date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2016/04/14
| 315
| 1,318
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a muslim sounding name. But I was born to a christian family and I consider myself an atheist. I have been trying to get fellowship in Canada. Will mentioning my religion in the CV help?<issue_comment>username_1: Mentioning religion on your CV is not standard practice. I can't see how it can be beneficial to you're employer unless there are specific requirements for your desired position which relates to religious beliefs. Unfortunately, in some cases, mentioning your religion can hurt your chances as these issues are sensitive and can get very personal for some potential employers. (from what I understand this is a rare occurrence especially in academia)
With that said, If the topic comes up in an interview, I would suggest giving an honest answer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd advise against including your religion on your CV. Unless religion is directly relevant to the job, it's illegal for an employer to take your religion into account, anyway.
And, look at it this way. Suppose you were offered a job at some institution where telling them that you're not a Muslim meant you got a job that a Muslim with your qualifications wouldn't have got. Would you be happy in that environment? Most of the people you meet there won't have read your CV.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/14
| 686
| 2,837
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate student (United States) majoring in *X*, applying to PhD programs with a research focus in subfields *Y* and *Z*.
I conjecture that the best universities for *Y* and the best universities for *Z* are not necessarily the same, and I want to narrow down my PhD applications to universities that are known for one or both of these subfields.
None of the professors at my university's *X* department do much research in either *Y* or *Z*, and they seem to not have the greatest idea where I should apply - I usually get generic answers like *Prestigious University U*, which may or may not be what I'm looking for.
The other concern is that I've taken a few graduate classes regarding *Y* and *Z*, but in no way am I fluent in the fields, nor have I done direct research in these fields. As such, it would be difficult for me to attempt to read research papers about *Y* and *Z* to try to back out which universities produce the best work.
How might I go about finding the strongest programs in *Y* and *Z*?<issue_comment>username_1: Two suggestions:
1. Look at the research publications of faculty in your area of interest and then look for the most widely cited research in this area. You can easily find such information using tools like Google Scholar. Then find out where the authors of these widely cited papers are teaching.
2. Look at what happens to graduates from the different programs. Many faculty have web pages that list their recent PhD students, some universities publish graduation programs that include lists of graduates, and there are sometimes other ways of identifying recent graduates of a particular Phd program. If you can't find those people on the internet, that's a strong indication that they working in academic careers. If you find them but they're teaching at community colleges and regional comprehensive universities, then that tells you a lot about how well the graduates have done in academic careers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For my program, Computer Science, one of my advisors pointed me to [this](http://chronicle.com/article/NRC-Rankings-Overview-/124721/) as being the "industry standard" for determining PhD program rankings; at least in CS. Several important criteria are taken into account, and rankings are provided for each.
However, as another poster pointed out, looking at the faculty and their publication track record with respect to a certain discipline is a good way to assess the quality of a university (i.e., famous people in the area you're interested in tends to equivocate to that university having a prestigious program for that discipline).
It's also helpful to have university rankings, along several research-oriented dimensions, by discipline all in one place... My 2 cents though.
Best of luck!
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/14
| 658
| 2,705
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is my cousin's problem. In the first week of March he was offered a PhD offer (Upper Middle ranked School in USA) in Physics and he received his I-20 to get the visa.The admit was fully funded. He accepted the offer because he didn't have any offer at that time. But few days ago, a top ranked school admin said to him that, he might be admitted as a lot of students haven't accepted their offer (it is not guaranteed though plus admission is completed ).
He was always expecting to get admitted in that school. The deadline of the offer letter from first school is 15th April (He accepted the offer already).
Will it be possible to decline the first offer later/admission if he gets the offer after around two weeks from the top ranked school? I want to know the consequences of this situation.
**EDIT:**
**I have received another suggestion from academia. He suggested to defer the admission (if he gets from the second university) from the Top ranked school. After a semester completed in the first admitted University, If my cousin feels that he should change the department, he will be able to do it. How reasonable is this?**<issue_comment>username_1: Is it ethical? Possibly not. But does it matter? Probably not. If the 'top school' is actually a 'top school', don't shed a tear - they have more than enough money and a long enough waiting list that losing your cousin won't bring them financial hardship. The scholarship will go to someone else in that case. No one will care in 6 weeks, except your cousin, who will be happy having made the choice best for him. I've never seen an academic department that couldn't find surfs....sorry, *employees*.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Assuming both schools are members of the [Council of Graduate Schools](http://cgsnet.org/april-15-resolution), they have an agreement about cases like this. If you don't change your mind and reject the offer from the first school by April 15, you have to get a letter from the first school releasing you from your obligation to attend before accepting the second school. Otherwise, the second school will be unable to take you.
In the one case I know about, there wasn't any problem in obtaining this letter. However, I can't promise that all graduate schools will be as reasonable.
If your cousin gets an offer from the second school before April 15, he should contact the admissions officers at the first school by April 15 (today!) and tell them he is rescinding his acceptance and why.
If he gets an offer after April 15, he needs to make sure the first school is okay with him not coming and get a letter from them before he accepts the second school.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/15
| 1,501
| 6,545
|
<issue_start>username_0: This semester I started working with a professor and a PhD student on one of their major projects, which is an application of their research. Though I was not involved with the research that went into developing the "idea" for the project, I have spent a significant amount of my time helping them to actually build the project, and a lot more work is planned.
Would it be typical for someone in my position to be included as a co-author on the paper that motivated the project I'm working on? Again, I wouldn't say that I have done any research myself, but I have done significant work in getting this project built, and the project is the main product / showcase of the research they performed.
Assuming it's reasonable for me to be included on the paper, how should I go about bringing that up?<issue_comment>username_1: It is really up to your advisor to include you as a co-author or not. If he feels that your work has significantly contributed to the paper, then s/he (without you telling him/her) should include you. Co-authors can have different responsibilities/roles when publishing a paper. One can have the IDEA, another will find the APPLICATION, the third will WRITE, the fourth will bring the FUNDING etc. Even if somebody was not a part of the research (for instance, friend's PhD co-advisor, did not really contribute much to his research but was a co-author in all of my friend's paper (3rd author to be exact)).
Also, if I was your advisor, I will ask you to write a/few sections (in addition to your work that you have done) to include you as a co-author. Giving that you did not do "research", maybe your writing needs work (it will a pain for me to go over your work/teach you). Still, this would be my way of encouraging you and introducing you to the publishing field.
After all, students need to learn, advisors need to advise/teach. Publications are the outcome of interaction, quality work and research.
Even if your advisor declines, ask him/her "respectfully" to be part of the next study. Tell him/her that you are willing to do some research because you would like to be a co-author. The more you engage, the better your chances you will have of being a co-author.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: That's research in my book. I would include you as a co-author, but I'd also make you write up some of it as part of your learning experience.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Taking your statements at face value (and thus imagining something like the others having designed X and evaluated X in a study, while you implemented X based upon their designs), this sounds like a typical situation where you should be mentioned for having conducted the implementation/practical construction. This should certainly happen in a presentation of the work, and possibly (if the paper has an *Acknowledgments* section and if space allows for it) also in the written text.
Admittedly, this is at the verge participating in the *design* / *idea* of the research at hand (and maybe you even did contribute some detail decisions without realizing), so including you as an author depends a bit on the concrete circumstances - and also on the main authors' personal preference (but then, so might accusations of gift authorship in this case).
As for how to bring this up with the authors, you could ask in a somewhat unspecific way such as "I'm interested in gradually increasing my level of participation in research papers, is there a chance for increasing my contributions and acting as a co-author in the future?" That way, chances are the main authors will immediately get the idea of adding you one way or another in the current paper, while at the same time, you are not burning any bridges by appearing too demanding.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: According to Harvard Medical School, and in agreement with APA standards:
" Everyone who is listed as an author should have made a substantial, direct, intellectual contribution to the work."
Someone who simply writes analysis scripts would not qualify.
Someone who conceived of an original analysis, however, would. I cannot tell from your context, but simply 'spending a lot of time' on a project does not substantiate authorship. It must be an original intellectual contribution.
That said, these rules are lax in practice, at least in the biological sciences, of which I am familiar.
@The Fire Guy: FUNDING is not grounds for authorship by APA guidlines.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: It depends on what your code does.
Writing code that collects, generates, or interprets data *is* actually research, as is designing and building an experimental apparatus. This is true even if you're not the person who actually "takes the data" under experimental conditions. Similarly, visualizing and analyzing already-collected data is also research, particularly if you are choosing the analytical techniques (or developing new ones). These ideas are in line with authorship guidelines for some major collaborative projects (e.g., [ATLAS](https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/Main/ATLASAuthorshipPolicy)).
In both cases, I'd argue that you have the strongest case for authorship when the work was done specifically for the current project. You might also bolster your claim by offering to draft figures and text describing the code and its output. On the other hand,...if you spent a few minutes reusing work from your previous project, it might be more reasonable to ask for citation as in "Data was collected using the system described in YourPreviousPaper, LastYear." It is also a little churlish to demand authorship for "minor" contributions. If I spent a few hours helping a colleague--or even longer for a closer friend, an acknowledgement might be reasonable.
Finally, it is possible to write "essential" code that is difficult to slot into a specific paper. For example, perhaps you built a database that tracked information about the specimens or patients. This would make it much easier to plan experiments and select appropriate controls, thereby increasing the lab's scientific output. Despite this, the database has limited value to *each* specific project and a correspondingly reduced claim to having contributed to any specific paper. For some types of code, it might be possible to write a companion paper describing the tool specifically (e.g., [The Journal of Statistical Software](https://www.jstatsoft.org/index) is a good venue for describing data analysis tools).
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/15
| 1,157
| 5,017
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a fashion designer student. I have given numerous presentations but one thing always bothers me: the level and frequency of questions by the questioners. By that I mean some folks in the class ask difficult questions sometimes which makes me a little nervous. And by frequency I mean repeatedly getting questions from folks esp. when teacher has left for a while and there is a mayhem in the hall.
I want an answer where those two things are addressed specifically.
Any good tips in handling such situation? Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: This sort of thing improves with practice. That is why you were assigned to do it. Keep doing it and it will get better.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In this situation, you're a presenter and you're getting bombarded with questions, is this right? Are people incessantly asking questions and not letting you answer, or do you just feel this way because you shut down in front of the audience?
First, relax, because as the presenter, you have the floor, and you should thus be in control of the room. This mentality has helped me in the past because if you're presenting, pending time limitations, you're the highest authority in the room aside from the chair/professor, and you're free to speak at your own pace, discuss things in your preferred order, etc. Others should respect this, and remembering this gives you power.
Pace yourself, and take time to think. If someone interrupts you, etc. tell them that you'd like to answer the previous question before you get to them. Stand tall, and crossing your arms behind your back helps posture to an extent, and try to not focus on one person in particular as you answer questions. Watching their reactions can be intimidating.
Just make sure to not focus on the people asking questions or how you feel about questions, but rather on how you feel about where you are in describing what you wanted to talk about.
Edit: If you don't have an answer, that is also fine, and never be afraid to say "I don't know". This is still part of the presentation, and that is what you have to offer. If you don't like not knowing it, ask the person asking the question if they can give you their information so you can follow up with an answer later.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I agree with practice, but it may be better to start in a more comfortable environment. Form a practice talk group with some of your fellow students. Give each talk to the group before it is due for presentation to the whole class.
You can begin by only asking each other easy questions, and not too many, then gradually work up.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: The answer is: crowd control.
You have to establish yourself as in-control forthright. This can be difficult to do, but it is important to establish that YOU are in control. The first time someone blurts out a question, just say: 'i have a lot to get through, we can take questions later'. Most likely the audience will comply.
As for difficult questions (that I assume you cannot answer): listeners *respect* people who can honestly say they do not know the answer to a question. It demonstrates character. Better yet, take that difficult question, admit you do not know, but state that you know *how* to get the answer, and thank them for their astute observation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: As you are a student, it is not a shame to say that you don't know the answer
According to my experience, it is always better to say the truth rather than saying something wrong that could put you in a more difficult situation.
Probably, when you say something wrong, you will feel that you say something wrong and this will probably increase more your stress and also there is another risk that other people in audience react as you say something wrong.
