a bit anxious and can't wait until Fall, is to contact via email or other social media people ahead of you in the program, and meet with them in order to address your specific concerns.
Don't overthink it though - work hard, keep and open mind, and you'll do great!!
Good luck!
Cheers,
Andrea
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: PhD student here. I am especially prone to stress, and my PhD has been very stressful, and while I haven't been completely successful with coping, I know a thing or two about it.
First off, I assume that you have gone through some schooling prior to grad school, which is what got you here (BSc, Masters?). That was stressful too, no? I have heard from SOME PhD students that undergrad was actually worse in the long run, but that depends heavily on the person, the lab, and the supervisor.
What you can do to stave off stress depends on your program and your supervisor. The healthy recommendation is to limit your working time. Some people on this site will tell you that a 'normal' working week is fine. Others will tell you that 60 or 70 hour work weeks are standard. This thread may devolve into a debate between those two camps. Personally, what I do is I set my own hours according to when I work decently. If I don't need to be in the lab for an experimental reason, I'll allow myself to get enough sleep that I'm not falling over myself through the day. If that means I get in a little late, it also means I stay a little late, especially if I get into a groove when working.
Sometimes, if I don't have stuff going on in the lab, I stay at home and I work all day in my pajamas wrapped up in a blanket, analysing data or writing a report of what I've done. This is especially true if my previous week was spent in the lab (I work in cryogenics and when we use liquid helium we have to pack as many experiments into 100l of lelium as possible, which means being at work from 8am to 9pm sometimes). I let my supervisor know about this, and I answer emails, and I do actually work (usually). But that means I can take breaks when I want to, be in my comfort zone, and relax a bit more than usual. I'm an introvert and it helps me recharge. If you're an extrovert, maybe it's not a great idea. Again, you do you. That's the important thing.
I try to keep weekends for myself, but this won't always be possible. The point is to try to give yourself SOME fun time, even if you are bogged down with deadlines. The best way to avoid a stress-related breakdown is to have a life outside of work. That means friends, hobbies, and other things unrelated to what you do. Even if they are other PhD students, it's still better than nothing at all.
Sometimes at night, I have trouble sleeping because the problems of the day keep running through my head, or I'm worried about something going on tomorrow. I installed a program on my computer called [f.lux](https://www.google.fr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjOptyT1c7KAhVIPxQKHRJcBuAQFggfMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fjustgetflux.com%2F&usg=AFQjCNETtFNujuxKD8o5R6TCYxy14NGGoQ&sig2=T5FvjTzdhwsli5sQxGsodQ&bvm=bv.113034660,d.d24) which automatically limits the blue light coming from your screen after sunset. This reportedly stops the limitation of melatonin production if you are working into the night, and can help with sleep if you've been in front of a computer all day. It may actually work, or it may be placebo, but I've been sleeping better. Also, if you switch it off after you've gotten used to it, your screen looks like some kind of crazy holy entity. More generally, practice [sleep hygiene](https://sleepfoundation.org/ask-the-expert/sleep-hygiene). It really does help.
Another thing to watch out for is seasonal affective disorder, if you are anywhere remotely northerly. I live in a not-very-north place (France) and I managed to get a case of it pretty bad this year. Keeping a desk near a window helps, as does walking somewhere in the middle of the day (e.g. to a cafeteria for lunch). Going for a run mid-day (if you can) helps too. Don't be surprised if you get the winter blues, especially if you wake up before sunrise and leave for work during it, and if you go home well after sunset at night. It happens.
I'd recommend living alone so you can rest and recharge at the end of the day, but if you're extroverted, this may actually be worse for you.
Finally, maintain a healthy relationship with your supervisor. If you find yourself worrying about whether you are progressing properly, talk to them about it. Be sure to maintain your independence (that's the point of a PhD) but also go to them for guidance when you need it.
Be sure to keep good records of everything you do (lab book if experimental, and make PDFs of your results written up nicely) to avoid stress later when you have to write a thesis. I experienced it in my masters; not having good records, and forgetting what you did before. Write it all up. Not only is it weirdly relaxing to write up reports, but it will help you later.
If you're in the US, you will probably have courses and qualifying exams. We don't have that here so I can't really comment, but the usual advice applies; start work early, create a decent schedule for yourself, don't leave a deadline until the last minute. Work with your cohort; they are a great source of support as long as they are not overly competitive.
And finally, the first few months of your PhD, I have been told, no one really expects you to actually accomplish much (YMMV with institution, program, country, and so on). Learn your way around, learn how equipment works (make great notes for this part!), deal with administrative stuff. Don't pressure yourself into being a magical science genius who spits out papers like an academic wizard. I spent a week translating an instruction manual for a dilution fridge from French into English. I spent a month filling in forms. Go to meetings, go to journal clubs. Part of the point is networking and expanding the way you 'think', so don't think of journal club or seminars as being a waste of time. It's partially a way to unwind, and partially a way to get you to think like a scientist.
Go to conferences or meetings if you can. Meet people. Meet potential projects you can contribute to, and people you could collaborate with. And finally, talk to your supervisor and get ideas.
At the beginning of each week, make a list of everything you have to get done, personal and professional. Make separate lists for long term or short term tasks. When you finish one, take great pride in physically crossing it off the list. If you want, look into [bullet journaling](http://bulletjournal.com/). Also, put EVERYTHING on a calendar which syncs with your email and across all your devices. I use [Sunrise](https://calendar.sunrise.am/) synced to my personal email, my iphone, my desktop and my work laptop.
I'll add more if I think of anything else. But try not to worry too much; you aren't even there yet! Right now, just get some rest, play some video games, go on a nice holiday. Celebrate your acceptance and look forward to the adventure you're about to have.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/29
| 1,718
| 7,372
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm finishing Applied Physics this month, and the next I will finish my other bachelor degree, engineering. I have many ideas for starting my own research (at the frontiers - not doing things already attempted) and I feel like it would be a waste of time to attend a graduate course, also because I learn more on books than from listening lectures.
In my specific case, I already started attending conferences since a couple of years and presented a poster at one of them. I'm interested in theoretical physics and the possible connections with biology.
Does it make sense to try for one year to do something on my own and see how it goes?
I think that people here sometimes get annoyed at me for reason I don't really understand, so I will explain: I read quite a lot of papers until now, so I have some idea of how it goes nowadays. I don't really want to pollute ArXiv with some utter nonsense, but rather the contrary. My aim would be to learn what I would learn in a normal course, by myself, more deeply, and not only basic things of everything. This example [here](http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gadda001/goodtheorist/index.html) shows some good resources. For example Feynman learnt calculus by himself, but better. In modern times there are many resources for self-teaching and something like Physics from a theoretical viewpoint should be perfectly doable and learnable from books on my own, like for programming or Biology. Anyway maybe this question is more suitable for Quora?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not too sure if you're asking what to do next semester or what to do afterwards, so I'm going to answer them both.
**Next semester:**
It can be a good idea to take graduate courses in undergrad as it shows you can handle the material. It's also possible, and highly encouraged, for any perspective researchers to start working with a professor as soon as they can.
**After graduation (aka. go to grad school):**
As you've pointed out, many parts of grad school involve taking classes. That being said, no one likes those parts and they're not really important in the long run. If you're any good, you'll be able to pick up most of what a class would teach you on your own.
The point of any PhD program worth its salt is to teach you how to do research. It's an apprenticeship with you learning from others in the field and creating meaningful connections with other researchers. You might be able to learn this on your own, but it's probably easier and more helpful to go through the program.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To be able to do meaningful research, "hav[ing] some ideas" is not enough. Also, graduate school isn't just "two years of forced learning by repetition". Many graduate courses are very resourceful and teach you the essentials to understand what has been done in the areas you're potentially interested in.
While it is possible for you to learn on your own and do high quality research, your picture of grad school doesn't reflect reality.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Learning, plus increasingly doing more research. You need to specialize in a specific direction after a few years.
But you need to go to grad school! And it's better to take courses. Self-learning should complement your formal program, not to replace it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: "I feel like it would be a waste of time to attend a graduate course, also because I learn more on books than from listening lectures."
You are quite right about this.
"Does it make sense to try for one year to do something on my own and see how it goes?"
Absolutely not. Listening to lectures is not an important part of graduate education in physics. Some PhD programs include lectures, some do not. But in every case it is the independent work that counts. The value of doing your research in a (good quality) PhD program is
* They will pay you
* There will be other people to work with
* You gain reputation
None of these things will be provided to independent researchers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You're seriously misguided both about what a research career requires and what is the purpose of a grad school.
Graduate school is very much "learning on your own", only with the possibility of direct support from more experienced peers and supervisors. The main goal of a PhD program is not in the study courses and lectures, the goal is is to enable capable students to learn how to properly do research. This implies that students after bachelor studies are not generally *not* considered ready for doing independent research. It's possible that you're an exception from this general pattern, but you have not named any specific reasons in support of this, so it's *a priori* unlikely.
Most likely any papers you can publish at this stage will not be very good, even if you're genuinely capable: without a grad school training you won't have sufficient training to recognize what's considered "good" by the community you want to impress. Even the papers actually happen to be good (i.e. not only interesting ideas, but also solid methodology, broad knowledge of the field, awareness of which research questions are "hot", etc.), they are unlikely to be noticed by the community in the first place, as being an independent you won't have the same opportunities to make academic connections and to promote yourself. Furthermore, being an independent researcher *without solid credentials* means that you have to constantly fight an uphill battle to be taken seriously.
>
> Does it make sense to try for one year to do something on my own and see how it goes?
>
>
>
The best you could do in this year is to try to maximize your chances to be accepted in a good graduate program.
You say that you want a career in science, but "independently from a university". Being an independent scholar is unfortunately not a viable alternative *at your stage* of research career. The only viable alternatives are governmental or industrial research labs, but there are fewer of these jobs compared to e.g. postdoc positions in academia, and they nevertheless typically require academical credentials. Perhaps more to the point, they're unlikely to offer you more freedom in your research compared to a university.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: As others have mentioned, graduate studies are less about classes and more about research apprenticeships.
You already know how to learn theory. What can you work on next? **Collaboration.** Physics research, and research in general, is for the most part a group effort... for many reasons. Some reasons are bureaucratic, while others are purely pragmatic. If I were you, I'd find a way to work with a professor - someone whose personality suits you - who is active in an interesting field. The easiest way to do this is through graduate studies.
Also, regarding classes...I get it. Sure, I often learn better on my own as well (though it's remarkable how often I recall my professor's mannerisms and metaphors when explaining certain phenomena!). But my grades and classes *do* give me one thing: credibility. When a professor assigns you a grade, they are vouching for your skill, tenacity, reliability... a host of factors. Regardless, it becomes easier to progress in research when you have established experts supporting you!
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/29
| 375
| 1,518
|
<issue_start>username_0: Last summer I did an Internship at a Company and after finishing it with a positive review, I received the offer to write my bachelor thesis in cooperation with that company.
After finding a suitable subject (taken from the list of available subjects) I contacted the Doctor that initialy posted the subject.
In his reply he told me that he would be interested in supervising me but he has to decline as he has not enough time and the University (Chair) would not reimburse him on supervising extern thesises.
Finally he re-emphasized that he *is* interested in the topic, and asked me to inform him when the company would find another *contingence*
I struggle to identify what he means by this.
My first impression is that he'd like to be compensated for supervising me by the company.
I don't know whether this is what he is suggesting or whether this would be indecent at all.
I'd like to here another opinion before proceeding.<issue_comment>username_1: The word [contingency](http://www.thefreedictionary.com/contingency) basically means "possibility". He can not supervise you now for the reasons he explained, but there is a possibility that in future he will. I would take it as a polite *no*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If the company is going to directly benefit from your thesis research, you may want to see if the company is willing to at least partially fund it. Even with some funding it may not mean that the Doctor you contacted to supervise you.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/29
| 803
| 3,325
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am planning to submit an article to a mathematically-oriented journal (namely: [Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis](http://www.springer.com/physics/classical+continuum+physics/journal/205)).