It is better to take a little notebook and a pen. When you feel that you can not answer the question. You can take your pen and notebook and say something like
*"Good point, I did not think about it, I will think about it."*
It is not a shame to not know something, we can not know everything so better is to be honest and show to audience that you are open to learn and progress. For me, this works always.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: "Fake it 'til you make it" may do good work here. Observe people who are cool as cucumbers faced with this situation. (Do not omit your instructors, many of whom have dealt with question barrages -- occasionally hostile ones, at that -- for years or even decades.) See if you can work out useful verbal or postural techniques they use to manage the questions. When it's your turn, be like them -- pretend you ARE them if it helps!
If stereotype threat is part of the issue here because you are part of an underrepresented demographic in your field, remind yourself that you are unique, with your own unique and valuable take on things. Somewhat-preliminary research suggests this is helpful.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/15
| 707
| 2,970
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in a situation where I am continuing to work on some of my M.S. research work after I have filed and will receive my M.S.
It is fine with me and I think it's good because there were loose ends. This is computer science field, and it involves a programming project we want to improve.
In the back of my mind, I'm hoping we can write a journal article. Part of me, though, wonders about whether this may be risky. Will my professor make excessive demands on me, even though we're officially finished? I also need to focus on other demands, such as my job.
So I worry a little about the expectations.
How common is it to continue working after getting one's MS, but without any official agreement (i.e., I just informally meet with my prof and discuss my progress).
Also, in case you're wondering, I'm not currently interested in doing a PhD (maybe later, just not anytime too soon).<issue_comment>username_1: Your concern that this is "risky" is somewhat vague, but generally, I'd say that working on something like this is extremely common. I've never "cleanly" finished a project, where it is fully wrapped up, with nothing else to do right as my degree was awarded, I moved to a new position, etc.
I'd say it's extremely common, and if you think that extra work might result in a publication, fairly valuable. There is the possibility of things being too demanding, but generally people are pretty understanding of other obligations that come up, especially if you let them know in advance.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 mentioned this isn't uncommon. With that said, I would like to add to the answer by suggesting a more official agreement. Instead of just working on a project, it's better to actually be part of his lab (even part time). Working in a research lab after you have completed your degree's obligations shows more commitment to research and this can make you a more attractive candidate if you want to consider PhD in the future. This of course depends partly on your time constraints and partly on your advisors decision.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: You mention 'your job', which suggests you've already moved on post-degree.
At the same time, you'd like to write up your work for publication, which is a very admirable and understandable goal. If the above is correct, then you are trying to balance an academic life with an industry life, and they are seldom compatible. For one thing (and I've experienced this), your academic advisor won't 'get' the industry obligations.
From your standpoint, you've already attained the end-goal: get a job. But, if you wish to continue working to get this publication out, do it now and do it quickly. Your advisor will have no qualms about continually asking for further analyses/models/whatever so long as he/she believes you're invested, because honestly, you're working for free at that point. So get it done!
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/15
| 715
| 3,147
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am from electrical engineering background and I want to do PhD in machine learning. But machine learning is a multi-disciplinary field and available in many departments. So I am bit confused that from which department I should pursue PhD and what is the difference in PhD programs in different departments. Should I pursue PhD in machine learning in computer science department or from electrical departments. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: Firstly, keep in mind that some institutions actually have their own machine learning departments (for example, [Carnegie Mellon University](http://www.ml.cmu.edu/)). That being said, in general, Machine Learning falls under the umbrella of Computer Science and Statistics / Applied Math. It's typically not considered a subset of Electrical Engineering unless you're working in robotics or very narrow cases of building specialized hardware for machine learning algorithms.
If you are interested in doing a PhD in machine learning, you will most likely be applying to either a Computer Science, Applied Mathematics, or Robotics program.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's not about the department. Choose an adviser that is good in machine learning (ML). He/she might be in CS or EE. In my university, there are staff members in **both** departments who can supervise ML projects. Choose someone who fits your interest and work style; see recent question regarding selecting an adviser.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You didn't provide enough information to know, but if your statistics department offers ML classes, do that. After having been in machine learning for a while, I'm realizing that a solid background in statistics does at least two things:
1) you are more likely to realize statistical characteristics of your data that are important for model selection and feature engineering
2) you are in a better position to *comprehend* your data in a manner your peers will not
Remember, machine learning is about training algorithms to recognize patterns. Statistics is about making inferences about data. Pair them together and you're unstoppable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In addition to previous fantastic answers, here is what I think:
* Note that there are universities where both Electrical Engineering and Computer Science are combined into one department. One famous example is [EECS, UC Berkley](https://eecs.berkeley.edu/). In such a case, it really doesn't matter. You will be working under the umbrella of EECS or CSEE.
* Further, another thing is that it is not what the PhD is going to be or what they offer. It is "you" who will decide what do you want to do in your PhD. Is it going to be a PhD in applied machine learning or theoretical machine learning? Is it specific to robotics or computer vision? and such like. Go through the websites of your favourite (and targetted) universities department, and choose wisely.
* Remember, in the end, it is the work that speaks, which has a direct correlation of the quality of guidance and trainings you have got during your PhD. Not the university.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/15
| 956
| 4,257
|
<issue_start>username_0: During the time to prepare for my application to applying to grad school, I have learned a lot of new knowledge. They are from various sources: scientific papers from insiders in the field, blog posts from them or other individuals, articles explaining the ideas for popular audience, Wikipedia, YouTube, etc. While they help me a lot to understand what the field is so that I can write a good research proposal, after having one I have basically nothing to do with them, except to answer my friends' question: "So, what do you do?", which I can only provide a small fraction of what I really know and want to say.
I think the knowledge has a better potential to help me go further in my career, so I am thinking to turn it into a real article/paper. There will be an international conference in my country in which my field is one topic of it and my furthest goal is to write the article good enough so that I can submit a poster in there. The deadline to submit is before I starting grad school so I guess that I will have to write it by myself. Although I always want to put my best effort to every product I make, I don't want to spend more than one month on writing this in order to move on to my next project. Popular readers will be my audience of course.
**Q**: The first and foremost question is: is this worth? Are there other alternative ways to do with what I've learned? If making it as an article is indeed worth to do, I still don't know how to maximize the benefit that it will bring to me. I have some more things to consider:
* **Language**: What language should I use? If I write it in English, I can reach more readers and hope that I will find grant easier. However if I write in my native language, I would be the first one to write detailly about this and therefore having an advantage of being the first one, though I admit I don't know what to do next with this advantage in this stage of my career.
* **Place to publish**: Where should I publish this article? Of course I can always post it in my blog, but can it be published elsewhere? If I should write in English, can you suggest some journals/magazines that will accept my work? If it's in my native language, I have two options of where to submit and I don't know which one is better. The first one is an old reputable magazine among researchers in my country. It's a kind of dicussion board where topic can range from introducing new discovery or science news to critics about government policy in science. The other one is a new young but promising science journal that available in both languages, founded by a young researcher. Its focus is narrower, only introduction of actual research of my country researchers in hard science/technology.
Thank you so much for your time to reading this far.<issue_comment>username_1: Research is always precious. Never ask a question like "Is this research useful?" ... You never know what you might hit upon in future. So, always maintain the copies of the journal articles and book chapters you read during the development of your dissertation or research paper. These days, inter-disciplinary research is becoming more and more popular. You may need to reckon or revisit your works anytime, anywhere. So, don't be disheartened. Instead, get yourself a cabinet where you can keep the hard copies of all the materials you read and analysis. You can also store electronic copies of relevant readings in a Cloud-based folder. One of the easiest ways is perhaps to cite and save all the articles you read on Google Scholar.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Having learnt something new does not mean that you can publish a research article. You need some new research to publish. So my answer to the question in the title is:
**Use your new knowledge to do research.**
If you still hold on to the idea of publishing something, you need to think hard about 1. a venue to publish and 2. what is it that makes your text publishable. If you can write a really good overview for some audience and can find a venue that may fit, you may try (but in fact, it is pretty hard and next to impossible to write a good overview when you just entered a field, this is something for more senior people).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/15
| 1,587
| 6,713
|
<issue_start>username_0: The process for obtaining funding for graduate work in the UK seems much different than it is in the US. In particular, in the UK, funding decisions often come after offers of admission. What is the process by which a good, accepted graduate application at, say, Oxford, is given funding?<issue_comment>username_1: As you say, an offer of a place is a different thing to an offer of funding. There are more places than there is funding, but not an infinite supply.
How each university/department handles this will vary. When I applied for maths at Oxford, everyone at the graduate open day was confused until we were told that they basically assume anyone who applies for funding won't come without it, so act accordingly until fairly late in the application cycle.
Funding also comes from different sources. Confirmation of funding will come at different points in the year. Some funding is specific to a particular project, so will be entirely linked to a specific place. Other funding may not be open to some students. Students can apply at different points in the year.
Basically researchers want the best students they can get, and they mostly expect to only get those by finding funding for them somehow. Unless you can fund yourself, an offer-with-funding is the only bit of interest to most people. The process of getting that depends on how obtaining the funding works, as some scholarships might need an offer of a place before you can apply.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The funding depends on your nationality/residence by a lot, as well as the field, the university, and the supervisor.
UK or EEA residents can get funding from national research councils (such as ESPRC, STFC and many more) which give them (usually) the cost of tuition plus a small living stipend (when I was applying the living wage was about £13,000).
Non UK/EEA people generally have to self-fund outside of a few special circumstances (competitive international scholarships such as Rhodes, university bursaries for internationals). This is very very rare. However, it's not terribly uncommon to see students from an above-average financial situation self-funding, but then they need to pay not only their living costs, but also the cost of tuition (at my old university it was about £20k per year for international students).
I wrote an extensive response on all of these issues [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/61795/fellowships-for-graduate-studies-in-uk-which-are-available-currently/61800#61800) and [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62885/phd-funding-other-sources/62886#62886) and [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/66687/why-is-discrimination-based-on-citizenship-allowed-in-phd-funding-in-the-uk/66689#66689). The other answers from other users on those posts are also excellent.
So what happens is that you apply, and then you will be (hopefully) asked for an interview. If you are able to compete for the 'normal' funding pot, you will be interviewed much the same way as everyone else. First a shortlist, then the interviews, and maybe follow-up interviews will be used to select the best candidates from the pool of applicants. If you're non-UK/EEA, you may or may not interview with everyone else; it's up to the university. If they don't have the money to fund you, many departments will make you an offer anyway (especially for foreign students) which you will usually have several months to accept or decline.
The research councils will grant the department a certain number of PhD studentship bursaries, and they will distribute them. From what I've seen, you don't have to do much self-application for scholarships unless you're foreign. Though you will always be told where the money is coming from, and there may be some requirements (a yearly seminar, for example) to get the money.
If you are given a stipend, it is tax-free, unlike in many other countries. Your funding is all-inclusive, not split up into RA or TA like in the US. You can normally make extra money marking coursework or demonstrating in labs, although the 'estimated number of hours' taken by these activities doesn't always match up with the actual number of hours you spend on them !
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The process of allocating graduate studentships is a nightmare. Funding for graduate students comes from a number of sources including
* External funding (from the research councils, charities, industry etc.) to named supervisors
* External funding to the department
* External funding to the university
* Internal funding to named supervisors
* Internal funding to the department
* The department budget
Each one of these funding sources has constraints on who it can be given to. For example, external funding to an individual PI/CI is generally associated with a particular project. Conversely, the department budget can nominally be used for any student, but promises have often been made to individual faculty. When then department know the funding is available is often variable. For example funding from Doctoral Training Center grants to the university is often managed by a committee who look at students who are nominated by various departments.
There is also the issue of when the different sources of funding get confirmed. Grants come in at all times. The department budget is often not set until after decisions are made. Decisions about how to allocate funding from Doctoral Training Grants/Centres often require accepted and nominated students.
My department allocates funding in the following manner. We rank the students. Students of supervisors who have a dedicated source for them (external, internal, departmental) get told they have been accepted with funding. We then work our way down the rankings trying to find students most competitive for other sources of funding (e.g., DTG or University funding). Sometimes a very low ranked student might be the best candidate for a potential funding stream. We then more or less work our way down the rankings deciding if we want to guarantee funding for each student until we run out of guaranteed funding (e.g., departmental budget). As we start to run low on money (the last 1 or 2 students), we might shuffle the rankings to account for the cost of the student or the supervisor. Sometimes we will go over budget with the intention of either covering the shortfall from unknown sources or stealing from future budgets. Students are then told 5 things: unfunded, funding conditional on obtaining the particular nominated source, guaranteed but the student must apply for a particular source of funding, and funded.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/15
| 1,371
| 6,136
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can we ask a journal to assign another reviewer to review our paper if we think that his/her review is not satisfactory, for instance if we have reason to believe that s/he is not familiar with the subject of the paper? For example, s/he points out that s/he does not understand a term which is well-known in the subject area.
**Edit:**
In this particular case, the reviewer in question is generally positive about the paper. The other reviewer is positive, and the editor has recommended acceptance.
Do you keep quiet about it because the paper has been accepted? Or should we at least let the editor know that he has not assigned someone who knows the subject to review the paper? Or do you go as far as asking the editor to assign another review just to be sure that everything is done responsibly?
If you have been in similar situation, I am interested to know which action you took.<issue_comment>username_1: You can ask. It's not likely that your request will be granted, but it's not impossible. Keep in mind that the editor's default assumption will be that you are simply disgruntled by negative reviews -- every single author who receives a rejection is convinced that it's because the reviewer is incompetent -- so you need to show why you're different. You will need to make a strong case that the reviewer is actually incompetent, not merely that you disagree with them.
That means you will need to point to incontrovertibly wrong statements they make. If they say something that 90% of the field disagrees with, that's probably not enough, because it may still be a legitimate minority opinion. Similarly, if their statements have any qualifiers, the editor is more likely to side with them. And it needs to be central to their review, not a side point. Basically, you need to leave the editor no room for subjectivity in deciding that the reviewer is incompetent.
It's probably not worth the trouble, unless you have strong reasons for really wanting that particular journal for publication. Keep in mind that the stronger the journal, the more trust an editor typically places in their reviewers, so you'll need to make a really strong case.
That said, I've seen it happen, so it can be done. Editors make the final decisions. They very often do deprecate one reviewer's opinion. But again, every author believes the same as you do, so you'll need to show objectively why you're the one in a thousand exception.
**Edit**: From the comments "*it is based on the assumption that the review and the editor's decision are negative. It would be great if you could include the other scenario as well, which I am more interested in.*"
This makes it sound as if you sent in a paper that you suspect is incorrect or incomplete, and you want reviewers to point out the errors that you believe are there. This seems like an inappropriate use of the peer review system. The peer review system isn't a free editing service for you. It isn't a way to avoid having co-authors, or to get someone to hold your hand and walk you through a field for nothing. If you have doubts about something in the paper, it's your responsibility, not the editors', to find someone who can reliably identify and fix problems.
If the reviewer approved the paper, but you don't think the reviewer was competent and you are concerned that there are still problems with the paper, then you shouldn't ask for another review, you should withdraw the paper and fix it yourself. If you can't do it yourself, then get a co-author who can, or at the very least have a colleague review it for you.
***Edit*** in response to the question being revised. If the review is positive, but the reviewer shows that they are not familiar with the topic to the point that the review is completely useless, I would not request a new review. The editor is supposed to be familiar enough with the field herself to understand this, and to deprecate the review or calibrate its impact appropriately. Telling the editor that the review is incompetent and requesting another review would be pretty insulting, telling the editor that they are incompetent themselves.
What might I do in the case of an egregiously terrible review? The same as I do with a good review. Even if the paper is accepted, there's a response-to-reviewers letter, and you can use this to politely and professionally indicate that the reviewer is incompetent. Just as I said above, be objective, find points that are irrefutable and unambiguous, and show that the reviewer is completely wrong. I can't overemphasize that you do this **professionally**. It's the same thing you do with every response to a reviewer -- show where they're right and where you're right, and why. You never say that the reviewer is incompetent, because that's unprofessional. You simply show that they are objectively wrong. The editor should pick up on this and understand that if every point the reviewer made is objectively wrong, they shouldn't use them again.
Finally, get over it. Bad reviews are a part of the job. It's hard for editors to find good reviewers. Almost every paper I've submitted has had at least one bad reviewer. I've seen scores of stupid, inane, missing-the-point comments. Get annoyed for a few minutes if you want, but don't take it to heart.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have made a request of this kind once, and it was granted by the editor. The referee in question was positive about the paper but had a significant misunderstanding of the subject area. The other referee had recommended acceptance of the paper in its current form. After a couple of rounds of refereeing, it seemed likely that resolving this misunderstanding might require many more iterations without any benefit to the paper. In this particular case, the associate editor handling the paper understood the subject area well enough to recognize this, and agreed to assign a new referee.
Of course, starting from zero with a new referee after multiple rounds of revising is not ideal either, so consider carefully before you make such a request.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/15
| 173
| 537
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I hold a MSc and a BSc should and I want to show that next to my name in my CV, should I use:
>
> Sosi, MSc, BSc
>
>
>
or simply the highest one:
>
> Sosi, MSc
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Highest followed by any professional titles, i.e., XXX PhD, PE
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If this is an academic CV (as this site is about Academia), then you should *not* include your titles next to your name in your CV, but describe them in the "Education" section.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/15
| 671
| 3,011
|
<issue_start>username_0: What should I do after BS Maths before applying to a well reputed institute for masters and PHD in maths, given that my BS was done from a less developed country where quality of math education is very low?<issue_comment>username_1: **EDIT:** This answer was initially based on the field of Computer Science.
This type of question relies somewhat on your personal opinion and what you mean by a low quality institution.
In my attempt to refrain from any vague answers, my number one suggestion is to publish/present in internationally renowned journals/conferences. This is not only because publications can make you stand out above other applicants, but it proves that despite the lower reputation of your current institution, you are capable of doing research acceptable by international academic standards.
Based on the discussions in the comment section, I will attempt to further specify my initial suggestion. First of all, starting on this path after your undergraduate studies requires serious commitment both in effort and time (it will take alot of introductory reading before you can even start any actual research) but it is definitely possible. Furthermore, the best approach to follow this path would be to join a research lab/team at your current institution. Try to find a faculty member who has a relatively positive perception of your capabilities (maybe you did exceptionally well in his/her class?). If you face problems in convincing someone to advise you due to lack of a positive perception, you can try taking an extra course with that faculty member (and excelling at that course). It will further improve your chances if you can enroll in a graduate course at your institution.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: You seem to be asking how to get admitted to a much better graduate program than your undergraduate program and record merits. I'm sorry to say that unless you did something during your undergraduate program to make you stand out on a worldwide scale beyond what virtually any undergraduate ever does (in other words, a very low probability event), this is not going to be possible.
Why don't you set more reasonable goals? If your education has suffered from coming through a systemically poor institution, I would suggest trying to get into a not-top-but-reputable program in a country with high academic standards (which gives you a lot of choices: US, Canada, Australia, the majority of Europe, Japan, some other parts of Asia...). E.g. in the US even the 200th best university has a curriculum which is largely modelled on that of much better universities, some very serious faculty members, quite solid library / computer resources, and so on. A student can "launder herself" by doing a master's degree at such a place. By doing excellently on the coursework and exams, she would show that she has the same skills, knowledge and potential of a strong undergraduate major, and could probably get into a top 50 PhD program.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/04/15
| 357
| 1,612
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've read in the law that logos are protected by the United States Trademark law, not laws of copyright. Essentially this means that you have immediate permission to use a logo that doesn't belong to you, without asking for direct permission from the logos owner (as long as you follow legal usage guidelines). So my question is: Do I need to cite these logos I use if they do not have protection by copyright (thereby giving me usage privileges)? And also do assume I would follow correct guidelines and include a standard legal disclaimer.<issue_comment>username_1: Logos can be protected by both copyright and trademark. This is entirely orthogonal to the issue of citation. By academic convention, you are required to cite any work which contributed intellectually to your work. If I base my work on a paper from the 1800s, I am still required to cite it, even though it is likely to be long out of copyright. This is not a legal requirement, but a question of academic ethics.
Whether you are required to cite these logos will depend on whether they make an intellectual contribution to your work, and the common practices of the field in which you are working. It does not depend on whether the logos are under copyright or trademark.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are using simply using the logos in place of the company name, there is no reason to cite them since you would not cite a company name. If you are intending on publishing the work, the publisher may want to see a signed release from the copyright and/or trademark holder.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/15
| 643
| 2,814
|
<issue_start>username_0: How can one find out how many funded PhD openings there are at a particular university in a particular discipline?
For example, MIT might have openings for 2,000 PhD students in all disciplines. 1,000 of these positions might be in the field of engineering. But only 5 of positions might involve bioengineering. And of these 5 positions, 4 might already be filled by PhD candidates in their second year of study; meaning only 1 position is available to applicants.
Any suggestions will be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: The number of funded positions in a department is not really known until late in the process. The best way to find out is to ask the department. I am not sure if knowing this information is valuable. Maybe it can influence your decision of whether to apply or not, but it is not going to help your application.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: At US universities, it typically doesn't work that way.
The department usually doesn't think of having specific PhD positions that have to be filled. Rather, admissions is done on a department-wide basis. Each year, the department sets a target for how many new students they want to admit, based on available resources. Let's say for example that this number is 20.
Now, most applicants are applying to many different programs, so not every accepted applicant will actually come to study in this department. Thus, if they want about 20 new students, they will offer admission (with or without funding) to some larger number, perhaps 40 or 45 (assuming there are at least that many qualified applicants). This number would be chosen based on past experience as to what fraction of accepted students choose to attend, and can be varied if they have applicants whose applications suggest that they would be particularly likely or unlikely to attend. A few additional applicants might be placed on a waiting list.
But it's entirely possible that the number of students who actually choose to attend is larger or smaller than 20. If it's smaller, they could try to admit some more people from the waiting list, but that still may not bring them up to 20. That's okay; they will just have a smaller cohort that year, and probably try to use a larger target number next year. If more than 20 accept the offer of admission, then the department just has to come up with the funds to support them, and use a smaller target next year.
Also, seats aren't necessarily restricted by research area. In mathematics departments, for instance, departments won't typically break down their targets as "we want 5 students in algebra, and 3 in number theory, ...". They'll just admit 40 good students and let them sort out their areas of study after they arrive.
So the number you are looking for may not exist.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/15
| 726
| 2,663
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a grad student, and will have an appointment as an assistant professor in a few months. For various conferences I am attending, I am to provide my title. I would prefer to mention my future position, if for no other reason so that people I meet will know where to find me in the future. Is there a term for a future appointment like "President-elect" or "Chairperson-elect" that can be used? "Assistant professor-elect" seems strange and "Assistant professor (effective August)" seems clunky.<issue_comment>username_1: I would not worry about the title as much as the new location. Assuming a name badge that looks something like
>
> Strongbad
>
>
> PhD Student
>
>
> [Crazy Go Nuts University](http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail26.html)
>
>
>
I would add a hand written line to make it
>
> Strongbad
>
>
> PhD Student
>
>
> [Crazy Go Nuts University](http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail26.html)
>
>
> [*Krusty's Clown College (starting August)*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSKEl6a-b_c)
>
>
>
I would only do this if the contract has been signed and there is no contingency on you finishing your PhD. If you have to finish your PhD to start the assistant professor position, then there is no guarantee you will be starting in August.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The clunky version is nevertheless more explanatory: XXX, PhD YYY Univ (anticipated, June 2016), Assistant Prof., Univ of Whatevs (as of Sept, 2016).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Sorry to be a bit of a party pooper, but I don't like either username_1's or username_2's suggestions. Notwithstanding the fact that you deserve all the respect and congratulations in the world for your new near-future position, and it's very understandable that you want everyone to know about it, I can't help thinking that writing anything other than your current affiliation on your badge or presentation slides risks leaving a rather negative impression of someone who is a bit too over-eager to take credit for things that they have not yet completely accomplished. After all, you are not technically a PhD yet, let alone an assistant professor.
My advice is therefore to tell anyone you feel should know about your new position in private conversation, and wait patiently until the effective date of your new appointment before listing it on any official documents such as your CV or conference badges. This is a special case of my more general philosophy that [one should never brag about achievements that one has not yet fully accomplished](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/57842/40589).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/16
| 1,017
| 4,323
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an engineering PhD candidate at a US university. I left the university a couple of years ago after 5yrs of PhD work to work as an independent scientist, while also working with my advisor on the completion of my PhD on the side (while not being enrolled in the university all this while). I received a notice recently from the department asking me to defend my thesis ASAP or risk being terminated from the PhD program.
What exactly does termination mean, and what does it entail?