I have quite a lot of results so I wrote a section "Main Results".
**Question 1** In this section, the results are given as theorems, and each proof is given in another section. However, there is one simple theorem whose proof is only a few lines long. Can I provide the proof in the "Main Results" section, or is it not customary to include any proofs there?
**Question 2** I am used to adding conclusions to my articles, but all the articles I read in this journal do not have any. Should I do the same and not add any conclusion (note that nothing is mentionned about this in the guidelines)?<issue_comment>username_1: Question 1. I have seen both cases. I will include proof of the simple theorem in main results.
Question 2. In math, your conclusions are your main theorems. It is typically not needed to include a Conclusions section.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Concerning Q1: Generally, people do not give proofs in the first section and state only main results in the introduction provided that the paper is written in the style that you described. However, if you think that the proof of a theorem should be included in the first section, it is completely OK. See for example the following paper : <http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.02604>
Q2: I did not write anything with a conclusion section until now but there are many papers having a conclusion section. If you want to include some open problems and conjectures (may depend on numerical experiments) or some open-ended discussion it is appropriate to add a conclusion section in your paper. Otherwise, the conclusion section (as the title of a section) may not reflect the content of the associated part of the paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Can I provide the proof in the "Main Results" section, or is it not
> customary to include any proofs there?
>
>
>
It is fine to include a proof of a few lines in a section titled Main Results, if you feel that that helps your narrative, if it adds some insight that is useful at this point in the paper, or if the proof is extremely elegant or interesting. It is also fine not to do so. Good writing cannot be summarized in a few rules, one needs to always think about what makes sense for the particular context one is thinking about.
>
> Should I do the same and not add any conclusion?
>
>
>
Pure math papers almost never have a Conclusion section. If the reader reads the introduction, the results and the proofs and still doesn't know what conclusions are to be drawn from the work, it is a bad paper and no final section will save it. For this reason, many if not most math papers simply end after the end of the last proof. Others will have a final section titled something like "Additional remarks", "Final remarks" or "Open problems". This section will usually be short and forward-looking, addressing possible extensions of the work, or containing some half-baked thoughts about aspects of the work or related questions that the authors still don't understand well.
Conclusion
==========
I don't have any. :-)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/29
| 1,485
| 6,535
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got invited for a PhD interview to the University of Edinburgh. I was asked in the email to prepare a 10 mins presentation on a recent research I was involved in. I did a sandwich placement year and it just so happened that this week I just gave a presentation about my placement project. I was given 30mins, which was still barely enough to cover everything. Now with 10mins, I might struggle to convey everything. What's more, what should I focus on in such presentation? I believe it's not to manage to show everything possible within the given (I don't want to try to squeeze too much data and speak ridiculously fast), but is it perhaps to show that I can present in scientific way? That's what my university tutor has told me. What exactly does it mean? Should I show that I fully understand what I present (which I believe I do), explain well my graphs etc? Any tips? What are they looking for in this short presentation?
I struggle a lot with presenting/public speaking, which is why I might worry too much over it but then again, I need to prepare twice as much as a person who is good at presenting.
Many, many thanks for help!
**Edit:** I realise that I'm still a bit stuck in the format of presentations I have given at the university and I wanted to ask what I should change to make this 10mins presentation as good as possible.
The format that I usually follow is:
*introduction to the topic* --> should I make it as short and simple as possible?
*aims/objectives*
*methods/materials* --> I wonder if I should skip it or make it very short?
*results* --> I believe I need to select most relevant ones
*discussion* --> this part usually takes some time in presentations, maybe I could combine it with conclusion to prevent repetitions maybe?
*conclusion*
*further experiments*
*acknowledgement*
*references*<issue_comment>username_1: First, you should choose the most significant research project you worked on. This is probably frustrating as you are likely to have done some other stuff you'd like to present, but put it aside. Focus on the selected project, and present it. Do not try to present every detail of it! Aim about one slide per minute, and one idea per slide. Adapt your presentation to whom you'll present (if they are not specialised, don't go too deep into the details and try to make something interesting). You *can* say that you managed to show that [blahblah] even if you don't have time to explain how. Keep in mind that often, judges might be sleepy, will not have read preliminary reports, etc. So be very clear. You can of course use graphs, but use them well.
From my experience, the most important tip is to question, for each slide, *what do I want to say/show with this slide?* and check that everything on this slide serves the objective (title, graphs, text, etc.). And do not write all what you are going to say, this is very boring! Only write the main ideas.
**Edit** Regarding your last paragraph: a lot of people give very bad presentations; questionning about how to present shows you are trying to improve, and that's very positive. You are probably a beginner; making and giving good presentations is a difficult task, and that's the right time to get on the right track. Moreover, making some efforts proves some respect to the listeners and avoid them loosing their time. So don't focus on the fact that others are more gifted at presenting, what matters is what you do and how you can improve your skills. I've seen people making quite poor presentations tremondously improving within one month.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Definitely don't try to cover everything. This is certainly not expected, and as you noted, is just not possible in a limited amount of time. What they likely would want to see is if you can explain the main points of your research in a succint way. Trying to cover too much will force you to rush trhough the material, making it difficult to follow. You can still show that you master a subject without getting into all the technical details. Indeed, it takes a good understanding of a research problem/project to be able to place it into perspective, to explain the main motivations and the most important results.
So what should be in the presentation? Different people will give different advice, but I think the following guidelines are sensible. First of all, you should identify the one or two main results of your research. Make sure that you have enough time to cover them, for example by addressing the main points in the beginning of your talk. You can go into the details (such as the methods you used) later on. Another important item is the motivation behind the research. Why did you research this particular problem, and why should people care about it? This might also be a good point to briefly mention the state of the art of the field, and explain how your work extends this. Towards the end of your talk you could go more into the technical details, but take into account that most of your audience may not be an expert on your topic.
And finally, make sure you practice your talk a few times. Ask a few more experienced people whom you trust (and can give good feedback) to attend a practice talk to give suggestions on how your presentation can be improved. Don't worry if it seems like you would have to redo the entire thing: this will only make it better.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As a PhD candidate in my group I was sometimes asked to join a committee that was interviewing a candidate for an open position. For the preparation of the presentation you already got some good tips in the other answers.
You are also asking about the intention of this presentation. It is not only about your presentation skills. That is a skill that you need to develop during your PhD as well. Much more important is the discussion afterwards. Especially if it is for a small committee, they will take plenty of time to discuss details of your research. That is the moment that they can evaluate you as a researcher. You should be able to defend choices you made, or suggest routes for future research. I think that the discussion is more important than the presentation (which you obviously still should prepare well).
The discussion is a lot more difficult to prepare. It is wise to read the thesis again, and think of the details that lead to specific conclusions. Especially if the research was executed a bit longer ago, some of the details may have faded.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/29
| 1,206
| 4,474
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know that arXiv have their own identifier system, but considering how widely adopted DOI is, why do they not use DOI perhaps as a supplement to their own identifier?<issue_comment>username_1: DOIs have a technical purpose and a bolted-on social purpose.
The technical purpose for DOIs is to be an actionable identifier for intellectual works (such as articles) that outlives technology changes, domain-name changes, business-model failures, mergers and acquisitions, and all the other stuff that makes ordinary URLs 404. (Thinking of it as a URL-indirection layer is not a bad way to get your head around it.) The thing is, *DOIs are not the only scheme that accomplishes this technical goal.* (In fact, technically? DOIs are actually [handles](http://www.handle.net/).) arXiv appears to have [rolled its own scheme](http://arxiv.org/help/arxiv_identifier) with underlying infrastructure to match.
The bolted-on social purpose? In the early days of web-accessible journals, it wasn't always obvious what was a legitimate journal and what was woolly-wild-Web content. (Not, obviously, that such things are exactly clear as crystal now! However.) Because nobody making woolly-wild-Web content bothered to buy DOIs, DOIs became a convenient heuristic for determining whether online content belonged to a journal.
In so doing, they accreted Mystical (but let me assure you, wholly imaginary) Powers of Reputability in the eyes of many people who really ought to know better... to the extent that anything *without* a DOI started to look fishy, including in the eyes of many people who really ought to know better.
So. Where does that leave arXiv? With an adequate technical solution to the 404 problem, but without the Mystical Powers of Reputability that DOIs are (erroneously) thought to confer. I hypothesize that arXiv doesn't think it needs to pay for Mystical Powers of Reputability... and it's flourishing, so if that is indeed what arXiv is thinking, arXiv appears to be correct.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: At least in mathematics, the arXiv is a pre-print server --- papers are mostly eventually published, and receive DOIs then. In fact, the arXiv encourages authors to add these DOIs to the arXiv metadata when they become available.
I think it could be quite confusing for papers to end up with two DOIs. Given that the arXiv numbering scheme works quite well, and in practice everyone knows how to resolve handles of the form `arXiv:NNNN.MMMMM`, why add the complication?
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: This behavior changed in January 2022. [ArXiV now assigns DOIs](https://blog.arxiv.org/2022/02/17/new-arxiv-articles-are-now-automatically-assigned-dois/), as well as arXiv IDs. The change was supposedly made to improve discoverability, and to "help arXiv meet the ‘[FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship](http://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618)’".
>
> Starting in January 2022, arXiv began registering DOIs and submitting associated article metadata to DataCite on behalf of (and at no cost to) arXiv authors. The first articles to receive DOIs are those with 2201.NNNNN identifiers, with all new articles receiving DOIs going forward. Following the successful launch, we will begin minting “arXiv DOIs” for the approximately 2M articles in arXiv’s corpus published between 1991 and 2021. The article abstract (/abs) pages are also now updated to display the arXiv DOIs following the registrations.
>
>
> **Why add DOIs when there are arXiv identifiers? Are arXiv identifiers going away?**
>
>
> The arXiv identifier has existed for more than 30 years; we will continue supporting it and you may use it in your citations as an alternative to the arXiv DOI. We are issuing DOIs for several reasons:
>
>
> * Making article metadata available in [DataCite’s centralized location](https://commons.datacite.org/doi.org?query=client.uid%3Aarxiv.content) allows research outputs to be more discoverable and harvestable.
> * Some funding agencies require DOIs for the research they are supporting.
>
>
>
The DOI is constructed from the ID according to
>
> An author can determine their article’s DOI by using the DOI prefix <https://doi.org/10.48550/> followed by the arXiv ID (replacing the colon with a period). For example, the arXiv ID arXiv:2202.01037 will translate to the DOI link <https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.01037>
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/30
| 1,353
| 5,056
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently in my last semester of BS degrees in Computer Science and Mathematics. I am in the middle of applying for a number of taught Master's programmes in both the US and in Asia, most of which are 1-year and full-time.
My grades are fairly good, with a cumulative GPA of ~3.7 and a major GPA of 3.9+ in CS. Unfortunately I have no research experience (that's why I chose to apply for taught Masters in the first place) and frankly have not much besides grades to show admissions.
So my question is: besides having strong letters of recommendation, what can I do to increase my chances?
I understand the "correct" answer differs from institute to institute and from country to country, but some general pointers are very much appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: DOIs have a technical purpose and a bolted-on social purpose.
The technical purpose for DOIs is to be an actionable identifier for intellectual works (such as articles) that outlives technology changes, domain-name changes, business-model failures, mergers and acquisitions, and all the other stuff that makes ordinary URLs 404. (Thinking of it as a URL-indirection layer is not a bad way to get your head around it.) The thing is, *DOIs are not the only scheme that accomplishes this technical goal.* (In fact, technically? DOIs are actually [handles](http://www.handle.net/).) arXiv appears to have [rolled its own scheme](http://arxiv.org/help/arxiv_identifier) with underlying infrastructure to match.
The bolted-on social purpose? In the early days of web-accessible journals, it wasn't always obvious what was a legitimate journal and what was woolly-wild-Web content. (Not, obviously, that such things are exactly clear as crystal now! However.) Because nobody making woolly-wild-Web content bothered to buy DOIs, DOIs became a convenient heuristic for determining whether online content belonged to a journal.
In so doing, they accreted Mystical (but let me assure you, wholly imaginary) Powers of Reputability in the eyes of many people who really ought to know better... to the extent that anything *without* a DOI started to look fishy, including in the eyes of many people who really ought to know better.
So. Where does that leave arXiv? With an adequate technical solution to the 404 problem, but without the Mystical Powers of Reputability that DOIs are (erroneously) thought to confer. I hypothesize that arXiv doesn't think it needs to pay for Mystical Powers of Reputability... and it's flourishing, so if that is indeed what arXiv is thinking, arXiv appears to be correct.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: At least in mathematics, the arXiv is a pre-print server --- papers are mostly eventually published, and receive DOIs then. In fact, the arXiv encourages authors to add these DOIs to the arXiv metadata when they become available.
I think it could be quite confusing for papers to end up with two DOIs. Given that the arXiv numbering scheme works quite well, and in practice everyone knows how to resolve handles of the form `arXiv:NNNN.MMMMM`, why add the complication?
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: This behavior changed in January 2022. [ArXiV now assigns DOIs](https://blog.arxiv.org/2022/02/17/new-arxiv-articles-are-now-automatically-assigned-dois/), as well as arXiv IDs. The change was supposedly made to improve discoverability, and to "help arXiv meet the ‘[FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship](http://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618)’".
>
> Starting in January 2022, arXiv began registering DOIs and submitting associated article metadata to DataCite on behalf of (and at no cost to) arXiv authors. The first articles to receive DOIs are those with 2201.NNNNN identifiers, with all new articles receiving DOIs going forward. Following the successful launch, we will begin minting “arXiv DOIs” for the approximately 2M articles in arXiv’s corpus published between 1991 and 2021. The article abstract (/abs) pages are also now updated to display the arXiv DOIs following the registrations.
>
>
> **Why add DOIs when there are arXiv identifiers? Are arXiv identifiers going away?**
>
>
> The arXiv identifier has existed for more than 30 years; we will continue supporting it and you may use it in your citations as an alternative to the arXiv DOI. We are issuing DOIs for several reasons:
>
>
> * Making article metadata available in [DataCite’s centralized location](https://commons.datacite.org/doi.org?query=client.uid%3Aarxiv.content) allows research outputs to be more discoverable and harvestable.
> * Some funding agencies require DOIs for the research they are supporting.
>
>
>
The DOI is constructed from the ID according to
>
> An author can determine their article’s DOI by using the DOI prefix <https://doi.org/10.48550/> followed by the arXiv ID (replacing the colon with a period). For example, the arXiv ID arXiv:2202.01037 will translate to the DOI link <https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.01037>
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/01/30
| 2,133
| 9,028
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm 27 years old and I'm applying to university. On the applications it ask the student to list activities and employment during time away from school. I played online poker for living for ≈4 years, should I mention this? Or would I be looked down upon and perceived as a gambling addict? There's no room on the application to go into details.
If I don't mention it then I'll have this big empty gap with no jobs listed – only activities. I'm applying for undergraduate studies into CS.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it's worth addressing your question on two levels, the practical level and the philosophical/ethical level (which by itself also has some bearing on the practical level).
On the practical level, it sounds like both the options of mentioning or not mentioning your poker occupation carry some risk. It cannot be denied that some people may perceive your choice of making a living from a card game as a negative, or at least not a positive, thing, whether this is justified or not. On the other hand, an unexplained 4-year gap on your CV would also very likely be perceived as a negative thing, perhaps by an even larger number of people than in the case of poker.
More positively however, if you were successful enough as a poker player to be able to make a living out of it for several years, that can say several good things about you that may impress even some people who tend to disapprove of poker. For example, if you want my personal opinion, I would infer that you are intelligent and have strong analytical skills, while at the same time not exactly getting the impression that you have strong altruistic tendencies or are especially passionate about using your talents for the good of society; of course, if I found out that you also volunteered at a homeless shelter or donated half of your poker proceeds to charity, my impressions on such things can change. If you are considering mentioning the poker, it may be a good idea to mention specific achievements in this area (e.g., which/how many tournaments you won).
Now, to address the more philosophical aspect of the question, I think as a matter of principle there's something to be said for being honest about what you have been doing with your life (as long as it's a legal activity), even though it may be a somewhat controversial activity that risks bothering or offending some people. More to the point, as I said this philosophical argument maps to the practical level, in the sense that if I were reading your application I would be somewhat impressed by the fact that you chose to mention it despite the obvious risks, independently of anything else, and would see that as evidence of a certain amount of character (at least if you didn't mention it in a way that seemed very cavalier or arrogant). Now, whether that positive impression would be enough to counterbalance the negative impression I would get if I were the sort of person who strongly disapproves of card games, is hard to say; probably for some such people the answer is no. For my case specifically, while I have a mild disapproval of someone with obvious talents taking up a form of employment that has essentially zero societal impact (whether it's poker or many other less controversial types of employment with the same characteristic), I do think the positive effect of seeing you take ownership of your lifestyle decisions in an honest way could actually make me see you in overall a quite positive light.
So should you mention it or not? **I don't know.** Only you can decide that, and given how critical of a decision this is, it would be irresponsible of me to give you any definite advice, even if I had a strong feeling about what the correct choice is, which I don't. I hope this analysis can still be a bit helpful though. In any case, good luck.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I like @DanRomik's analysis, but the same analysis leads me to a different conclusion: **yes, list it.**
First, it gives a better picture of who you are and what you have been doing.
Second, while some people may be prejudiced against poker players, in most applications there are things (and lack of things) that may be viewed positively by some committee members and negatively by other committee members. I don't think the concern should be too great that it will lead to too much veto-ing of your application, as might be the case for being incarcerated for a violent crime, say. (Of course this is my personal opinion and not based on any hard data from surveys--I imagine it might be an issue at some schools, but probably not most.) I personally would find lack of activity for 4 years more of a concern.
Third, the fact that you are no longer playing poker professionally (I infer this from your use of past tense) indicates that, even if you were addicted to gambling at some point, you overcame it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I'll suggest one of two options.
### Option 1: Put a positive spin on your poker activities
It's one thing to write "I played poker online a lot and lived of my winnings." It's another thing entirely to say "I developed a statistical algorithm for multi-round poker tournaments while affiliated with ACME online games inc." the more you can make it professional-sounding (not necessarily with the angle I've demonstrated), the better it sounds.
### Option 2: Fill the gap with other things
I'm sure you didn't play from dawn to dusk, get drunk and go to bed for 4 years, right? You're applying to be an undergrad, not a R&D team leader. Maybe you spent time doing volunteer activities? Helping your family out? Pursuing an interesting hobby? Traveling abroad? Even if that doesn't cover all that much, you can play it up.
PS - If your grades are good, I don't think anyone would care what you did before your undergraduate studies. I mean, maybe for a scholarship, but not beyond that.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Lean yes, provided it was legal. Professional poker takes a tremendous level of mathematical acumen and discipline. Given that this is a tremendous qualification and, you know, explains what you've actually been doing, you definitely include it. My guess is computer science professors understand the weight this carries, but you should use your essay to flesh out how it's challenging.
All else being equal I would not assume the committee is tremendously moralistic and I certainly wouldn't carve an application around the biases they might hypothetically have.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: There have already been some great and thorough analyses. Adding to username_1's and username_2's assessments, I would focus more on the latter's philosophical argument, which may also play into the practical. Agreed, there will always be some risk in mentioning the poker playing, but **not** mentioning it could be considered tantamount to misrepresentation. If you leave it off and it is later discovered (sometimes the likelihood of something coming out in an unexpected way is directly proportional to how much one didn't want it discovered) that could be grounds for revoking any admission offer, presuming that you had to beat out other candidates who we (or the university) assume did not misrepresent themselves on their applications.
As an aside, a hole in your CV is not automatically the worst thing ever. It is not the best, but I would suggest it also depends on what came before. If one were gainfully employed for years before a gap, economic climate in a country/job area, medical reasons, etc may also be considerations. Having said that, personally, I would still go by the first paragraph and declare it, although as others have noted, only you can make the decision of a course with which you are most comfortable.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I faced the same problems with employers. I have a decent poker CV, could say I was ranked #1 globally for a particular game and format over an extended period (years)
Almost everybody (including my parents) hated it but some others were extremely receptive towards it. In analytical professions and studies poker is complimentary and some people in those professions will recognise this. In other professions poker is looked upon extremely negatively
The odds of a middle-aged university staff member being impressed by poker are low. It suggests a rebellious streak and wasted talent - anybody who can beat poker for a living could and should do any number of other things
People don't really read all of applications/CVs. They scan for a few facts, in your case it will be your previous academic record and work experience. It's definitely better to add poker than have a blank but I would include either achievements or estimated earnings beside this
The one thing you can't do is let anybody believe you were a degenerate sitting with your laptop, drinking beer, smoking weed, playing poker and calling it work. We all know you wouldn't do that now, right? :-)
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/30
| 622
| 2,645
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the application form of the school I'm applying, there is a short definition of SOP:
>
> Your statement of purpose should explain why you want to study your proposed course and how it will help your life and career.
>
>
>
The message is direct: why I want to study here and how it will help my life. It doesn't ask for my past research, it doesn't ask for my community service, it doesn't ask what I'm working on. My research proposal is asked in another field.
This contradicts to what I know on SOP. My prepared one is strictly followed to this question: [Choosing research ideas to include in a statement of purpose](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/1529/14341).
My questions are:
1. Does this mean that the school actually doesn't care about my past research, and talking about it just waste my space?
2. Unfortunately I just noticed the difference after I submitted my application. If the answer for the question above is yes, then how bad my SOP is?<issue_comment>username_1: I assume this is for a PhD or research-oriented Master's program. Almost certainly the admissions committee will care about your past research. Here are some possible reasons why they don't explicitly mention it in their description of the SOP:
1. They don't assume that you've already done research.
2. Someone wrote it without much thought or experience.
3. Presumably any past research would play a role in your desire for a further degree, so it is implicitly covered.
4. They were just expecting this information as part of your research statement.
Also, regarding your comment "This contradicts to what I know on SOP": different departments (and different committee members on the same committee) look for different things, so this place may not look at community service at all. Answers on this site are not infallible universal laws.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have no idea what you would say to "why you want to study your proposed course" if not for previous research experience!
Say you want to research (throwing something out there) algebraic topology. Well...why? What made you interested in this topic? What experiences led you to be interested in this? I'm assuming you were exposed to algebraic topology SOMEHOW. Was it through a class? Through an REU? Through a senior thesis? Through other research experience?
If you had relevant research experience, and it didn't make you interested in researching that topic, that's a larger problem than any statement of purpose.
I have absolutely no idea how to answer if not by talking about research/classes etc.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/01/30
| 743
| 3,085
|
<issue_start>username_0: It has been several months that I am looking for a juniorprofessor position in German institutes. Basically there are just a few opening which are far from my research interests. I have a good publication record and I was involved in writing funding proposals. Is it possible to write a proposal to ask for a professorship position?
P.S. My research lies in computer science and electrical engineering.<issue_comment>username_1: Such positions are sometimes created and attached to full W3 professors, essentially as a temporary *Assistent* in the old parlance (compare C1). Whether this is actually done may depend on your field, your *Bundesland* (you are in Baden-Württemberg, where this is possible in general) and even your university.
You may want to talk to your supervisor, who may have the most vested interest in having you continue on board, especially if you have a proven track record and/or specialized knowledge. However, it would probably be better for your CV to get a "normal" *Juniorprofessur* to show that you can stand on your own feet, rather than continue in your supervisor's working group.
---
Alternatively, there are ways of getting funding for a few years that may not be a *Juniorprofessur* in name, but in effect. For instance, the DFG's [Emmy Noether Program](http://www.dfg.de/en/research_funding/programmes/individual/emmy_noether/index.html). After a few years funded through this program, you will be considered *berufbar*. You will need to apply with your own research proposal.