On a side note, what are the implications of such a termination on my professional career in the industry? For ex. does it show up in a background check? I have a Bachelor's (from another university) and Master's degree (from the same university).<issue_comment>username_1: This is normal practice these days at universities. In the old days, doctoral students could drift away from their program mid-stream and people wouldn't really care. They might return after 20 years to submit their dissertation, but otherwise there was no attempt to track these zombie students down.
Unfortunately, many places are now using average time-to-degree (TTD) as metrics to a graduate program's quality (purportedly a lower TTD is better). Zombie students are problematic as you can have someone who is 15 years into a program without graduating, dragging the average up. Note that there is a difference between a nominal TTD and actual TTDs -- for example, in my old university the nominal TTD was 5 years but very few people actually graduated in that time, the average was closer to 6.5 years.
In my experience, provosts are asking departments to track the zombies down and determine whether they should be terminated or not. Being terminated isn't a bad thing, it means that you will be left with your last degree (e.g., M.Phil) and you shouldn't really call yourself ABD as you won't be permitted to submit. I've been through a few of these cullings and as faculty I think they are a good thing as zombie students on the books really help no one.
If you have any hope of submitting, I would ask that you be given some time (1 year would be reasonable) to submit. Otherwise, I would take your MA/M.Phil and be happy with it. I don't think there are any negatives for a career in industry. Again, you technically shouldn't call yourself ABD (rather you "withdrew from program after meeting all qualifications for the doctorate but the dissertation") but I really don't think anyone is going to check. Think of it as a general discharge, under honorable conditions.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Regarding background checks: at a US university, your educational records should be protected by [FERPA](http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html) and nobody should be able to access them without your permission.
However, you should probably assume that a potential employer would be able to learn the following things: You used to be enrolled in the PhD program, you're not enrolled now, and you didn't receive the degree. (Some of this would be "directory information" which FERPA does not protect; other parts might be otherwise publicly available, such as from old department web page listings of grad students.) So they can reasonably deduce that you either quit voluntarily or were kicked out ("terminated").
Some employers might also require, as part of the job application process, that you give them a copy of your official transcript from the university. If you are terminated from the program, the transcript will state this, and probably explain the reason ("didn't complete program requirements within time limit", "didn't make satisfactory progress", something like that).
If you don't think you will be able (or willing) to either defend before the deadline or negotiate more time, you might see about voluntarily withdrawing from the program. ("You can't fire me, I quit.") This might not look as bad on a transcript. After all, it's not uncommon for people to start graduate programs and then decide it isn't something they want to pursue, and you could explain it to an employer in those terms. ("I decided that instead of academic research, I wanted to work in industry, so that I could do work that was more practical / real-life / lucrative.")
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/04/16
| 1,260
| 5,281
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am really in a fix in my career.
I completed my Masters in 2014. I qualified in a PhD Scholarships Test in 2015 and in the same year joined in a University for research work.
My interest lies in Linear Algebra, Topology, Abstract Algebra. My guide offered me to work in Spectral Graph Theory. As I was not quite acquainted with the topic I took up this topic for research.
As I am reading on my own, I am getting stuck on many theorems and some problems.
My guide has said recently that he does not have much expertise on this topic besides the preliminaries and hence he can't answer each and every problem of mine. He has said that the topic is new to him also. I have found now that also does not have any research papers to his name on Spectral Graph Theory as well. I was not aware of this before
**My question is how important is the choice of a guide/adviser for pursuing PhD in a topic and what needs to be checked before joining him**.
Is it wise continuing to work with him or should I look for some alternatives. Does getting a PhD depend a lot on your guide or I am expecting a lot from my guide? Does pursuing a PhD mean you have to do all along yourself?
I know there are many in this site who have got a PhD or have served as guides/advisors for many students. Please help. Any suggestions will be helpful. I would be happy to give more inputs if required.<issue_comment>username_1: Working on a PhD in an area where your advisor appears to have little to no expertise in is fraught with danger. A PhD degree is in some sense an apprenticeship - while you need to do the heavy lifting, you also get/need to learn the tricks of the trade from an accomplished master. Every craft has subtler/finer aspects that are not acquired easily. Would you want to rely on someone who himself doesn't appear to know much, even at a high level? I wouldn't do a PhD with such an advisor for the same reasons I wouldn't learn painting from someone who doesn't know it himself/herself.
On a more important side note, it might not be very wise to jump into a doctorate in an area you have such little knowledge/interest in. You do appear to have the right background, but even with that, doctoral level research in Spectral Graph Theory (and applications, if you are interested in them) is not going to be easy to pick up, even with an expert advisor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: A chief hazard in working on a topic (in mathematics, for example) in which your advisor is not expert (and for which you have no other immediate expert co-advisors) is analogous to the idea of trying to make money on the stock market only with knowledge available to everyone else. Yes, there is the internet, but it is available to everyone else, too. The way to make *big* money on the stock market is with "insider information", but in the U.S. this is illegal (unless you are in Congress!) Analogously, unless one imagines that one is "special", it is not so easy to get started in some line of research without expert advice. Luckily, it is legal, and certainly desirable, to have expert advice! Otherwise, one may fail to understand relevant keywords, for example, and thereby be unaware of work already done. Or be unaware that dozens of other people are already working on whatever problem one sets as project goal, setting up a situation in which one's thesis inadvertently turns out to be old news? Or that one's project-idea is known (to experts) to be infeasible? How to avoid such issues?
Despite frequent claims on this site and others about a Ph.D. simply being "learning how to do research", I would also claim that there is such a thing as "expert knowledge base(s)", and these are not easily replicated simply in software (with or without the internet).
(By the way, the usual style in mathematics is that advisors are not co-authors on PhDs, in any case.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: It's crucial. You can get technical help elsewhere, but your advisor is ultimately the gatekeeper to your future career. And it is a career; just being good at math is not sufficient without the set of contacts and public presence that your advisor controls access to. You're in theoretical mathematics, and it's extremely difficult to get an academic position in that area, and it's extremely difficult to do any significant research outside of such a position. (It isn't difficult to find a random high-paying job with a degree in pure math; but if you only wanted that, getting a PhD is not an efficient method of going about it.)
The point of grad school is to prepare you from an academic career, and that involves (and, honestly, is mostly about) getting the appropriate CV that will allow you to enter that career. Your goal at this point is to churn out publications. Ask your advisor if, given the difference in your research interests, he can help you with that. This involves knowing enough about the subfield to direct you toward the better journals and conferences, identifying the cool problems that will attract notice, and avoiding the problems that are intractible or just not interesting. He may be able to do this; if so, there's really no reason for you to switch advsiors. If he can't, find someone who will.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/16
| 1,732
| 7,082
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student, and I was recently invited to visit a university which happens to be at a very attractive touristic location.
It goes without saying that the purpose of the visit is purely scientific, and any other matters are tangential. On the other hand, it has occurred to me and my long-time girlfriend that it would be a perfect opportunity for her to see this touristically attractive place. Now, I am wondering how best to make the arrangements, so as to maximize both research and personal benefits (and not offend the host as a by-product).
To state the obvious, at the time when I am supposed to be doing research I will be doing research, and not get distracted by the presence of my partner. The place is interesting enough to keep her entertained through the day, and to keep us both entertained during the evenings. I would not expect the host to have much interest in how I spend my free time if I want to be left to my own devices, so if me and my girlfriend make totally separate arrangements and only spend the evenings together, this should not cause any problems.
Keeping things entirely separate feels a little impractical though, so I have some questions about issues that I do not see as so clear-cut. My host will be booking accommodation for me and paying for it. Is it impolite to suggest that he book a double room, and we pay half of the price from our own pocket? It is probable that I will be invited to some social gatherings - maybe beer after a seminar, maybe dinner. Is it polite to bring my partner along/resign from joining? Would it be OK to streach the visit for an extra weekend after the research is done (paying for the hotel, of course, but hopefully still getting the return flight refunded)?
I would also be grateful for input on any issues that I have not yet thought of.
A few details, just in case they are relevant: My field is (pure) mathematics. The university is in Europe, at the Mediterranean coast. The visit is about a week long. We are in a long-distance relationship, so a extra week together does make a difference. The host strikes me as rather easy-going, but I don't know him that well.<issue_comment>username_1: It is perfectly reasonable. I have done it a couple of times and I know colleagues that frequently do it. Her presence at work/social events depends on the event and how well you know the host and the events. Often the work/social line gets blurred. I am friends with a number of my colleagues partners and my partner are friends with them and their partners. Sometimes my partner will join me for social events when we have a visitor.
That said, while it is not inappropriate, the trailing partner at academic events never has worked well for us. I have been both the leading and trailing partner. The person working is often tired at the end of the day and not really in the mood to be a tourist. We find it is a better use of our time and money to travel both as tourists and really enjoy our holidays.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To complement [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/67123/20058) I'll address directly a few points of your question:
>
> Is it impolite to suggest that he book a double room, and we pay half of the price from our own pocket?
>
>
>
No, it's not impolite: there should be no problem for them to ask refund for just half of the hotel's invoice.
>
> It is probable that I will be invited to some social gatherings - maybe beer after a seminar, maybe dinner.
>
>
>
Of course it depends on your host, but as a European, and according to my experience around Europe, for a week-long visit, there might not be many social events, probably just a dinner. You can surely tell your host that you would like to come with your girlfriend.
>
> Would it be OK to stretch the visit for an extra weekend after the research is done
>
>
>
Whether it's ok or not depends on the administration of the university which refunds the flight: if it's your host's, ask them; if it's yours, ask your university administration.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: We often invite people to our institute, and it's not at all unusual for them to bring their girlfriend/boyfriend/family with them. This is never a problem - we're often asking them to come a long way, and it would feel strange not to accommodate their personal ties as much as possible. I imagine other institutes are similar - certainly no-one should be surprised if you ask, and I would be surprised if it caused a problem.
I would also ask about extending the visit to cover the weekend. Sometimes institutions have bureaucratic rules that can affect their ability to pay for your flights if you do that, so it's worth making sure that's not the case here. I don't think it's an unusual thing to want to do, so again they won't be surprised if you ask, and they will probably be apologetic if it's not possible.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The most important thing is to ask in advance.
Often, administration works by the principle that anything that reduces the cost is okay with them. They might even accept a flight arriving a day earlier or leaving later if it is documented to be cheaper (this mostly works if a weekend is inbetween - a flight arriving wednesday, leaving friday is usually more expensive than one returning on sunday because of business travelers. Usually the night sat-sun is reducing the price). Similarly, splitting a double room usually reduces cost (and you might not even need a double room - if its a single bed double occupancy, they might pay it completely, or minus breakfast).
The tricky part is knowing in advance what documentation is required (e.g. a screenshot of the booking site, comparing best fares).
Often they won't expect you to be around every night, in particularly when visiting a research group: many members will want to spend the evening with their families, too (this is different on a conference, where almost everybody is not local; it is advisable to join the events there for networking). I have been on a number of trips where I was on my own at night.
But consider that you'll both have a different experience if you spend most of your day separated. Sometimes it may be nicer if e.g. you arrive a week earlier for your research, and after completing work, you spend a second week (or even just the weekend) of vacation together. Then it's a true shared experience. Otherwise, she'll be seeing a lot of places and things that you did not. And she might not want to go to all these places a second time with you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Being a PhD student/candidate is quite different from having earned one's PhD...There are some who would see such behaviour as presumptuous, bordering on entitlement--regardless of the student's motivation. The time allotted to you is to get to know you, your behaviour, ability to interact with a number of people, professional and ancillary, in as many situations as possible...it's their dime.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/16
| 505
| 2,330
|
<issue_start>username_0: For most of the undergraduate courses I teach, I also prepare lecture notes and students usually buy a printed copy at a copy shop at the university. Sometimes I think it might be beneficial for the lecture notes if I include additional material which I might not cover in the course.
Is it ethical to add additional material if most of the students will buy a printed copy and the price will go up due to the additional pages? Does it make a difference if the material is available as a pdf in the course's page in a learning management system?<issue_comment>username_1: As long as it's your material or you have a license to reproduce it, you may include whatever additional material you want. Since you're not going to grade or test on it, you're ethically covered as long as you have the right to reproduce the material in question.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It is very thoughtful of you to be concerned with the increased costs to your students; indeed, professors should be aware of and sensitive to such issues. At the same time, it is important not to go overboard with such concerns. As an educator, your primary concern should be to provide the students with the materials that *you* feel they need. That can legitimately include material that you are not planning to cover in the course but feel would be beneficial to at least a reasonable number of students. When weighing the benefit of this extra material against the increased cost of 1-2 euros to purchase the lecture notes, personally I feel that the educational benefit wins out against the fairly negligible amount of money involved. So yes, I would say it is ethical.