The advantage is that this is very competitive, and if you snag one of these, it is a true mark of excellence. In addition, you will be independent of senior professors, and it offers quite a number of networking opportunities. If you can manage to get one of these, it would be ideal.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Stephan's answer is generally correct, but I get the feeling that this is not what the OP has in mind:
>
> Is it possible to write a proposal to ask for a professorship position?
>
>
>
I take this to mean whether it makes sense to essentially do a "blind application" for a professor position (i.e., send to a university that is not currently conducting a suitable search an application to the extend of "here are my credentials and a research proposal, please create me a position"). The answer to this question is a pretty resounding **no**. This will only make you seem out of touch with how academia works.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I guess you should wait till the next application season, which generally starts around fall (October-November). Most universities start posting job adverts around that time. You can apply for faculty positions that are available even if the requirements do not strictly match your CV. Meanwhile, inform your colleagues, peers, professors (basically as many people as possible in your network) that you are looking for such a position. Hopefully, if they know of any such upcoming position, they'll pass on the information to you.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/01/30
| 1,018
| 4,351
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose you have a manuscript and you have just missed the deadline for an A\* conference. Should I submit to the next tier A conference or wait until for the A\* conference to come around again?
I am in the computer science field, hence the emphasis on conferences, rather than journals.<issue_comment>username_1: My choice of whether to bother with the "tippy-top" conferences depends strongly on their size. When you have a highly selective but also very large conference like AAAI, I'm quite comfortable to submit, since there is enough space for papers that the decision is likely to depend primarily on the quality of my paper.
For the "super-important" conferences that are single-track, however, there is too much selective pressure. Because these have become so high-stakes and because such a terribly small percentage of work can be accepted, the decision is often less about "Is this a good paper?" and more about "Are there any reasons that we can use to eliminate this paper?" This creates an environment in which there is much more randomness in acceptance, as well as a danger of significantly increased group-think, clique politics, and preference for safe incremental thinking. Thus, I am unlikely to bother prioritizing them too strongly. To be fair, however, these hyper-selective conferences also do not dominate my subfield or strongly determine my career future, and thus I can afford to do so.
If you or your co-authors are in a subfield and career stage where the difference between an "blessed" conference and an almost-as-good conference is going to make a big difference to university administrators or an in-group that dominates your field, though, then sure, prefer the "blessed" conference.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Suppose you have a manuscript and you have just missed the deadline for an A\* conference. Should I submit to the next tier A conference or wait until for the A\* conference to come around again?
>
>
>
This depends on a number of factors:
* How likely do you think your paper is to be accepted in the A\* conference? If this is your absolute best, cream-of-the-crop paper and you are confident it will go through, then submitting to a weaker conference just because you did not want to wait will feel like waste down the road. If the A\* conference felt like a long shot anyway, go ahead and submit now.
* How likely are you to get scooped? If you are doing cutting-edge research in a trending topic, you may want to go for the A conference simply because you are afraid that somebody else may publish before you if you don't.
* How important is timely publishing for your content? Many great research papers are in essence timeless, but occasionally one has produced a paper that is of value to the community right now, but which may be much less interesting in a year (e.g., some empirical studies in fast-moving fields are like that). In that case you should submit to the A conference now, because there is a very real danger that the paper will not be good enough for the A\* paper in a year anyway.
* How important is having the paper out soon for your career progression? E.g., if you are handing in your PhD in a year, or plan to be on the job market in a year, or plan to hand in this selective personal grant in the next year, then having another published A paper may be better than a potential A\* paper that comes "too late".
* How much value is (in your field and your circles) placed on the "esteem" of the venue? That is, what do you estimate how much more valuable the same paper will be for your career if published in an A\* venue rather than an A venue? In a perfect world, it would not matter. In the real world, as for instance in my field, the venue a publication appeared in is ultimately more important in career decisions on all levels than the actual content.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would submit just to get feedback. If it is an accept, then re-read the answers here and decide whether you want withdraw and submit it to the A\* conference if the comments are very positive. Otherwise, if it is lukewarm, and an accept, then you at least have a conf paper. If it is a reject maybe a self reflection is in order. If there are bugs then you can fix them so you have a better paper for the A\* conf.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/01/30
| 337
| 1,436
|
<issue_start>username_0: How should you handle a question in an interview for a PhD program when you don't know the answer ?
Should you try to just say something even if this is wrong or just tell the interviewer that you don't know the answer?<issue_comment>username_1: In most cases, the interviewer does not care about the "answer", but rather about how you answer. I would answer honestly with something like "I do not know, would you like me to try and work it out?"
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Honesty would be the best and tactical strategy. No one is expected to know everything. An ideal panel would only be interested in how much you know and how much of that pertains to your candidate position as a PhD scholar.
The time given for you in the interview process is gold -- you must try to expose your potential as much as you are able to within the period. If you spend too much time in an a question you cannot make out the answer, then you are probably losing time to express the answers for the future questions you might know. Hence it would be better to admit that you do not know the answer and try if you are confident (as suggested by @StringBad) or move to the next possible question if not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't recommend lying but there is a saying "Nice guys always finish last". It's sad but true that the modern world values bravado over honestly and sensitivity.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/31
| 1,502
| 6,094
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my area (computer science) it's common for a paper to be posted on arxiv, then appear in a conference a few months later, and finally appear in a journal several years later. This raises the question: [which version should I cite?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5964/choosing-which-version-of-an-article-to-cite/)
The general practice I've seen is to cite the latest version. However, I do not agree with this general practice for several reasons:
* The chronology becomes unclear. e.g. I might say "Bobson [Bob14] builds on the seminal work of Adamson [Ada15]" It looks like the chronology is backwards, but the correct chronology is that [Ada15] appeared on arxiv in 2013 and then appeared in a journal in 2015.
* The most recent version is often not the best version to read. For example, the conference version of a paper is usually heavily abridged (due to a page limit) and the journal version is hidden behind a paywall and strangely formatted. Thus the arxiv version is usually the best version to read.
* If I am citing a specific part of the article (e.g. "Theorem 4.2 on page 23") that only appears in the arxiv version or has a different number in the journal version, then it doesn't make sense to cite the "wrong" version.
* It means I have to keep updating my citations as the paper moves through different versions. And this leads to inconsistent citations.
The only advantage I see to citing the most recent version is that it indicates how "good" the paper is, as indicated by the prestige of the conference or journal.
I am often tempted to cite the arxiv version in these cases, as it is gives the best chronology and is usually the most readable version. (I can justify it by saying that this is the version I actually read.)
Is going against this general practice acceptable? Might I annoy someone by not acknowledging that their paper appeared in a very prestigious venue? Or would someone be unhappy that I don't have the venue information in my references?
**How should I cite articles that have multiple versions? In particular, how do I communicate (i) the correct chronology, (ii) the version with the right information, and (iii) the conference/journal that accepted it?**
One solution is to cite all the versions, but I think that is impractical and confusing - and I have never seen it done.<issue_comment>username_1: I have the same problem and cannot offer you a solution for which I claim it to be the *correct* one. However here are some thoughts:
* For work citing other work like in your example "Bobson [Bob14] builds on the seminal work of Adamson [Ada15]" I would use the version [Bob14] references since this is the one [Bob14] *builds on*.
* I usually prefer a peer-reviewed publication to arXiv.
* Typically I stick to the *first* peer-reviewed publication I used and only "update" if a later version contains a result that I need.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I would cite only one, and that would be the
(a)latest (b) peer reviewed item (c) from its first place of publication.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In math we have the same issues. Here is what I do, most of which is standard:
1. If a paper has been published, always cite the published version.
2. If you want to point out the chronology, in particular because it is not clear from publication dates, do it in the text. People understand that publication dates do not align perfectly with when the papers were originally written. (My papers don't appear in the order I wrote them.) If you refer to arXiv versions, it is easy to see the chronology, at least up to the level of month/year, from arXiv ids.
3. If something is accepted to a certain journal/conference proceedings, you can say "Journal XXX, to appear" in the references. If you want to say something was announced at a certain conference, you can say so in the text.
4. Make references (e.g., theorem numbers) to the version you cite. I personally like to include version numbers in arXiv citations for this reason (e.g., arXiv:1601.0000v37). If you want to refer to something that appeared only in a previous version, I would cite the published paper if published and say in the text something like: *This result appeared as Thm A.B.C of an earlier version* (arXiv:1601.0000v36) *of [citation]*" possibly with some remark about why it's not in the current version. (Hopefully, if you're using it, it hasn't been removed because there was an error in the proof.) But if the paper has not been published, you can either do a similar thing or just put a citation to the version you want to refer to. However, it's probably best to point out in such situations that the result doesn't appear in later versions so the reader doesn't accidentally check the wrong version.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The hierarchy is usually 1) the journal paper (if exists, usually the most recent), 2) the conference paper (if exists), 3) non-peer-reviewed sources, including arXiv.
Never cite arXiv if there is journal version out there, since in many fields citations are valued, and citations are formally collected only for "reputable" sources. SCI index for example, counts only journal citations of journal publications. So, citing arXiv instead of journal is really bad.
Another, equally important reason is, that arXiv papers are not subject to peer review and basically anyone can "publish" anything. Consider this: in arXiv paper you find some interested claim you plan to rely on. You don't find this claim in the journal paper. Perhaps you don't find it, because reviewers made the authors remove it, since it was *not substantiated by results*, and citing the arXiv paper because it says something that the journal paper does not, would be extremely foolish. Conference papers from reputable conferences are usually peer reviewed too, but authors cannot fix as many things as in journal paper, so they come as the second choice.
So, there is reason that peer review exists, and you really should rely on reviewed versions of the paper.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/01/31
| 1,406
| 5,948
|
<issue_start>username_0: EDIT: I originally tried to make the context as brief as possible, but I may have overdone it.
Context
=======
I'm starting to put some data analysis I'm asked to do on Github, and licensing all my work (mostly **R** scripts and markdown files displaying statistics, graphs and brief result descriptions). These are mostly medical and health research projects by graduate students. Faculty there usually ask for help in statistics/design and suggest their students do the same. Since I'm new, most of them are coming to me. Although I don't think it's relevant in this question, I have recently been offered a part-time position there for this exact purpose.
Reasons
-------
The main reason for this is to provide the ~~user~~ student an *always up to date* version of the current work in progress. If something is quick to fix, say in a graph, they have an *instant* updated version of the current report I'm writing (usually in markdown).
I also like the transparency I offer to the researchers that ask for my help when I show the development process, what issues I have identified and the overall organization of my work.
Since most of them are not that tech-savy, I prepare the repo with plenty of README.md and other markdown files so they visualize the results and get relevant files without the need to create a github account. They usually report issues to me by email, and I open and close GH issues myself based on their feedback.
Perceived problem
=================
It just hit me that, while my own work is my own to license the way I want, the dataset is **not**. I didn't participate in the collection, or curation of it. The first step I take before pushing anything to the public repository is to anonymize the dataset.
I usually show the users students the repositories of previous projects, and indicate they'll have such access to their results in a similar fashion. So far, no one has complained about their data being online. One of those projects I show is from a student of an IRB member.
Questions
=========
* ~~Should I ask each user if they want me to remove the datasets from their repository?~~
* EDIT: would it suffice to put a warning on the repository that the dataset is not licensed the same way the code, graphs and other contents therein available?
* Should I remove all such datasets regardless? Why or Why not?
* Is there something else I might be missing about this scenario?<issue_comment>username_1: My take, as someone who tends to use other people's data in extended analysis, and does enjoy having the most up-to-date version of an analysis/etc. up on GitHub:
>
> Should I ask each user if they want me to remove the datasets from
> their repository?
>
>
>
**Yes**. You should, fundamentally, be respectful of other people's data. Which includes things like "I'm about to put this on a website". While you haven't mentioned if your repositories are public or private, there's no guarantee that data stored in a private repo won't end up in the wild, one way or another.
>
> Should I remove all such datasets regardless? Why or Why not?
>
>
>
I don't know that I'd remove all the data sets that are already up there, but I would definitely ask for approval, and if you don't hear back, assume that the answer is "No".
>
> Is there something else I might be missing about this scenario?
>
>
>
Yep...
>
> These are mostly medical and health research projects.
>
>
>
You haven't said what kind of data, but beyond just whether or not your anonymization step is actually sufficient, is whether or not the agreements that generated this data - IRB approvals, informed consent documents, data use agreements, etc. actually *allow* it to be put online in this form. That is, by no means, a sure thing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Your main reason seems to have version control in a way that is easy to share with the co-workers (as opposed to the rest of the world). This you can rather easily have without the need for publicly accessible github accounts.
I have gitlab (<https://about.gitlab.com/>) on an internal server (initially it was on my desktop computer) to share code and data under version control with coworkers.
>
> would it suffice to put a warning on the repository that the dataset is not licensed the same way the code, graphs and other contents therein available?
>
>
>
I don't think so. Personally, I'd go for an opt-in (they need to declare explicitly that they want the data to be publicly available; and that they have the right to do this decision). The more so, if medical data is involved (see also @username_1's answer). In my experience, anonymization isn't always as good as it is supposed to be!
Note that even private github repos are not always acceptable, e.g. EU data protection/privacy laws often do not allow sensitive data to be stored on a US server even if the access to the repo is "private" (the privacy laws here and there are not really compatible).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Once the data is out in public, asking for it to be taken down is just theater.
Data collected by others, presumably giving the people from which it was collected explicit or implicit guarantees it was *only* to be used in so-and-so way, first doesn't belong to you to publish, and if it was yours, you can't publish it anyway without violating the agreement with the real owners, the people to which it applies.
I'd say you can not publish such data. Period.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: You should never post a clients data, only people that should have access to the data is if it is needed to perform their job is the rule of thumb, any examples I post I change any identifying data, if you are posting a question that uses a clients proprietary algorithm that determines something that would also violate intellectual property and you can be prosecuted.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/31
| 1,726
| 7,139
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a Ph.D. candidate in social sciences and last month I presented and defended my thesis in an Eastern European university. The full text of my thesis is available to the public. A couple of weeks after my defense, a math professor from the U.K. wrote a blog post in which he utterly misrepresents my results and suggests that my work is pseudo-science. His opinion does not deal with statistics or any other parts that may be a common ground for mathematics and social sciences. When I tried to publicly defend my work on his blog and to point out that his claims are malicious and untenable, he accused me of homophobia, implied that I am a psychopath, and said that the methods I'm using have driven people to suicide (none of which is true, but rather nonsensical - I had a serious WTF experience when reading these claims).
All of the above happened on a niche blog that is widely read among my colleagues, and I fear that it will affect my career as a researcher. Some signs show that this may have already happened. I want to file an ethics complaint against this professor at his university and I would like to hear whether the above are sufficient ground for such a complaint. Do university ethics committees dealing with other cases beside research misconduct and harassment? Should I present this as a research misconduct case or as something else? I feel that this belongs to presenting flawed interpretation of data and misrepresentation of qualifications or experience which is not held (a math professor thrashing social science research), but I do not think that a blog post would qualify as 'research' at all.<issue_comment>username_1: First, and foremost, be *very* cautious about taking this issue outside of the scientific realm of argument. If you start to file ethics charges or libel lawsuits, then you are likely to be casting yourself in the role of [censorious scientific villain, and it is likely to not go well for you](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Singh#Chiropractic_lawsuit).
Instead, if you feel that your work really is scientifically defensible, I recommend that you stick entirely to the evidence to defend it. If you cannot do so, then that is a serious problem --- having not read your thesis, I have no idea whether you or your critic has a better case. Do note, however, that being in a different discipline does not immunize you from a person's criticism: a critic need not have any credential at all to point out a potential flaw in your work, and the nature of science is that if you cannot defend against criticism, your work cannot stand.
Finally, I would strongly recommend talking to your advisor before you take any further steps and strongly heeding their advice. Your advisor is likely to know better than you whether to take your critic seriously, given the state of your work and the field, as well as what types of response are likely to be wise or foolish.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Cases like that are best treated in "cold blood". Get one or two trusted friends to listen to your story and get them to give an outsider's view of how the blog appears. We cannot judge without further details how consolidated your work is, but I'll take here the stance that it is well-founded, scientific work without major methodological flaws.
One thing you have to remember is that in my experience, there is a significant "facultism". Mathematicians, especially, are, in my experience, not prone to any other type of discrimination, but they *do* look down on practically all other disciplines (with possible exception of physicists, whom they begrudge the ability to get away successfully with the most outrageously ill-founded mathematical sleight-of-hands).
You have to realise this, and that social sciences will not rank very high on mathematician's scale; so, rather than your particular piece of work being attacked here, it may be that it is your whole discipline. If that is the case, this can inform your strategy.
In your responses, you should stick to facts, not too many, but point out where he is wrong. Factually and focused. Don't make long replies, or people won't read it, pick 1 or 2 points where he is clearly wrong.
As for personal attacks, if his blog is satirical, and you attempt to silence it, you will, as mentioned before, get backfired upon. He is much better trained than you to run a smear campaign.
If you do not wish stay silent on the personal attacks entirely, you could try to say something along the line that he is not trained to judge your psychological makeup and should confine himself to make judgement about facts that he understands about. However, it would be even grander if you would just brush it off as not the issue of the moment and completely concentrate on discussing your results.
One thing that strikes me is his accusation of homophoby. You should check where this comes from (if not from the devolution of your interaction with the person): if there is something in your results that could be interpreted in a way that is politically unwelcome to various agendas (and it doesn't matter which one it is), you need to tread particularly carefully. In the latter case, it is particularly important to utterly refrain from any entanglement into personal invectives, and clarify, drily and accurately what your results say and what they don't say; where their limits of applicability lie and where they are valid.
I haven't answered about the ethics complaint. That's because I think, yes, you might have grounds, but, no, it may not be a good idea. Instead, see my advice above.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It might be worth taking some time to familiarise yourself with some related cases. I can only think of one off-hand, but I'm sure that others could point to more. It could be reassuring to know that this sort of thing happens to other people, and that they survive. I'm thinking of [Terrance Deacon](http://terrydeacon.berkeley.edu/plagiarism-investigation-exonerates-terrence-w-deacon). In this case, the defendant won the case, but only because the complaint was "without foundation."
As for the "pseudo-science" assertion -- that's an easy term to throw around. It might be useful to read up on that, too, e.g. in the work of [Imre Lakatos](http://www.lse.ac.uk/philosophy/department-history/science-and-pseudoscience-overview-and-transcript/).
>
> "But what distinguishes knowledge from superstition, ideology or pseudoscience? The Catholic Church excommunicated Copernicans, the Communist Party persecuted Mendelians on the ground that their doctrines were pseudoscientific. But then the problem of the demarcation between science and pseudoscience is not merely a problem of armchair philosophy: it is of vital social and political relevance."
>
>
>
The main thing is to approach the issue in a professional manner. Remember that people say all kinds of rude things on the internet that they wouldn't say in person. A polite phone call to the professor in question might be interesting, though potentially also quite fruitless.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/31
| 668
| 2,751
|
<issue_start>username_0: If a student has to use the bathroom, s/he may simply politely and quietly excuse him/herself for a few minutes.
**But is there any established etiquette for what an instructor is to do when nature suddenly calls?** Let's say this is a typical classroom lecture of about 90 minutes, meaning a student body of about 80-90 and no scheduled breaks.
Oh, also, let's assume that there's no real illness or other crippling circumstance that forces the instructor to leave; just a good old-fashioned porcelain inspection, resulting from consuming just a bit much V8 an hour earlier (seriously, that strawberry-banana V-Fusion is *addictive*).<issue_comment>username_1: Ideally, you use the bathroom before lecturing which should prevent you from needing the bathroom during the lecuture. In cases where you are unwell, I find it best to let the class know ahead of time to tell them you are unwell and might need to suddenly excuse yourself, but that you will be back.
Regardless of if you have told the students in advance, if you must excuse yourself, do it politely and tell them you will be back in a few moments.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A plausible reason is if the instructor becomes ill, and this manifests partway through a lecture.
In this case, the only thing they can do is politely explain that they are unwell.
If a teaching assistant is on hand, they may be able to take over the lecture. If not, they may choose to invite the students to use the room and time remaining for self instruction. At the university level, students should, as a group, be able to fill in the blanks for a missed half lecture.
In either case, a follow up email indicating that the next class either will or will not precede as scheduled is probably a good idea. This may include information on a time, or times, when the professor will be available to provide clarification on the subjects that were unexpectedly omitted. It should probably not include the details of the illness, unless it is sufficiently serious as to merit inclusion to explain why the professor is changing mid-semester.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: for my own classes, I prepare with anticipation:
1) an exercise that students could complete while I am away from the Classroom or
2) show an instructional video and ask students to fill a questionnaire at the end to evaluate their comprehension of the presentation.
If there is no need to use these resources, then I just left them as assignment for next class.
Ideally, in our 21st century, every teacher should be able to record their own classes in video. In case of an unexpected emergency, students watch this lesson's recording, at least in that day.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/01/31
| 665
| 2,859
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have already had this issue a few times. I just received an e-mail from a former student of an undergraduate course, asking for a letter of recommendation to apply for graduate studies. This course took place almost 5 years ago. I don't think I had any contact with the student after the course, although it's hard to say: I can't remember the student, and I don't even work at the same university anymore, so I don't even have access to grades, etc. He sent me his transcripts but can I write a letter only with that?
What do people do in this cases? Write a standard letter quoting some of the grades (from the transcript)? How can that be useful to anyone?<issue_comment>username_1: I would try to accommodate the student. Most faculty were traditional college students, so this might seem like a weird request from our point of view, but many students don't have the same backgrounds, expectations, and economic resources that we do. Some students may need to take a long break from school due to economic setbacks, or because they've had a kid, or because of health problems. Also, keep in mind that not all grad schools are elite PhD programs, so the function of a recommendation letter may not be to vouch for the student's brilliance and ability to do groundbreaking research. For many programs, the purpose of the letter may be more to make sure that the student isn't a cheater or a psycho.
Be up front with the student. Explain honestly that you don't remember him. Let him know that if he has other possible recommenders who would have had more recent interactions with him, he would be better off with them. But if that's not possible, ask him for more detailed written info about his life and plans, and write the best letter you can. You may want to show the student the letter before you send it out, so he has an idea of what he's getting.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Assuming that the student had good grades, I'd explain that I couldn't remember the student and that I could only base my recommendation on the transcript. I'd still be willing to write such a letter, but I'd encourage the student to find someone else to write a letter if possible.
If the student had grades that weren't very good, then I'd simply decline to write a letter.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I ask such students to tell me which course(s) they took from me and what major projects they did for those courses (where appropriate). I also ask for a current résumé. That's usually enough for me to write an acceptable recommendation letter for a job or award.
I turn down requests to write Ph.D-program recommendations, as I neither have a Ph.D nor make the kind of assignment that differentiates the Ph.D-ready. (I teach in a professional program and my courses are pretty hands-on.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/01/31
| 570
| 2,539
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently sourcing some ideas from a few books (through Google Books) and I sometimes stumble upon introductory messages from the authors/editors of these books saying something like:
"All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by an electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers" (<https://books.google.com/books?isbn=1317622006>)
and similar messages... so, does that mean that I cannot paraphrase or quote from it under fair use? (Sometimes I do read other messages explicitly allowing fair use)<issue_comment>username_1: This is fairly standard boilerplate in UK-published books. You'll probably find that all books from this publisher have identical text, with gentle shifts in phrasing over the years as they refine it.