As for distributing the extra material online for free, sure, that would work as well, but would probably send a signal to most of the students that this material is not important and should be ignored, and would dilute the pedagogical value of making the material available to the students.
Finally, note that my answer may be different if you personally were making a profit from the inclusion of the extra material. In that case there would be a clear conflict of interest that would warrant, at the very least, a good deal of extra caution and perhaps rethinking your entire approach to distributing course material.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/16
| 689
| 3,008
|
<issue_start>username_0: Say I have a deep knowledge of an advanced technical topic, and have written a book on such a topic. Though this book does not contain any original research ideas, it is a well written and thorough treatise on a technical topic that is relevant in both academia and industry.
Would writing (and hopefully publishing) such a book help with PhD admissions, or do admissions committees generally only care about research publications (as far as publications go -- obviously they care about recommendations, grades, etc in addition to research)?
If the book were published with a major publisher such as [O'Reilly Media](http://www.oreilly.com/), would this make a difference?<issue_comment>username_1: Certainly it would be a plus---even a good technical blog or a nice portfolio of posts on SE can be helpful. It speaks to your level of sophistication and interest in the subject. One can tell a lot about scientific maturity by reading someone's expository works---it betrays the way one thinks about things and can also give an indication of scientific awareness.
At least some of your letter writers should be familiar with the book and be impressed with it. If you're lucky, some faculty at places you're applying may also be familiar with it as well.
For me, publishing with a well-known publisher would make a little stronger first impression (the publisher can lend the book a little credibility), but really what the letters say about it, or how the book reads if I decide to look at it myself (which is much easier for open access books) is much more important. (Note: open access books or online notes can actually get wider circulation in academia than traditionally published books.)
This is not to say that writing a technical book is a good way to get into a PhD program. It takes a lot of effort that could be put to other use if your only goal is to get a PhD. But if you already have one written, it would be silly not to mention it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Fundamentally, PhD programs are in the business of admitting and training academics, researchers, and teachers. In that sense, writing a technical book aimed a larger market won't be a substitute for a demonstrated interest and ability in scholarly work and research.
That said, publishing a "trade" book is solid sign that you can write well enough, that you're organized enough to complete a major project, and that you have a mastery of the technical field you have written about. These are all things that a potential graduate program will care about it.
For context, I wrote two technical books before I applied to graduate school and I think it was part of what helped me get accepted to a engineering program without an undergraduate degree in technical field. I did not use the book writing sample and I don't think anybody at any PhD program I applied to read it. In my case, the book compensated for what might have otherwise been a hole in my CV.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/16
| 1,362
| 6,275
|
<issue_start>username_0: Why are schools offering software development degrees as opposed to computer science? Are computer science degrees not as good for software development jobs as the software development degrees? I see companies advertise jobs that say they want a computer science degree or related. Also, some companies won't accept any less than a computer science or computer engineering degree. I've never seen one company say that they want to hire someone with a software development degree. I know that "software development" is related, but what I think these companies mean by "or related" is math, physics, engineering, etc...<issue_comment>username_1: Some universities offer courses for software development as a specialization to computer science, while others offer it as a separate degree. There is not really much of a difference concerning the final result. Even when it is a separate degree, it would certainly count as "computer science or related", and most probably even as "not (...) any less than computer science or computer engineering" - after all, that is what it is, just with a different name. Even when a job ad says they only want computer science graduates, that doesn't mean people whose major was called *cybernetics*, *games engineering*, *information technologies*, or any of the other imaginative names universities introduce for one reason or another are excluded.
Coming back to whether software development is a specialization of the main CS degree or a separate degree, the main differences are:
* **from the university's point of view:** Specializations are often more modular in that students may choose only a subset of the classes in the specialization offered, and also take classes from other specializations. Professors from the respective topics might feel certain specializations deserve some more focused attention, in the form of a compulsory set of classes for anyone who chooses that specialization, or also by requiring specialized projects that couldn't be embedded into the normal CS major, and thus make it a separate degree.
* **from the students' point of view:** While studying, chances are classes for a separate degree concerning a subtopic like software development are more efficiently connected to each other, as prerequisites can be expected more reliably. A single CS degree with specialization classes, on the other hand, gives students more flexibility to mix topics. After studying, a dedicated major for a specific subtopic might sound a bit more convincing when conveying in an interview that the student is knowledgeable about the subtopic than just saying "I was in a generic CS major and also attended some classes on subtopic X".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There is widespread confusion and lack of clarity in education when it comes to "computer science".
Formally, computer science is the rigourous study of information theory and other abstract notions; it would be better called "computing science". You're not likely to do any computer science in a real job unless you're doing computing research, though an understanding of some of the fundamentals is useful: in particular, some of the less rigourous parts of computer science may be seen to include algorithms and data structures, an understanding of which is almost always a job requirement.
However, [the "computer science" course offered in many universities is often in fact a software development/engineering/programming course](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/61975/12378), with very little theory and instead a focus on actually creating computer software. I posit that these courses are misnamed but it's so widespread as to be unavoidable.
In a University that offers both Computer Science and Software Engineering courses, I recommend taking the latter if you want to become a professional software developer. That being said, it's impossible to predict what some arbitrary company is really asking for on their job description. You'd really have to ask them, or just wing it.
In a University that offers only a Computer Science course, read its syllabus as you will probably find that it's *really* a Software Engineering course anyway, or is a mix of both disciplines and will still be useful to you in all likelihood.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: My favorite description of *computer science* comes from [<NAME>](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hal_Abelson):
>
> "[Computer science] is not really about computers -- and it's not about computers in the same sense that physics is not really about particle accelerators, and biology is not about microscopes and Petri dishes...and geometry isn't really about using surveying instruments. Now the reason that we think computer science is about computers is pretty much the same reason that the Egyptians thought geometry was about surveying instruments: when some field is just getting started and you don't really understand it very well, it's very easy to confuse the essence of what you're doing with the tools that you use."
>
>
>
In other words, *computer science* is about **computation**, procedural knowledge about how we can methodically calculate and operate on information.
*Software development* is the application of computer science concepts and resultant technologies to build software systems.
Another analogy that I like is this:
>
> Chemistry => computer science
>
>
> Chemical engineering => software development
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There is no right or wrong answer in a way if you are asking with concerns about financial viability.
Software development and computer science are extremely broad subjects.
Try to upscale the resolution of what you intend to do. Do you want to develop videogames?
Do you want to work on AI or research into new ways of machine learning?
Do you want to develop video-editing software?
I could go on.
However I think it will be useful if you base the decision you want to make off of what you actually want to do first, and once you know the answer to that, you can research both fields, talk to people who study it, or professionals in the field, and from a well-rounded and properly informed position make your choice.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/16
| 905
| 3,743
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I am doing a PhD for nearly 3 years now. I am self-funding my PhD, and I think I already have enough work for my PhD (in Mech. Engineering).
I have 4 papers already published in ISI and Scopus conference proceedings, and one journal paper submited. Apart from that, I have another 2 conference papers published.
In my country I am able to defend a thesis without a supervisor. I am thinking of dropping out and doing this due to the fact that my supervisor claims he needs 2-3 years to review my thesis.
How can I know if my thesis has enough quality and results quantity? Any tips on how to evaluate that? I would like to drop only when I have enough results. Or is there any thesis review service?<issue_comment>username_1: Programs vary in their requirements but I know of places where it takes a minimum of 4 years no matter who you are. If your fast, you sit and wait just because nobody can finish until they have been in the program x number of years.
I do not know if this is how things work at your institution. Given your track record and brisk publishing ability you might be moving too fast for your advisor and the tradition of the institution. His comment of taking 2-3 years might be an indirect way of saying "slow down" and "who do you think you are?"
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It would be helpful if you had specified the country. The typical lengths of PhD vary a lot, from 3years in parts of Europe to 7 years in parts of US. I have also never heard of a system where you can ask for a defence without a supervisor, usually she/he is the main person coordinating everything.
Having said that, given that your supervisor seems to be suboptimal (and no, even if he thinks you need to slow down, he should tell you to slow down rather than say I need 2 years to read your thesis), I would:
a) Look into changing advisor
b) Have someone local in the system have a look at your thesis and material and decide: conditions vary enormously from field to field and from system to system
c) Make sure you are not egregiously fast. If average time is 5 years and you want to submit in 3 years as no-supervisor deal, it just calls for trouble to ask me. However, if the standard is 3 years and you are ready after three years and someone else thinks you are ready, go for it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: First, get the examiners' guidelines/criteria in which all PhD theses are evaluated against. From that you can gauge whether you have done enough.
Second, does your university have a person that is responsible or 'take care' of research students (other than your supervisor)? e.g., the person you go to if your relationship with your supervisor turns sour and you need a new supervisor. If so, go to him/her and ask what you can do. The best option would be to find an experienced staff member in a similar area to evaluate your thesis.
By the way, based on what you said about your supervisor, he/she doesn't seem to have your best interest at heart. 2-3 years to read a thesis? Come on. Looks like he/she is trying to keep you around to pump out papers.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: You obtain your PhD when you show you are capable of performing independent research.
You have already >1 paper published, chances you published them out of pure luck is negligible, if you are able to thread a story across the papers and if you know the fundamental knowledge&state-of-art needed to produce the papers, you are good to go, even if your papers'results are already obsolete.
Keep in mind that in many places you can do a cumulative thesis, where you prepare an introduction chapter and then you collate the papers you wrote in a certain timeframe.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/16
| 1,627
| 6,900
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a high school student who is interested in mathematics. As such I have been emailing several professors from prominent universities. I have been running into trouble when trying to figure out what their research is from their websites (it's either way too specific and jargon-filled, or so general I can't find anything good to ask them.) Would it be a good idea to just plainly say: "I see you research 'area in math.' Would you mind telling me what specifically your research entails?"?<issue_comment>username_1: Some professors are open to interested/enthusiastic students. However, they are busy people. If you want them to spend their time with you, you have to give them a starting point that gives them something specific to start from, not some generic "tell me what you do".
Better to check out what you would be interested in (e.g. robotics, quantum physics, topology, or whatever), read up on that, and then find a friendly lecturer at a local college who covers that material. If there are none, then you could contact a prof, but be specific with your question, and do not waste their time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I advise you to put yourself in the shoes of the professors reading your emails. Why would they answer you? What's in it for them? They explain mathematics for a living, so your request is a bit like asking a barber you aren't friends with to cut your hair for free.
It's great that you want to learn about math research, but with due respect, you can't understand the specifics of most math research. Not because you aren't smart enough, but because it's written in a language that takes years to learn. It is (or can be) possible to communicate some of the ideas behind a piece of research math to nonexperts, but this is a difficult thing to do, and most researchers aren't inclined to try. This is unfortunate, and it would be nice if there were more resources out there for laymen who want to get a sense of what math research is all about, but emailing professors out of the blue is not the way to go about this.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: As a suggestion, when it comes to math, I would highly advise looking up other resources. A few things I could recommend:
1. Slide decks: How they communicate their work to peers. Or, even better, the slide decks that they use to present their work to grant sponsors who aren't necessarily experts in their field.
2. Websites: These should summarize their goals and general field of work, and should also be more accessible.
3. MS Student Theses: Masters' theses from their students will often be more accessible, since they often cover a lot of background that established experts take for granted and don't bother covering in much detail. Or, in other words, they're worse papers, but the redundant/useless information could be useful to you.
4. Wikis: Honestly, lots of commonly-used advanced math (at least for stats and machine learning) is on the web. While it won't show you the novel aspects that a given professor is working on, it will help fill in the baseline information. Otherwise, it would be like asking a professor who designs steering wheels what he does, but without even knowing about the existence of cars.
5. MOOCs: Try out EdX or other free online courses that are for introductions to advanced math that are interesting. Some of these are geared very much toward people in your position.
These are often vastly more accessible than the published papers, which tend to be for a narrow audience. For example, during grad school I once leafed through an optimization algorithm paper off and on for a few days to grasp the novelty of the approach. After a bit, I finally figured out from the math and supporting papers that the prior approach used a shrinking n-dimensional ellipse, while the new one was a shrinking rectangle. Which was not stated outright in the text *anywhere* in the ~15 page manuscript. A single slide with 2D or 3D depiction of each approach would have made the concept very clear.
Finally, it seems like you would be much better off looking into high-school research experiences where you'd visit a lab for a few weeks. This would give you a much better idea about what to pay attention to. MOOCs are also an option for this.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: 1. Have a look at the chair's web site. The textual content is often outdated, but the list of publications is usually very up-to-date. You can also use academic search engines, such as citeseer or Google Scholar, to search for that professor's name. The abstracts and introductions of papers usually detail the field of research.
2. If available, you can also read the list of supervised student theses. These are frequently about current research topics at that chair.
3. Look at lecture material, slides and scripts, if they put it online. Lectures are often about the fundamentals of the research field of that chair. This way it is easier to judge whether you have the necessary foundation to understand the research topics.
4. If you can visit that university without too much hassle and have the time, you could also just visit a lecture by that professor. This makes it way easier to get in contact in person.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: With a little bit of poking around the Internet, you can find videos of lectures given by prominent mathematicians freely available online. For example, [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx-4MUKCMPg) is a video of <NAME> giving his Fields Medal lecture, where he gave an explanation of his work to a general mathematical audience. As another example, the [Arizona Winter School](http://swc.math.arizona.edu) is an instructional conference for graduate students, and they have posted videos of all their lectures for a long time. Most of them are quite good.
If you just want to get an idea of what leading researchers are working on, I think that watching videos might be more enlightening (and more entertaining) than trying to read papers.
In general, please don't send unsolicited e-mails to professors -- especially if you are choosing the recipients because they (or their universities) are famous. If you develop a particular interest in, and some understanding of, a subject area in contemporary research, then it may become okay to send unsolicited e-mails in certain circumstances. Also, if you want to seek a research mentor from a local university, then e-mails *might* get a positive response, especially if this university is *not* famous, and/or if you have a math teacher who is willing to write first and say you are exceptionally talented.
One famous mathematician told me that he gets a huge number of e-mails such as yours. He feels bad ignoring them, but he gets so many that if he tried to answer all of them it would leave him no time for research.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/04/17
| 374
| 1,614
|
<issue_start>username_0: I interviewed yesterday for a lecturer position at computer science. At the end of my interview, the Head of School asked me if I have any questions to ask them. This is my first time to interview, and I don't know what to ask, and just said to the HoS that ``I saw your research project on Youtube, and I was very interested in that topic, and is possible to have any future collaborations?'' I did see his research project on Youtube. However, I can feel that the HoS was not very happy. Maybe I screwed it up. Is this a sensitive question? Could anyone give me some suggestions on how to ask good questions? Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: One good question to ask is, "What is required for a new lecturer to succeed here?" and the likes. I've asked this myself and the Head of School was very eager to share with me the answer.
Asking people whether they would collaborate with you seems too early, as you will need to show them that you have something to offer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You should prepare a lot of questions in advance to the interview. Of course make sure that the questions are not answered on the website of the institute/university. During the interview have the list of questions ready and when you asked if you have any questions, either ask the remaining questions that haven't been answered already or say
>
> I think that all questions I had have already been answered.
>
>
>
However, I do not have a really good generic general question - I think that the good questions are specific for the place that interviews you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/17
| 2,316
| 9,712
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently declined a really good PhD offer in the US for another offer from an American university and I'm terribly regretting it now.
I made my decision on the 15th of April and it's past deadline now. I really want to go to the other school and since the 15th of April was the last working day, I'm hoping that they haven't offered my position to any other aspirant yet. I know this is ethically wrong but I feel miserable about my decision and want to contact the university and ask them if they can still accommodate me.
As far as the other university is concerned I have only accepted their offer through an email and haven't formally been given the final offer letter yet. Should I go ahead with this?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have much experience of US PhD programs, but in the UK it would be quite likely that the place you declined would have been offered to the next candidate almost immediately after you declined it. Again from a UK perspective, it would also give a somewhat unfavorable impression that you declined and then changed your mind. A potential worry for the University making the offer would be that you might change your mind again at a later point.
You don't mention your reasons for declining the offer the first time, I would reflect on these before doing anything further or in haste.
Having said all that, if after reflection you still feel that it was a mistake to decline the offer, I would suggest informally contacting the University where you declined the offer and asking if there is any possibility for you to change your mind. If you don't ask, you'll never know.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You had a reason to decline. Has the reason evaporated? Why are you changing your mind? You should need to have a good response for that, both for yourself as well as to the place you apply to. As a superviser, I had students changing mind back and fro, which I understand - it's a big decision, and not all information may be available. However, keep in mind that your originally offered position, as stated elsewhere, may have been already given to someone else.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Do try contacting the department, or if you can't, contact your prospective adviser if you know who that is. I believe I have heard of students in the U.S. who have made such a mistake and then reversed it through contacting the department.
Departments who care will not have chosen their students lightly -- they will have put in a *ton* of effort on the students that have been accepted and will *want* them to come.
So if all that stands between you joining them is 1 click, they'll probably help you fix the mistake.
Note that I would *not* contact the *university* for a Ph.D. admissions matter -- the department plays a heavy role and has a lot of power and a lot more incentive to make this happen for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Dude I am an old guy and here is my advice:
* Never be shy to ask for things you *don't* know.
* Accept the fact that you are an imperfect being. You made mistakes, and will make mistakes.
* Be open to hear others views, and take moment to digest their words to fully understand their perspective.
Therefore it is totally normal to email the university back with *full honesty* and tell them that you changed your mind.
**BUT** before you do that, think twice, thrice or even more. You have already done a mistake for being too quick. Don't be too quick again. At least learn.
To me it seems that maybe you are unstable and change your mind too quickly. Let me blame you a bit: before deciding too quickly, why didn't you just email them back and simply ask "I would appreciate some time to think. Could you please let me know the deadline for my response? Thanks."?
**Lesson #1** when you are at a point in time where you need to make a choice, usually the *best* decision to evaluate and perform is the following:
* Evaluate if it's possible to *postpone* the decision (you might need to ask questions to ensure whether it's possible to postpone the decision).
* If it's possible to *postpone*, then postpone it so that you have more time to think and make a better decision.
Of course, some times it is not possible to postpone a decision because time matters. That's why you need to first evaluate the possibility (or even more accurately: the *cost* associated with postponing it; if the cost is low, and the value from a more reliable decision is high, then dude postpone it!).
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_5: I declined a PhD offer from one university and accepted an offer from another. It was a very difficult decision and I later regretted it (and still do). It made my whole experience of the PhD quite miserable because I regretted my decision. You are making a commitment to spend several years of your life in one place. It is not an easy decision. I would just ask. I think people will understand.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: You can certainly ask.
You say yourself the program is very desirable. Surely you are not the only one they admitted, and they have a whole list of backup applicants that have been waiting with bated breath for someone to reject the offer. Now that you have, the school would try to promptly notify the person on the waitlist, and that person would reply very quickly that, yes, they'd love to take up the offer. From what I recall, PhD applications are very competitive at the top schools and the stakes are high for applicants.
If the waitlister did indeed reply and and accept the offer, then your ship has definitely sailed. The university cannot go to the person they just said they'd admit, and say, "whoops, nevermind, we're not admitting you after all, go ask the other school you just rejected to take you back". The outrage and loss of reputation would be far greater than telling you "sorry, should have thought about that before rejecting our offer" (though they'll use much nicer language than me, I'm sure).
The offer of admission, and acceptance of that offer (or rejection for that matter) is often considered legally binding. While it rarely makes sense for anyone to actually go to court over something like this, in practice that adds additional gravity and friction to the decision. That is to say, there is a very narrow time window from the time you reject their offer to the time the next applicant on the list takes your spot, and if you miss that window you are almost certainly out of luck. The best you can do is hope to be waitlisted, but even that is doubtful - both due to time, the fact that universities often dislike applicants who reject them, and also that in rejecting their offer you reduce your own desirability as a candidate (who knows, if you changed your mind once you can change it again).
What if you hit this very narrow window? There's two possibilities:
* If you tell them you changed your mind after they send the email to the waitlister, but before the waitlister replies, I would say your chances are almost as slim. As I said, the offer cannot be easily withdrawn, unlike your asking to renegotiate, which can very easily be refused with no real consequence.
* If you tell them before they take any action, ie. before they tell the waitlister, then you might have a chance. It comes down to whether that particular program will hold your indecision against you. Some are understanding, because everyone knows the decision is hard and stressful. Some don't want students with even the slightest hint of not being absolutely committed.
On the one hand, you let them know on the 15th, so even the deadline has passed. In theory, all the decisions should have been finalized by now and it's too late for any do-overs. In practice, there's always a few programs that are late, I've heard of people on waitlists linger on into May and then get an offer after all. In addition, it was technically the weekend, so if you send an email now, they should see it first thing in the morning tomorrow... Assuming they don't decide to keep working over the weekends - again, something which while a huge factor, you cannot possibly know.
So in conclusion, it's a bit of gamble with long odds. Can you ask? Sure you can. Should you ask? Well you don't really lose much, so I'd say go ahead and try. Hell go buy a lottery ticket too while you're at it, you never know. But I'd say, whatever you do, don't go to the school you have accepted instead and tell them you won't be attending until you've got a concrete yes from the one you want.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: There are a lot of questions, especially on academia, that only exist because the person asking the question has completely overthought the problem. It seems a lot of people in academia tend to do that, rather than using 'gut feel' or 'common sense'.
Now deep down I think you know that this question is just an excuse to postpone what you know you have to do.
I can answer a lot of questions on this site very simply - be OPEN and HONEST with the university. If you are really regretting not taking their offer and deep down you really want to, but you feel guilty for doing so, THEN TELL THEM THAT. Tell them EXACTLY what you wrote in your question.
How do I say this...? Be open and honest. What if my boss thinks this...? Be open and honest. But what if...? Be open and honest. Don't walk on eggshells around everyone - get to the point.
Being honest and open takes balls because when we are not used to opening up to people and being vulnerable it scares us. You are worried about integrity. Integrity is about being honest, open and vulnerable.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/04/17
| 3,628
| 15,000
|
<issue_start>username_0: According to the [***research paper***](http://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/65/11/1088), where the comparison of postdocs in China and US was done, there are several global cons of Chinese postdoctoral positions, like low sallary and lack of permanent jobs. But, what are the other unofficial problems I could face if I go to China?
First, I really recommend everyone who is interested in postdocs to read this article - Postdocs in Science: A Comparison between China and the United States (November 2015) [(link to pdf)](http://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/65/11/1088.full.pdf+html).
After it, I turned my search vector to China and found the position in good academic institution. I have my own subjective reason to go there and the pros are clear for me. However, I worried about any hidden specifics of Chinese science. For instance, my position is only for European researcher and it was opened at the institution’s web page during last 2 years. If Chinese postdoc is still not very attractive for foreigners, why is so (except money)?
Moreover, China has very old traditions and they probably influence at scietific ethic and standards.
This will be my first postdoc, therefore, could you please share with me your experience and knowledge regarding unpleasant specifics of Chinese science.
\*Possible topics:
collaborations and attending conferences (local and abroad);
grants and project I can apply for (local and foreign);
duties and demands (help from colleagues or PhD student);
tangible and intangible benefits and attitude to scientists (see [Laowai](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laowai)).
Some questions have been already discussed here:
* [What is the average postdoctoral salary in
China?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/43260)
* [Is it possible to study in China without knowing
Chinese?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/34837)
PS: I also will be very greateful if you mention the possible solution for a problem (maybe add some point to my contract).<issue_comment>username_1: I'm doing a postdoc in computer science at Nankai University, Tianjin, China. You've asked about the negatives, but I first want to point out that I love living in China (my friends talk about how they should visit China one day; I live here!). It's not perfect, but it's not nearly as bad as made out on Western media. And I feel physically safer here than I do in any other country.
Some items that might be of concern:
* Culture shock. Have you been to China before? Because wow! It's a shock when you're new. I recommend visiting (e.g. for 3 months) before taking up a job here. Things you'll need to get used to: chopsticks, squat toilets, pollution, crowds, haggling, real Chinese food, the great firewall (e.g. Facebook, Google, Dropbox are blocked), crossing the road, finding clothes that fit, fighting over the bill, people pushing in front of you, traffic. A lot of the time, you won't really know what's going on because it was explained to you in Chinglish. At other times, things won't make sense because they're just done differently in China.