This statement is effectively saying "to be clear, we don't give you permission to do any of the things that the law requires you to have permission to do, and you can't pretend you didn't know this". However, it will **not** prevent you doing anything you would otherwise have been allowed to do as reasonable fair use/fair dealing/etc by local copyright law - generally speaking, the publisher cannot prevent such use.
Incidentally, "other means, now known or hereafter invented..." is a relatively new addition - it's a reaction to ebooks! I have a collection of essays where the editors were feeling playful and added "or magical" in here...
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In the broadest sense, the statutory note generally means you cannot make copies of the whole or part of the book and that you cannot reuse any content of the book without attribution. That doesn't mean the entire contents itself are *classified* for only those who read it.
Of course you can give quotes of the book provided appropriate *citation*. I do not however suggest the use of its images without prior permission.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: They don't give you any permissions
-----------------------------------
Such statements explicitly mean that they are not giving you any permission to do the things listed there.
On the other hand, your local copyright laws will specify in what cases you need their permission (often, as the default position) and in what cases you don't need their permission and can copy or use the work anyway.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/02/01
| 582
| 2,628
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently interested in pursuing a graduate degree in computer science, but right now I am working full time and will need to continue to do so for a few more years until I can pay off my undergraduate debt. I also have very limited research experience as an undergraduate. That said I was wondering what are some small things I could incorporate into my daily routine to both prepare myself for graduate school (I've noticed the work in the corporate world is very different than school) and make myself a more attractive candidate when I am able to apply?<issue_comment>username_1: To prepare yourself and keep your skills in shape, one idea is to gradually go through advanced undergrad/beginning graduate textbooks, including doing exercises. (Reading is good, but also doing exercises (both theoretical and programming) is better.) It might also be good to do a programming project or two, from which ideas might naturally stem out of your reading. What to go through also depends on your situation (what area of CS, what you learned already, whether you're already programming for work...)
However, to make yourself a good candidate for graduate studies, you'll also want good letters of recommendation, which means you want someone (ideally an academic) familiar with your further preparations. Therefore you might try contacting one of your old professors or a professor geographically close to you to see if they're willing to help give you some guidance in your studies and/or involve you in a research project.
See also: [How to show graduate schools my strong self study background?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/45558/19607)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I took a year after my undergraduate degree before applying for my PhD studies. In my experience of discussing this break in interviews, the best thing to show is that you were still interested in the subject and have kept up to date with what is happening. I joined the Institute of Physics and regularly read their members magazine, which kept me up to date with the latest research, trends in funding, and new technology and methodology. Mentioning recent discoveries or being able to give an opinion on current debates shows your dedication to the subject, interest beyond your own work and often helps provoke conversation with your interviewers which makes everything a lot more relaxed.
In summary, I would recommend subscribing to relevant research journals or magazines, or possibly finding blogs of researchers you admire, to keep your knowledge of your subject up to date.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/02/01
| 916
| 3,928
|
<issue_start>username_0: Long story short, I'm a struggling first year graduate student. I considered myself very lucky when I found out that I was accepted into one of the best programs in my field, but didn't realize at the time how steep the learning curve would be to work alongside the best. I work in a wet lab, which I joined three months ago. However, given that I had very little research experience in undergrad, I've had a rough start. I don't think I fully realized the level of critical thinking skills that would be expected of me, and still depended on other people to tell me what to do and what to work on. A lot of science conversations I've had with people in the lab have also been completely over my head. Like I should be the one developing novel knowledge, yet sometimes I can't even understand someone else when they describe something to me (not just older grad students either, a lot of the undergrads also know more than me)... As a result, people in the lab have started treating me like I'm stupid or inferior, and my PI is slowly decreasing my level of responsibility.
I've spent the past few months in complete depression and anxiety, which is making the problem even worse. I would really like to change this situation, and have been working really hard on my project, but I'm not sure whether it's already too late to change the impression of my labmates and PI. So I guess my questions are as follows:
1. Have you ever had/known any grad students who started slow, but have reversed bad first impressions? How much harder did they have to work to achieve the same level of respect?
2. What do you think of students that on average take longer to learn the same technique or concept? Should such student still stay in research given the amount of competition that now exists in academia, or is it realistically a waste of their time?
3. How would you recommend I go about making changes. Work harder and push out more experimental results? Dig into and understand literature broadly? How should I go about changing people's impressions of me?
4. For any PIs out there, what do you think of your students that are not meeting your expectations? Do you wish you never took them on as a student, or are you still rooting for them to make changes?<issue_comment>username_1: Every new beginning is hard, don't worry too much.
Concentrate on doing your lab work accurately, more than fast. Fast comes with practice. Remember, this is a work for a normal human, don't drive yourself too hard. Understand what you are doing, and why. Check with coworkers/boss if there are better ways.
Study in an orderly way, check the ground covered each day. Get back to stuff you didn't get, with classmates, TA, lecturer, looking at notes on the 'net. Do your homework in timely manner. Try to reserve a day a week to do something else whatsoever, getting out off the stress is vital.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The truth is, even though people don't like to talk about it, that most graduate students start out like you do. As advisers we see it all the time, and the better ones among us have conversations about these sort of things with our students and/or to our research groups. Many students, and not a few of those who later make it into the professoriate, have at times struggled for weeks or months with frustration, depression, and general unhappiness with their progress in graduate school.
In other words, what you're describing is, if not a normal, a common experience in graduate school, even among some of the best students. I like to thing of graduate school as less of a way to filter out the best than a way to filter out those who can deal with frustration and yet persevere with their research.
So keep going on. If you want, seek out the postdocs and/or your adviser to talk about this. You'll find that you're by far not the only one to encounter such feelings.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/02/01
| 2,604
| 10,775
|
<issue_start>username_0: From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest):
>
> A conflict of interest (COI) is a situation in which a person or organization is involved in multiple interests, financial interest, or otherwise, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation of the individual or organization.
>
>
>
*Question*: In the context of gender studies, what constitutes a declarable conflict of interest in gender studies?
As some hypothetical examples:
* A woman scientist is writing about male violence against women, and is herself a victim of such violence.
* An LGBT person is writing about an LGBT topic.
In both cases, the work will likely be influenced to some degree by the author's personal experience, i.e., one could argue that there is a conflict of interest. However, it seems unreasonable to insist that a victim of violence declare the fact. Similarly, it seems unreasonable for an LGBT person to declare their LGBT status, and possibly face discrimination as a result.
In these scenarios, there's a conflict of interest in declaring a possible conflict of interest.<issue_comment>username_1: Usually, these relationships are financial.
For example:
* In a paper talking about how Twitter has failed to police harassment, a professor who's an investor in an early-stage social network competitor would have to declare that.
* Similarly, board memberships, speaking gigs, etc. are things that would have to be declared. For example, while writing a paper about abortion access rights, a professor should disclose if she was a paid speaker for a pro-choice advocacy group.
Generally, "I really care about this" for personal reasons doesn't so much count as a conflict of interest. I cannot *imagine*, for example, a journal intending for those writing in gender studies to disclose if they had been victims of intimate partner violence.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As a matter of nomenclature, I would say that a *conflict of interest* is related to material gain (aka financial gains) that hinge on the results of your work going a certain way. @username_1 does a good job of describing this.
What you're talking about is probably better described as *bias*. All researchers have some bias for their own work, this is normal and expected. For example, at the low-end you have "I spent two years on this work and don't want it to go to waste", and at the high end you have "I have a deep personal connection to this work" or even "I really think this is the right theory, even if I can't quite find the right evidence to support it". Having a strong connection to your work is a good thing! As long as it doesn't affect your objectivity...
*Conflicts of interest* are easy to identify and disclose (do you own shares of a competing company? Yes / No?), while *biases* are more subjective and much harder to spot - and in many cases would be silly or a violation of personal privacy to declare. Good researchers / authors are expected to recognize and control their own bias in their writing, but sometimes it leaks through and this is where editorial review and critical reading come in - don't take everything in a paper at face value!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Unfortunately you've asked right in the middle of the gray area. For most publications and journals the conflict of interest has to be one which directly benefits the researcher in a financial or similar way. For instance receiving a job offer or being paid to do the research by the company producing the product under research. Note that these might not invalidate the research - but the conflict must be clearly stated so the reader can take it into account.
Within social sciences, however, the conflicts may become a little more subtle.
When in doubt, consult with your ethics board and the journal you plan to publish with. Reputable journals require a signed statement that includes wording about conflicts of interest such as
>
> any real or apparent conflicting or competing interest is clearly stated on submission of their paper (this would include funding assistance) ([source](https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/ethics-responsibility))
>
>
>
As you can see this is still quite ambiguous, and the responsibility belongs to the author to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. When in doubt, including such a statement per the journal's guidelines will give the journal the ability to make that determination themselves.
Do note that many, many social science research papers are authored by people that are close to the subject. For instance many male researchers study male violence, many women who are mothers study the impact of motherhood on children. It's natural to study those things that affect us personally.
Being a possible part of the group you're studying doesn't indicate a conflict of interest, but in the interest of transparency it's worth mentioning even *possible* conflicts of interest.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You are confused between a conflict of interest and bias. A conflict of interest is when it is in your personal best interest if the results are interpreted in a particular way, regardless of whether that way is correct or not or supported by the data you have gathered. As others have said, that is most frequently financial, but there are other \*consididerations. Bias is more or less having an opinion.
What would non-financial conflict of interest be? Say you were doing a study on recidivism rates of convicts that earn degrees while in prison, at the same time you were about to come up for parole...clearly it is better for you personally for people to believe that you are safe to let out.
Bias would be if your childhood best friend was studying for his degree, while you do the above study -- you may unintentionaly bias the data in favor of convict-students, but presumably there's no danger of you deliberately corrupting the data to get the result you want.
You are expected to recognize your own biases and guard against them unduly influencing your results. Bias is too pervasive and too nebulous to require reporting, there is simply no end to the things that could conceivably cause you to lean one way or another when gathering and interpreting the data.
A conflict of interest is much more concrete, and you are required to disclose a potential conflict of interest so others can judge whether you are cooking the books and/or are likely to be doing so. If you don't disclose, and the conflict is discovered, the assumption is going to be that you were.
* Not directly financial conflict of interest: [Is it ethically justifiable to conceal a fatal conceptual flaw in a thesis to avoid an unaffordable 2-year setback if the flaw is the advisor's fault?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/187521/is-it-ethically-justifiable-to-conceal-a-fatal-conceptual-flaw-in-a-thesis-to-av)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: As others have said, the conflict of interest is about money.
But also we should not pretend that there is no difference
between studies measuring height of people and studies measuring,
for example children well-being in LGBT parenting.
Any result of height measuring is probably not going to affect
social organisation of countries, etc.
I will stick to this example, because I made some preliminary studies
into LGBT parenting research methodology (disclaimer: I'm not a social
sciences/psychology researcher).
LGBT communities have certain goals that they want to achieve.
For example, many of them want LGBT parenting to be universally accepted,
which is currently [not the case](http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/10/01/italy-survey-finds-71-do-not-approve-of-gay-parenting/).
So, in my opinion, it constitutes a conflict of interest if they
financially support research into LGBT parenting. For example,
as we can read in [CV](http://www.aclu-il.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/CV-David-Brodzinsky.pdf) of <NAME>, he received 20000$
from organisation Rainbow Endowment (which promotes LGBT agenda).
In my opinion, this constitutes a conflict of interest, which extends
not only on the research programme that was directly financed by
the organisation.
You could argue, that you can always analyse the methodology,
to ensure it is proper and the studies are not biased. If you look
into 71 abstracts of *positive* articles listed [here](http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/) (I haven't analysed
3 newly added), you can see that they have many faults,
for example researchers use convenience samples (lesbian researchers
look for other lesbians to be objects of their study in their own,
well-educated, wealthy community), strange variables being analysed
(flexible view on sexuality as an indicator of a child well-being),
etc. I haven't yet found a single study that contained no methodology flaws
(based on abstracts that describe methodology).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Mere influence of personal experience on a topic is not enough to constitute a conflict of interest; if it was then arguably every belief on everything would be a conflict of interest. Conflicts of interest generally occur when there is some direct causal connection between a cause one is pursuing and some personal benefit; something more direct than a mere influence on a general topic or idea. Thus, a woman who has been a victim of male violence would not generally be considered to have a conflict of interest when writing about the general topic of male violence, but she *might* be considered to have a conflict of interest if she were writing directly about a police matter or court case she is involved in (e.g., a journalist writing about a court case where she is a witness or alleged victim). In the latter case the conflict should be declared in the interests of informing the reader.