* Low salary (by international standards--well paid by Chinese standards). But the university should cover accommodation (so no bills to pay), and cost of living is next to negligible (as long as you eat the local food; Western food incurs Western prices).
* Language barrier. Even if your colleagues all speak English, you will need to do things like buying food, taking taxis, etc., which will require some level of Chinese (unless you want to disturb your colleagues repeatedly). You might end up misunderstanding important things (e.g. your salary level) because it was explained to you in broken English. Also, how good are you at pronouncing Chinese names (your future co-authors names)?
* Medical care. Forget having privacy; expect to explain your medical conditions in front of maybe 5 other patients. Oh, and probably one of your work colleagues will need to translate for you, and help you buy medicines. (It helps if you know someone who's a doctor.)
* Loneliness. All of your friends will probably be through work. They will go off and spend time with their family and friends, or go back to their accommodation, and you'll be left alone. You'll be a kind of outsider, and people might be too shy to invite you to events, even though you are lonely. (From my perspective, this is the worst aspect of living in China.)
* Proofreading papers. You're probably going to get asked to proofread/polish a whole bunch of papers.
* Administration. In order to get a work permit, there's a lot of forms to fill in. You'll need a "foreign experts certificate", a "work certificate", and there's a medical check and an interview. Many forms will be in Chinese (and your colleagues will likely need to fill these in for you).
* Grants: There's also special grants for foreigners: Research Fellowship for International Young username_2s (which I'm on currently), and the 1000 Talents Program.
* No fixed address. When people ask me for my address, it's hard to explain to them I don't actually have one. (E.g. I'll stay in some random hotel for the next few weeks, then I travel to some country, and will stay in some other random hotel.) I essentially live out of a suitcase.
* Hard work. People in China seem to work much longer hours than in Western countries. (E.g. I'm in the office virtually every day, including weekends, from morning to night.)
* Team work. China is the country of people power. Everyone in our lab helps out everyone else, and we end up with papers with many authors.
* LGBT? Don't be too obvious about it and virtually nobody will care.
* Religious? For my postdoc, a government official told me that it's okay to have and practice a religion, but not to preach religion. (Easy for me; I'm not religious.)
* Vegetarian? It's tricky completely avoiding meat; it's easiest to just accept that you'll occasionally end up with meat. (You'll probably need to get used to tofu and spicy food, if you're not already.)
* Woman? Expect groups of men (typically construction workers and gardeners) to stare at you, making you very uncomfortable. Also, some Chinese men will think of you as "exotic". (Oh, and I can't find anywhere to get my eyebrows tinted.)
* Man? You'll probably be requested to drink (lots) at celebrations, dinner meetings, and so on.
* Bathrooms are disgusting. Knock before opening the stall door (if there is a door)---it most likely doesn't lock and if you open it without knocking, you might interrupt someone (and you need to say "you ren" = "has person" if someone knocks on your door). You'll need to get used to squat toilets and carrying around your own toilet paper.
* People are less uptight about things. E.g. people will compare skin colors; males will have pictures of sexy women on their computer; movie and software piracy is not a big deal (even on the lab computers). Things that are not really appropriate in Western countries.
* Other things: Random people will take photos with you (or of you). Fresh milk is difficult to find. Coffee is poor quality and expensive. It's hard to get decent wine. Don't drink the tap water.
The things you ask about (but I don't have a general answer):
* Collaborations. It's a bit embarrassing having to ask for letters of invitation from colleagues. Other than that, it's been real easy for me to travel.
* Conferences. It's easiest for me to go to conferences as the professors are too busy, and I don't need a visa for most places. I travel *a lot*.
* Duties. They're trying to make me associate professor here; which will require teaching a course. I have no idea how I'm going to do that.
* Attitude to scientists. Held in high esteem, although you might be mistaken for a foreign student if you're young looking. The public won't be able to understand what a "postdoc" is, though (it's easier to say "teacher").
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I know this question is dated thus likely the OP Artem has finished his/her Postdoc contract long ago. But I will leave some comments as well, as a westerner (from a 3rd world country, engaged to a foreigner) finishing a 2-year-old postdoc contract in South of China.
Rebecca's answer above is quite complete and fills most of the points, however some aspects may change depending on the local institution traditions and the candidate's background. This is why I emphasised the where I am in China and the fact that I come from a western 3rd world country, along with marital status.
Pros: China has great food, fantastic scenery, rich and deep culture and knowledge. Thus life in China will be anything but bland. Still nowadays a foreigner attracts considerable attention and interest, thus there will always be someone willing to help and get friendly. Academics are very respected in Asia, thus a postdoc should expect cordiality and polite treatment essentially everywhere. Criminality is almost zeroed, especially against foreigners. Stealing is rare, and people are relaxed about taking care of their belongings. In spite of officially a dictatorship there is a lot of individual freedom in China, as long as one is no activist. Likely the greatest positive aspect for a postdoc, getting a job in China is currently quite easy for anyone willing to embrace the culture, particularly open-minded foreign PhDs.
Cons: Local culture is not open nor flexible, meaning you are expected to accept local ways all times and gradually conform to or adopt the Chinese way of life. This tends to overwhelm foreigners so that most end up living in an expat bubble and eventually leave. As mentioned, salaries are usually lower and quite often there is a catch behind salary discounts. Communication is a major issue not only because of language barrier but actually mainly because most people in Mainland China imply statements and suggest contexts instead of uttering their minds directly. Assertiveness is often perceived as arrogance and blunt statements can easily offend. Because of their unique and inbred culture, Chinese nationals get easily offended (people say they are "glass-hearted") and in the counterpart cannot understand/accept what could offend a foreigner. There is a strict hierarchy in almost any form of communication which is hard to abide to as a foreigner with a democratic mindset. Scamming and lying are quite common and culturally acceptable depending on the context (meaning quite often others will not have you complaining about it). Face and clan cultures are not easy for just everyone to swallow. Local work culture pressures on posing all times, thus locals will pretend to work literally everyday from early morning into the night, and will post hardworking-related status updates on social media... even if they do not really work much. The internet feels like Truman's Show and workarounds are unstable, troublesome, and expensive.
I will quickly summarise what makes me very happy in China and what drives me nuts.
I feel in heaven while eating and shopping as prices are low, variety skyrockets, and quality is overall quite good. I feel physically safe at all times as long as I am wary of where I thread. Finding solitude isn't hard and I can have a mind of my own. Nature is still here and looks beautiful. The written characters are gorgeous, the language doesn't sound too bad, in every corner there is something new to learn. My friends are reliable and always willing to help, and I want to keep them forever. The concept of social peace is central to Chinese society, thus conflicts and uncomfortable situations are avoided whenever possible. I feel growing quickly as a person and culturally. Clearly the country is developing at unrecorded speed through adopting strategies which are unknown to most foreign governments.
I get desperate and think of running to the airport every time I find myself unable to send/read an email or paper, or the Skype call won't work. I bought a local LeNovo computer which turned out to be a nightmare because of language/system/connection settings which refuse to be changed plus a patchwork of hardware issues still surfacing. In the lab most of the time I feel frustrated and baseline angry because I cannot easily make myself understood in too many different areas (requests, reasoning, questions, acts, etc), resulting in my generally avoiding communication. [Trivial examples. There is no equipment maintenance, nor routine of cleaning and organisation; nobody cares. Details which are usually not important: statistics; concentrations; temperature & humidity conditions; precision; light:dark regularity; brands; purity; reproducibility; authorship criteria. Nobody is responsible nor knows about anything unless when given an order.] I have had payment conflicts from the day of my arrival, and of such complexity that would feel a monograph -- at the end I hope leaving in a civilised manner with at least 80% of the agreed salary. I am never comfortable, be at home or at work, as rooms are generally cluttered and dirty (all shared) with some degree of structural damage and pests are a constant nuisance. (Mosquitoes, cockroaches, sometimes a rat.) Authorships are locally exchanged like handshakes, and my adamant refusal to join in the club has generated tension also from day one. I must add that advisors/supervisors see themselves as emperor thus expect being covered in flattery and papers from just sporadically sitting at their desks/thrones. The university administration has provided null help for any official procedure, including translations and health/police certifications (they didn't know what should be done or where), and they will not have me asking them questions about unstable salary pay. Finally, I mentioned my friends are gold, yet jewels are indeed rare: almost everyone approaching me is openly seeking language favor, authorships or marriage, and that might get delicate when involving some expectation of a hierarchy.
I believe some of the mentioned aspects are highly dependent on circumstances, as follows: I believe US citizens (normally given top VIP treatment in China) and Europeans would have no issues with salary pay nor quality of accommodation; Western provinces or regions near Mongolia are regarded as not so safe; faculty administration is said to be more professional in the most highly developed centres such in Beijing, Nanjing, Hangzhou; there is a strong stigma against anyone who does any drugs excepting alcohol; aggressive/impolite types may find it harder to make friends and adapt; someone willing to marry a Chinese partner will culturally and socially adapt much more smoothly.
Sorry if too long. I hope my description enables someone to decide whether China is what they are searching for. I would have greatly appreciated reading about these points before coming -- I would have not decided otherwise but would have taken many specific precautions.
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/04/17
| 543
| 2,477
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got review reply with three reviewers comments. Most of them are workable. I can address them while revising the manuscript. However, one reviewer is asking much more work, and based on my understanding, I feel that can be a another work. Thus, I want to politely answer that query with proper reasons. However, I am wondering if there is any formal way to address this issue?
I can say that, we totally agree with the reviewer's concern. However, this study which itself is a novel work, is a part of our future work.<issue_comment>username_1: One thing to make clear at the outset: it is the *editor* who controls whether your paper is published or not. Your task is to convince the editor, not necessarily the reviewer, that your paper merits publication.
Most editors will not blindly require you to implement all the reviewer's suggestions to get the paper published. After all, it's not like the reviewer necessarily knows *better* than you do what is going to make your paper publishable. (If multiple reviewers all make the same suggestion, that's a different story and an editor will put more weight on that.)
If you have a good reason not to do something suggested by a reviewer, you can not do it and point out in your response to the editor why you made that decision. The important thing is to make it clear that you didn't simply decide to ignore part of the reviewer's report. If you're going to avoid implementing any of their recommendations, you do need to justify it. It then falls to the editor to decide whether the paper is still publishable without that particular suggestion being implemented.
I'd add that saying that an addition to the paper would be too large and would justify an entire followup study on its own is a valid response. Even a reasonably common one, I would think. Reviewers haven't done the research themselves; they don't know how much work an extension would take, and if you say it would be too involved, there's a pretty good chance the editor believes that you know better than the reviewer on that point.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: What's sometimes worked for me is to e-mail the editor noting the conflicting demands of the referees and saying what you propose to do and asking if that would be OK? Depending on the circumstances I have also asked if doing X is a requirement for publication, and I have withdrawn or resubmitted depending on the response.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/17
| 327
| 1,347
|
<issue_start>username_0: What is the difference between hours carried and hours earned on a college degree audit. For example, I have this:
```
LSU Totals: 68 carr, 60 earn
Cum Totals: 77 carr, 69 earn
```
Can anyone explain to me how to interpret these 4 pieces of information individually? I can't find a direct answer on the internet and it's important for me to understand the difference for accuracy on applications. Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: If you want an authoritative answer, contact your university's registrar office. Terms like this are not completely standard around the world, so we can only guess as to what they mean at your institution.
I would guess "carried" counts all the classes you have taken, but "earned" counts only those which you have passed. So on the first line, the extra 8 hours might represent some classes that you failed, or that you are currently taking and have not yet completed. "LSU" probably counts only those hours corresponding to classes taken at LSU, while "Cum" (presumably standing for "cumulative") might also count classes transferred from other institutions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Rather than hours failed, 'hours carried' might be associated with courses that only give S/U grades - those related to classes you passed with a "S" (satisfactory).
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/17
| 382
| 1,742
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in a dilemma between 2 internship offers and would like to get some professional opinions here.
I'm an environmental engineering master's student (in US) and I have been professionally doing research during my studies, I have two offers for internships this summer:
1- Small startup company, started in Jan, 3 other people, environmental engineering position, opportunity to learn design and legal procedures.
2- Well established company, position in market research, want someone with technical background to provide an overview of global market for the product (by reading academic papers, market analysis and contacts)
With the assumption that none of the internships would turn into a full time job offer, which one do you think provides better opportunities in future (when applying for another job)?<issue_comment>username_1: If you want an authoritative answer, contact your university's registrar office. Terms like this are not completely standard around the world, so we can only guess as to what they mean at your institution.