When dealing with topics like gender research, it is notable that *everyone is in some category* that may have an interest in general outcomes of the research. As a general rule, if a purported source of bias would apply to *everyone* then it is probably not something that needs to be declared. For example, if being female is a purported source of bias when writing on gender theory, then presumably so is being male. Similarly, if being LGBT is a possible source of bias when writing on LGBT issues, then presumably so it *not* being LGBT. In such a case, it seems unlikely that every author should have to declare their gender/sexual preferences merely because every possible category might have some indirect interest in the cultural outcomes of the matter.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/02/01
| 1,774
| 7,608
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is something I have been thinking about for some time. What I study is pretty much on the edge between applied and pure math. Specifically, I am interested in stochastic dynamics including SPDEs. Thus I have been investing a lot of time into stochastic analysis, really enjoy the subject, and am looking into some new ideas in my "spare time". I say my spare time because right now I am really productive on the more applied side where I am looking at stochastic dynamics in developmental biology and numerical methods for stochastic systems (I have a few publications I will be able to push out before advancement).
There is some trade-off here. My adviser strongly thinks I should drop all other activities because I am already building a solid foundation in the applied math / systems biology direction, and going 100% in it would make me have a higher chance of being a top candidate in the field come graduation. However, I kind of think that incorporating more "theoretical" stochastic analysis into my studies/research will lead to stronger results further down the line, but in the short term will inevitably be a hindrance. If I am thrown in the same pool as other applied mathematicians (who tend to publish more than pure math) and judged in the same manner for productivity, it seems that the extra time it takes for pure math results would most likely be detrimental to my chances of getting a post-doc.
I assume I am not the only person in academia who has faced this kind of decision. Is this something to come back to as a post-doc, or tackle now? How did you handle it? How did your colleagues handle it? How did it turn out? Do you think you made the right decision?
I do want to emphasize that right now I am doing quite well, and I think that matters a lot in this decision. However, since I will have a good amount of publications pre-advancement (based off of my own ideas), have fellowships, and will have a masters in both math and bio: does it make sense to take the time to diversify my personal portfolio? [Currently I am thinking of doing like 75% applied 25% pure, trying to spend less time optimizing code and using the down time as theory time.]<issue_comment>username_1: (Sorry; though I'm a mathematician, I have no professional familiarity with stochastic anything.)
"Even in mathematics," most postdocs are given because a particular faculty member wants to work with you or is at least interested in hearing what you are working on. Can you identify mathematicians who are working on both the pure and applied sides of SPDE? For them, your aspirations at breadth will be viewed as a positive. If there are no tenure track faculty members doing this, then trying to do this as a PhD student looks, from a purely strategic perspective, rather risky.
In my experience -- though, beware, my mathematics is as pure as the driven snow -- graduate school is too early to "show breadth" in an advantageous way. Up until relatively recently, the most common number of pure papers a strong graduating pure math PhD student had was **zero**. (This was my situation, and I graduated from a top-three department.) Instead they had a letter from their advisor talking about how important their thesis work was (going to be). Things have changed a bit, but even now in pure math one great theorem is worth ten very good theorems. My feeling is that, except for a targeted audience as above, the applied math faculty is going to judge you for the applied math you've done, and the pure math faculty is going to judge you for the pure math you've done. These accomplishments will not be added together: rather, you need to be sufficiently impressive on either scale separately. If you're doing 25% pure math, then unless you have an amazing project it will be hard to compete with those who are doing 100% pure math.
I have to say though that I have some misgivings in answering your question from a strategic viewpoint. I would really like to say that PhD students in math should study what interests them the most, and not worry about "selling themselves" until later in their career. Unfortunately in the current job market I think it is fair to warn you that you may be taking a hit for this -- but nevertheless it may well be what you want to do. Doing what you want to do is a powerful, wonderful thing and should not be underestimated.
Finally, I wonder if you can escape the "all other things being equal" aspect of your question. There really is not a "fixed amount of productivity" possessed by every math PhD student: on the contrary, I have observed an almost limitless fungibility there. Maybe you could stay in your PhD program for an extra year. You would think that only weaker students do this...but you'd be wrong -- I've observed a positive correlation between both age of a newly minted PhD student and total time in school with the quality of their work. Maybe you could spend a semester or a year working with a faculty member who is more focused on the pure side of what you want to do: that could work out very positively. Maybe you could just vow to yourself to do the same amount of applied math you were doing before, do pure math on top and watch less TV. Or whatever. It's your life, and who the heck am I to tell you not to chase your dreams? Just chase them with your eyes open. (Hmm...)
Good luck!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you are able to publish in both pure and applied math and keep a leg in both worlds, I would say that can give you a very real advantage later when you are looking for a faculty position. E.g., you may be perceived as an applied guy since that's where 80% of your papers are, but the pure math people would much prefer hiring an applied guy that they can see themselves having fun talking to than one they can't, so if a department is hiring in applied math in a certain year, a candidate who can appeal to both groups can get more faculty to coalesce in support of them. I have seen specific cases where that kind of breadth has made a difference in hiring decisions.
With that said, obviously there is a trade-off and an opportunity cost, and the time you will be spending developing the theory side will be time when you might have written an additional paper supporting your "main" line of research. In my opinion, each math researcher needs to consider for themselves how much diversity is optimal for them. Personally, I'm someone who favors more breadth and diversity (in my case, not in the sense of doing both pure and applied work but doing work in several areas of pure math), and have been able to build a good career doing that. But it's not something I'd recommend to everyone to try to do.
Putting aside career concerns and the fact that there are only 24 hours in a day, in a utopian sense I think the best mathematicians (and the ones I personally respect the most) are the ones who have as broad of a background as possible, since such people are often able to draw surprising connections between unrelated areas that other, more narrow, people can't. Mathematics has a surprising unity to it, and it's often amazing how an idea in one area can inform developments in another seemingly completely unrelated area. But, as you yourself clearly recognize, it would be unwise to consider only such utopian, philosophical aspects of the question without considering the realities of the academic world and the limited time window one gets in which to launch one's math career. As <NAME> said in his excellent answer - good luck!
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/02/01
| 892
| 3,727
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm at an engineering department at a public US university, and I'm somewhat new to writing proposals. The call I'm submitting to wants know if the project budget is higher than the amount of the grant, what other sources of funding the PI will use, presumably to ensure the success of the project.
First, I'm not rich. But this leads to me to think, is it okay to use personal funds to do research? For example, if a piece of equipment costs $4000 and I only have $3950 left, can I supplement it with personal funds?
What might end up happening is that I might convince a colleague to lend me his instrument. But I don't want to say this in the proposal. Also, I'm not sure saying the project will be "supplemented by personal funds" is a good idea.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you shouldn't offer private fund to supplement a research budget, and I also think people won't let you for the two following reasons (among others):
**1. It's not your private responsibility to fund your research.** For the sake of your own self respect, you shouldn't pay to work. It will give a bad signal, even subjectively, about the quality of your work. It's important for an academic career to be able to show that you can secure complete funding for your research.
**2. Personal funding is not reliable:**
People reviewing your application will see that the project is underfunded and will doubt that you will effectively be able to compensate with your own money. There will be no ways for the institution to enforce a funding commitment like "the project will be supplemented by personal funds". Funding is generally secured via contracts or other forms of legal documents.
Besides, any institution that relies on researchers breaking their piggy banks to pay for equipment is doing a sloppy job and it's going to hurt its reputation.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> The call I'm submitting to wants know if the project budget is higher than the amount of the grant, what other sources of funding the PI will use, presumably to ensure the success of the project.
>
>
>
Almost certainly the answer to that is not "my private money". I can see three "correct" answers from the point of view of the funding agency:
1. The PI will make sure that this does not happen. Optimally, you will attach a detailed cost planning that is well within the grant amount to substantiate this point.
2. The host institution is co-funding the project. This is often quite popular with funding agencies, as it shows commitment from side of the host institution.
3. Another funding agency is (potentially) paying for it (see info on other submitted or accepted grants). This one is a bit iffy, as relying on another submitted grant is high-risk. Also, depending on the concrete setup, you may involuntarily raise the suspicion that if your current project is not accepted, the "other" agency may fund it in full - and as you can imagine this is an impression you want to avoid at all costs.
>
> For example, if a piece of equipment costs $4000 and I only have $3950 left, can I supplement it with personal funds?
>
>
>
You can definitely do that, and in practice this can sometimes happen (maybe subtly - for instance by going on self-paid conference travels, using your own laptop, etc.). However, the project proposal is certainly not the right place to mention this.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Not sure about the US, but over here in Europe (Britain to be specific) we usually ask the university to top-up the grant as to fill the gaps. If a researcher succeeds to get 90%, the institution that gets credit for the research should give something in return in the form of 10%.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/02/01
| 604
| 2,062
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing an academic paper in the CS field. I'd like to define five symbols as tersely as possible.
Can I say this as the following using 'let' and semi colons? Like:
>
> Let $a$ be xxxx; $b$ be xxxxxx; $c$ be xxxxx; $d$ be xxxxx; $e$ be xxxxxx.
>
>
>
If answer is no, I would appreciate if you suggest a suitable and short alternative for an academic paper.<issue_comment>username_1: If you're in the "squeezing blood from a stone" stage of paper compression, trying to fit 10 pages of text into a 6 page limit or the like, then sure.
If you want readers to be able to understand what you're talking about, however, you typically want to give your variables a bit more space to breathe. Definitions sections are typically very dense and hard going, cognitively speaking, and the more that you can present in a reader-friendly manner, the better the rest of the paper is going to be. If each symbol is important and distinct, then it's worth devoting the space to explain each naturally. If you really do have a large number of not-very-interesting variables best explained by brief phrases rather than prose, consider using a table instead, which at least provides a clear and separate visual organization of the symbols.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The best way would be to use commas:
>
> Let $a$ be xxxx, $b$ be xxxxxx, $c$ be xxxxx, $d$ be xxxxx, and $e$ be xxxxxx.
>
>
>
As indicated in this [answer](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/2504/140911):
>
> When elements in a series involve internal punctuation, or when they are very long and complex, they should be separated by semicolons.
>
>
>
You could also introduce the formula first, and then the meaning of the variables:
>
>
> ```
> R = pq,
>
> ```
>
> where p is the price at which each widget is sold and q is
> the number of widgets sold
>
>
>
See: [A Guide to Writing Mathematics (K.P. Lee)](http://web.cs.ucdavis.edu/~amenta/w10/writingman.pdf) for more information about writing in mathematics.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/02/01
| 320
| 1,363
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an incoming freshman. I'd like the first set of courses I pick to be with great professors. By great I mean someone that's encouraging, honest, and patient, and that makes the subject interesting.
My question is: How should I go about finding who these professors are?<issue_comment>username_1: Easy: Ask your sophomore/junior/senior friends. Depending on the institution, teaching evluations may also be publicly available.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: At most US institutions (and perhaps in other countries as well), the first week or two of classes are what's known as an "add/drop" period, in which you can switch from one class to another before you're "locked in" to the classes you're going to take for the semester. This means that if there's a professor you're not sure about, you can attend a class or two with them and get a feel for whether their classroom style and their personality are compatible with your preferences.
A lot of professors don't particularly care for this approach from their students—a student who comes into the class a week late will be substantially behind, and may require special attention to get them caught up. But it may reassure you to know that you have this option in your back pocket should you discover that one of your professors is truly awful.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/02/01
| 745
| 3,087
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be starting my Masters degree and intend to be fully committed to working on interesting problems with a lot of impact. I have a few groups in sight which seemingly work on very important problems and publish in major conferences but looking at the 'alumni' section on their website, I haven't noticed MS alumni getting into top PhD programs. Does this say anything about the group's quality or could it be just because of the students?<issue_comment>username_1: You have two slightly different questions. Some groups/programs may prepare MS students for jobs in industry and other for PhD programs. This tells you little about the quality of the groups. What this means is that asking
>
> Does this say anything about the group's quality or could it be just because of the students?
>
>
>
is not the same as
>
> Is alumni success a valid parameter for selecting a group?
>
>
>
Trying to infer the quality of a program/group from where students go is likely not useful. Choosing a group/program based on what it will prepare you for is very important. That said, just looking at where past students have gone, is not all that informative. Asking the PI how he can help prepare you for a PhD program is going to be much more informative.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It is *a* valid parameter, but not the *only* valid parameter. It's absolutely justified to ask, and consider, "Where did people in this group go when they were done?"
>
> I haven't noticed MS alumni getting into top PhD programs. Does this say anything about the group's quality or could it be just because of the students?
>
>
>
You need more information than just "did they get into top PhD programs" - unless a research group is *very* large, it's likely that any patterns you see in the fates of MS students will be the result of stochasticity. For example:
* Are they ending up in private industry? For many people, this isn't a failure, but a success. A group I was in sends many of it's graduate students onward to jobs, and this is considered a success by all involved. Masters programs are *not* just one step in a PhD conveyor belt. The same is true for "R1 Tenure Track Positions" etc. Many people don't end up taking what is conventionally considered the "brass ring" of their track because they don't actually want to.
* Did they *want* to go to a top tier program and couldn't, or did they not want to? These are two very different things, and will be easier to assess by talking to members of the group, rather than just browsing their alumni page.
* Is their alumni page actually accurate? Don't ever assume academic web pages are fully up to date.
It's a valid parameter consider when weighing choices, but I believe it would be a bad idea to eliminate a potential option simply because of their alumni page. You should also look at individuals. Where did the people who presented those important papers end up? Is there someone "like you" who had the trajectory you did? If not, it's worth talking to them about.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/02/01
| 1,021
| 4,699
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in a Department of Mathematics in the Irish Institute of Technology sector.
Funding for mathematics research has been reduced by the Higher Education Authority and between this, a heavy teaching load and other reasons, staff are either not very active or completely inactive in research. There are a number of departments who are very active in their research.
I am interested in exploring the idea of setting up a problem session in the institute where the research community would be invited to present problems they are having in their research that they feel mathematics department staff might be able to shed light on.
At the moment questions I have include:
* has this been done in other institutions?
* if yes, has it been beneficial to both communities?
* will researchers share their problems; will the sessions sustain themselves?
* how regularly should such a problem session take place?
* should problems be presented at the session and solved in the next session or presented prior to the session?
I feel there are a number of obvious benefits that could come from such an endeavour and I am looking for help in seeing potential problems, etc.
I hope this question, although quite open-ended, is appropriate for this site.
**Edit:** Regarding the comments below
Thank you all for your help. These sessions would be primarily focussed on staff in the institute and incubated industry. I wouldn't envisage them being of the duration of a workshop: rather just a single afternoons. I am looking at something a lot less formal than the workshops ye survive. I have heard of the ESGI thank you Ruadhaí.<issue_comment>username_1: From my experience (mostly on the interface of biology): unless you are thinking about something like theoretical physicists, you need to consider that most researchers will not have a good understanding of what mathematicians actually do, and will not be able to recognize an interesting mathematical problem.
This means you essentially bring the mathematicians to a state in which they will be able to identify good problems (with help of the other researchers). This is not easy, but I think it is a more sensible strategy than trying to bring the non-mathematicians to a state in which they can identify good mathematical problems (though you can nudge them in this direction).
Thus, you need to set reasonable expectations with realistic goals. I suggest the following approach:
1. At the first stage, I would focus on introducing the mathematicians to the field, so they can start understanding the terms and what tools are being used. This will probably get the mathematicians thinking about how to introduce formality and so on. This step is also very important in order to establish a common language for discussion.
2. Next, I would let the researchers introduce important open problems in the field. These problems don't need to be mathematically interesting - because the researchers will probably not be able to tell what is mathematically interesting anyway. This helps avoid a common issue of theorists focusing on problems that are useless for practitioners.
3. After these are done, the participants should have the minimal set of tools to explore problems that are interesting for both sides. This should be mainly based on open discussion.
Realistically, if you are able to achieve the first 2 steps and get the people to start thinking about point 3 (as it can take some time to process all this new information) and possible establish some pre-collaborations, I would call it a success. While I strongly believe that many fields can benefit from mathematical insights, it can be very challenging to find a problem that is interesting for both sides.
BTW it may also help to invite some people which are doing active research at the interface of the two communities.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You could set up something like a help desk or a clinic. Have a website to advertise the services to the other departments and give some examples of things you could help with. An uncomplicated way to meet is important to reduce the barrier for others to contact you. A short meeting should be enough for you to asses if this is any thing the maths department could help with.
The University of Bristol has a [statistics clinic](http://www.bristol.ac.uk/maths/intranet/statistics-clinic.html) working along this way. They have a drop in sessions every other week, where researchers form other departments can present a short summary of their problem. This is not sessions where you solve problems in front of others but it is a way to facilitate collaborations.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/02/01
| 1,208
| 5,162
|
<issue_start>username_0: How important is your written PhD thesis for an academic job search, assuming the results are already written in papers? Do search committees ever read your thesis in addition to your papers? My PhD advisor said that the written thesis is not important and I can write whatever I want as long as it's not about Star Wars.<issue_comment>username_1: This will depend on your field, and how your thesis is formatted. That being said, I don't think your advisor's (hopefully) flippant answer is correct. If nothing else, while the *content* of your thesis might not be read, your thesis topic is the thing you're best positioned to present yourself as The Expert on, and as such will have a pretty significant impact on your job search.
You will, on the academic job market, be expected to talk about your research, etc.
Beyond that, many people repackage their thesis as a series of papers - indeed, many institutions now allow (or require) a thesis to be formatted this way (sometimes called a "sandwich thesis"). In this case, you're dividing your thesis into several hopefully published papers, and you should *absolutely* plan on those being read.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your thesis and what is written about it your letters of recommendation will have a big effect on your career initially. To get a good postdoctoral position, you'd better have a good thesis. Later in your career, your thesis won't matter much any more, because people will be more interested in your recent achievements.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: From my experience, at least with regard to life sciences your advisor is absolutely correct. In life sciences, journal publication is the standard and everything else is typically considered "unpublished" and "unreviewed" - and most people will not bother reading it.
The only exception I can think of is if you have important material in your thesis that is not published yet (for example if the project is still ongoing). Even then, you would have to specifically point out that this is the case and urge the relevant people to look in your thesis (and it may still seem weird).
Of course I am not passing judgement whether this state of affairs is good or bad.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I am a faculty member who sits on many PhD thesis committees. I always read the thesis. More than once I (and other committee members) have **decided to fail a student at the thesis defense because of a thesis that was poorly written**. This usually was a combination of both small issues (like rampant grammar and spelling errors) and larger issues (like lack of clarity, lack of motivation, no clear indication of the student's contributions). Usually these students rewrite the thesis and retake the defense successfully later.
**You cannot fully separate the quality of the writing and the quality of the work**. Excellent work can be masked by poor writing; poor work can be made to appear good superficially by superficial (hence poor) writing. Surprisingly often I find that as one digs into the writing issues, one finds significant scientific issues.
Even if your institution and/or your advisor advertises low standards and is willing to graduate you with a poorly-written thesis, it is probably in your best interest to produce a well-written thesis. **Writing is one of the central skills that will get you an academic job**, and writing a good thesis will help substantially in the development of that skill. At this point you probably have few papers, so it is likely that potential employers will look at your thesis. It is often the first thing I look at when hiring a postdoc, and if it is poorly written then I assume I will need to spend a large amount of time helping that person learn to write and editing their work -- which usually means I won't hire them.
Finally, a well-written thesis should be wonderfully satisfying to you. Your thesis should be your magnum opus, a thorough explanation of this new corner of knowledge in which you are the world's leading expert! Put in the effort to do it well.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: As for your academic career, it's not the most important, but it's not unimportant either. A sloppy thesis gives a bad impression about you, even if the research itself is good. It's true that if you did a "sandwich" thesis, the majority of people will only read your published papers and not your thesis. But not all of them: think of the people on your thesis committee and the future members of your research group for example, do you want them to have a bad impression about your work?
---
Besides, there is one central person that you need to please when writing your thesis: *yourself*.
A PhD thesis is something for which you put tremendous amounts of effort, personal commitment and sacrifice (salary, free time, etc.). You should be happy with the result. You might browse it in the future and that might annoy you that such good research is presented so poorly.
One week, counting the nights, is a lot of hours, enough to turn an ugly draft into something you will be proud of in the future.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/02/01
| 612
| 2,683
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student applying to academic faculty positions in mid-sized institutions in the United States. I am writing research statements for ecological/environmental positions with a major focus on my current (graduate) research and my plans for extending my research in the future. However, I had almost 5 years of research experience prior to coming to grad school (4 of the 5 were while I was an undergraduate).
My question is, **should I mention or incorporate in any way the research I was involved with as prior to graduate school**? I am especially curious about work done as an undergraduate.
Also, does the quality of work matter? for example, I researched and published an undergraduate thesis but also worked as research assistant on a number of projects.<issue_comment>username_1: You should mention it (You still feel proud of it, don't you? Also, "full disclosure" is key, don't try to hide good/bad aspects of your career, they *will* come out and bite you in the worst way.), but emphasize your later performance. They are interested in your *future* research performance, of which presumably your *recent* performance is a better predictor than what came long before. Sure, seeing that the candidate has long be involved in research is a bonus, but I'd not consider it tipping the scales.
No, only tangentially involved in search committees, don't just take my word for it.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Do you feel that your undergrad research is a significant part of your research profile, or tied in with your current research interests? If so, then yes. If not, then I don't see it adding much value to your research statement. For research schools, you want your research statement to be impressive, not watered down with minor results. I was involved in 1-2 (unpublished---1 became a paper, which got accepted, but I decided not to publish) research projects as an undergrad, but I did not even think to mention them in my research statement.
Note any papers you published will appear on your CV, so the committee will already see these.
However, one place you might mention it is in connection with the prospect of supervising undergrad research. You can say what a good experience it was for you, and how you would like to be involved in it on the other side now. This could come up either your teaching statement and/or your research statement, depending on your application. (I might put it in my research statement if the projects I was already discussing lead to good projects for undergrads.) This could be a boon, depending on how much the departments you're applying to value undergrad research.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/02/02
| 360
| 1,539
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to a Canadian University for a Master in Neuroscience. I have contacted a professor and asked for a place at his laboratory even though he only accepts PhD and post-doctorate students. However, he said that he accepted me as his student but wanted to have a skype meeting for us to get to know each other.
I am a medical doctor and his area of expertise is more philosophy-oriented. I am not an expert in this area. My questions are:
* Will I be expected to have a well established research proposal even though I am a master student?
* Are master students expected to have solid knowledge in the supervisor area even though they have a very different background?
* What are some questions a master student can expect from a skype meeting with his/her possible advisor?<issue_comment>username_1: Ok, my interview has already taken place. In case anyone has the same question, it was a very relaxed interview ( even though I was obviously very stressed).
The researcher asked me why I chose to contact him, what I wanted to focus on ( based on his previous projects), when I would start, how I was going to finance my studies and how long would I be willing to stay at his laboratory, etc.
I wasn't asked about neurobiology, physiology or any other scientific knowledge.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: What you will be asked obviously depends a lot on the person(s) involved, whatever data they already have on you, how many applicants they have, and a lot of other details.
Upvotes: 0
|