I would guess "carried" counts all the classes you have taken, but "earned" counts only those which you have passed. So on the first line, the extra 8 hours might represent some classes that you failed, or that you are currently taking and have not yet completed. "LSU" probably counts only those hours corresponding to classes taken at LSU, while "Cum" (presumably standing for "cumulative") might also count classes transferred from other institutions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Rather than hours failed, 'hours carried' might be associated with courses that only give S/U grades - those related to classes you passed with a "S" (satisfactory).
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/18
| 1,075
| 4,859
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a friend who'll be attending a graduate program in Physics, at a school I would be interested in for when I am applying to grad schools. However, I'm a CS major, so I'd be applying for that.
My question is what can he do that would help at all in making my admission more likely? I know the research he'll be doing is interdisciplinary (Physics and CS) so he'll have some interaction with CS. As a first-year grad student, he won't have much weight, but I'm still curious.<issue_comment>username_1: There are a couple of places where your friend may be able to help you. First, some programs have admission committees that include a few graduate students from their own program. Depending on the culture in the program, the student involvement may range from administrative/paperwork assistance to direct evaluation of the applicants. Unfortunately this opportunity is usually not provided to a first year student (or a student outside the department, for that matter). Moreover, if your application is not strong already it's hard for your friend to argue for your case in front of the faculty even if he/she really wants to promote your application.
A second possibility is the interview. During the interview/recruitment weekend, student involvement is quite common. You may be assigned a student host who will walk you around and make sure that you make it to your interviews. During social events (such as dinners, poster sessions, etc) you also have a chance to talk with students in the program. Usually after the recruitment the program will solicit opinions/comments from the students. Thus given the already positive relation between you and your friend, he/she will likely give you favorable reviews after the recruitment, making an admission offer more likely. Unfortunately, this scenario will only help you if you can make it to the interview stage in the first place. But if you've already reached the interview stage, the program most likely will give you an offer anyway, providing that you don't do anything stupid during the interview. So overall the effect of having a friend in the program is minimal in this regard.
To sum up: it's better to work on your GPA, research experience, GRE, etc., rather than wasting time trying to find "shortcuts" like this.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It is highly unlikely that they would have any ability to directly influence your admission to any graduate program. It is plausible that they could help you indirectly, however. They could be helpful for the following:
* Scouting Professors/Labs: Finding out more about the interests and goals of the professors and labs that you would want to work with. This would help you tailor your application so that certain professors might be more likely to advocate for you, if they see a good fit for you in their lab.
* Gathering Comparisons: Talking to recent grad students admitted to the program and seeing if they wouldn't mind sharing their application packets, so you could see what a successful candidate looks like (and what factors seem to be valued).
* Informal Reference: If a professor who is reviewing your application packet has worked with your friend, they *might* ask them for some details about you. This is highly unlikely in your case, due to them being a new student and in a different department. I provided this kind of background once when my lab was evaluating an acquaintance of mine from my undergraduate program. It is fairly uncommon and would not sway the decision greatly.
Some of these things would have been more effective if they were performed earlier (e.g, gathering comparison CV's), since it gives you more time to beef up any weak spots that you have or to build on your strengths.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Depending on the school, one common question that is often asked is how likely is this student to accept our offer, particularly with fellowships. This is generally more an issue for the more middle of the road schools, especially ones in backwater locations. If this is the case, then anything you mention that indicates you have ties to the area can be helpful, because it signals more than just a passing interest in the school. In this context, your friend's presence there may be able to strengthen your application by helping you form a coherent argument as to why you want to attend that particular school.
For example, suppose you visited your friend at the school once for whatever reason. If that is true, mentioning that you have been to the school and liked something about the campus or whatever is helpful. If you have spent time at the school or the area for one reason or another and actually liked it, it is worth briefly including, because it helps to communicate your serious intent to relocate your life to that school.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/18
| 837
| 3,648
|
<issue_start>username_0: If wanting to end up in a specific graduate program at one university, but having had failures along early paths, like college dropouts, mediocre to good GPA and GRE, having become an adult/unconventional student, how can one still end up in the specific program of dreams? Would it help to collect experiences in neighbouring fields if the direct, focused approach fails? When should one just give up the dream of getting into a specific program, or even the whole field of studies?
Let's take scientific, non-engineering astronomy as example. If wanting to be admitted to a Master's and/or PhD program at a specific R1 level university, how would it be seen if having a thorough vocational industry education in optics manufacturing, an internship in electronics, astronomy as a hobby with serious nightly observing programs and submitted results, a half finished college degree in physics and a full degree in geology? Does a patchwork such as in this example have any advantage if having the bad luck of not having been able to succeed in first college attempts and thus being 10 to 15 years older than a typical college student?<issue_comment>username_1: When I started my PhD (R1 school in engineering), I shared my office with an older gentleman who was 12 years older than me, had an average GPA, been a structural engineer for 10-15 years or so, married with kids and extensive industry experience. He applied for 3 years in a row to the same university and only that university because he lived in that town and did not want to relocate (his kids were at school, his wife had a job too) and every time he would get rejected. At his fourth trail, he was accepted. He said that he was going to keep applying as much as needed! As far as I know, nothing has changed in his application from the third to the fourth year. The professor who agreed to support him has just got a project and needed somebody with technical experience (it was construction/material related).
I would say that getting to know the right people does not hurt! Maybe visit the department, introduce yourself and have short meeting with some professors. I noticed that many professors hold much respect for established industry people who want to go back to school. Although some feel it maybe a little risky as well. But, you never know if you do not ask or try. I do not think it is impossible, but maybe you would need to do some extra work to convince/explain your story/timing for such a decision.
I can also think of a scenario were if you work at a company that has an R&D department, maybe a collaboration between the company and school can open up a spot for you in a program. In this scenario, the company can provide the school with a proposal, pay fees and (raw) materials and the school can allocate the lab, equipment and an advisor to supervise you. You can work on such a project and get a degree at the end of the day. However, I'm not sure if this applicable to your case or if this something that happens often.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: More to the point than acceptability of your patchwork and unconventional background is how do you propose to address missing course requirements e.g., two semesters of quantum, thermal physics, etc (that you presumably did not take in the course of your geology program)? How would prepare you for the entrance exams upon acceptance, given that you haven't never had some of the subjects you will be tested on? Most important of all, what kind of research do you want to do and what special skills do you have to do it? What are you bringing to the equation?
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/18
| 216
| 795
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm assigning weights to different course assessments.
```
Assessment Weight
============================ ======
Assignments (best 5 of 8) 50%
Mid-term exam 20%
Final exam 30%
```
Is there a word or phrase for a grading scheme that counts the best m of n marks? Example: There are weekly assignments worth 10% each, the best 5 of 8 will be counted.<issue_comment>username_1: Only half serious, but you could try this:
>
> The last 5 [order statistics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_statistic) of the 8 assignments have a weight of 10% each.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I often see this expressed as "lowest x grades dropped," where x is n minus m.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/18
| 396
| 1,632
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am told that any changes in content beyond correction of small mistakes, like obvious wrong use of a term or typographics is not allowed. This makes sense to me.
Is this a common opinion or are there institutes somewhere where no chances at all are allowed?
Of course one can ask, why the alterations after acceptance of a thesis. But let's assume perfectionist reasons and in case one wants to show it to potential employers where some mistake might be embarrassing.<issue_comment>username_1: When I submitted my MSc thesis, I thought my thesis was perfect (English/vocab/grammar). Now, every time I go back and read a section or chapter, I find some mistakes/things I will never use if I'm to write it now! I'm sure this will always be the case since your writing style/opinion will evolve and change. The point is to try to be better in your current work (thesis, papers etc). I wouldn't bother going back to FIX stuff but rather to see how much I have become better!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Of course one can ask, why the alterations after acceptance of a thesis. But > let's assume perfectionist reasons and in case one wants to show it
> to potential employers where some mistake might be embarrassing.
>
>
>
This is actually pretty crucial. You should be aware that it is a possible warning sign (depending on the field). In my field I run away from students that wave their thesis around. It means that they didn't get it: the point of research is to do research and anything beyond minimum post-stapling papers together shows you're focusing on wrong things.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/18
| 1,856
| 7,860
|
<issue_start>username_0: My PhD supervisor has contributed 0% to my research and he even does not know the basics of my research. On the other hand, I have a collaborator from another university who has contributed significantly to my work. Now that the manuscript is ready to submit, my supervisor demands to be the second author, after me as the first author and before my collaborator. My colleagues recommended that I do whatever he asks because he can easily screw up my life for few years by delaying my graduation. The reason he claims for the second position is that my university pays my scholarship, not my collaborator's university.
I am confused and worried. I do not want to be unethical .... Any idea?
Just and update :
According to my university authorship guidelines
"Acquisition of funding, the collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, by themselves, DO NOT JUSTIFY authorship. "
But if I remind him the ethical issues, it's like a declaration of war!<issue_comment>username_1: Your supervisor sounds most unreasonable. "The reason he claims for the second position is that my university pays my scholarship not my colloborators's school." Perhaps you should add the president of your university as the second author. (Of course, **don't actually do that**: it would expose your supervisor's immature behavior in a very passive-aggressive way.)
My feeling is that given the callowness of your supervisor, you should consider yourself fortunate that you are first author. Isn't that what really matters? That's not a rhetorical question, because in my field ordering of authors is strictly alphabetical, but I don't know of a field in which being *second author* means much. So it may well be that your supervisor is just being petty without really harming any of your collaborators. Anyway, it seems to me that you have already discharged your ethical responsibilities by suggesting what you think is a good ordering of the coauthors. If the coauthors other than you disagree with the ordering among non-first-authors, isn't it really up to them? If your other coauthors are among the ones who are advising you to put Professor Immature as second author: under the circumstances, I would go with that. If on the other hand they object: well, of course they have that right, and they should hash it out with your supervisor.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with others that your advisor is somewhat despicable, but as a graduate student it is just not worth playing the hero. You should say to your collaborators: "Look, this guy wants to be a second author and there is not much I can do." and they will understand (they already seem to pretty understanding) and won't notch a minus to your name because it is not your fault. So just relax and don't behave like that once you get up the pole.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: There's an adage my supervisor told me when I had an issue with her. You heard this before it goes "don't bite the hand that feeds you".
Whoever controls the purse has the power. Getting lead is pretty good. If any body should be fighting it's the second and third author. It's better for you to stay out of this one.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: There may be a way out, depending on the journal that you intend to submit to. Some journals, such as those associated with the American Physical Society, have very clearly delineated ethical rules about who qualifies for authorship. As I recall, in those journals (e.g., Physical Review Letters) to not violate ethical considerations, authorship requires "substantial" participation. Your supervisor does not meet that requirement so, in principle, should not be among the authors.
However, no one on the reviewing end is going to ask pointed questions about who did what, so, in the end, it will depend on how far you are willing to stick out your neck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Authorship discussions should be had out in the open, as early as possible, as often as needed, and always with the involvement of all authors. While your advisor may or may not be correct in asking to be second named author, they are certainly not correct in pushing for this change without the knowledge of the third person involved. They are now putting you in a difficult position and they probably know it.
Hard to say what's best without knowing more about the situation (how is your relation in general? has authorship been discussed previously?). But one way to play it would be to just be honest about your own discomfort and say something like:
>
> "*Thanks for your suggestion, let's see how we can work this out. Given the involvement of X, I had assumed 2nd authorship would be fitting for them, and they may assume the same. So I feel a bit uncomfortable unilaterally pushing them back to 3rd position. If you think authorship should be renegotiated, it's probably best if we involve them in the discussion. That way everybody can speak for themselves.*"
>
>
>
Finally, authorship conventions differ a lot by field. In my field (cognitive science), last author usually implies "this is the lab the work was done in", so I am usually fine with final position for projects on which I am involved as an advisor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: In my field, Chem and EE, it was and is considered "normal" and ethical to list authors in the order of their contribution. In your specific case, I would list you first, your collaborator second, and always the advisor(in my case, major professor) last. it is then obvious who contributed what and in what amount. your "boss" gives you credibility, he is, after all, your advisor and your supporter. Once you graduate you will have plenty of opportunity to be the single author of papers you generate but you will find that the source of your funding may still desire recognition. Same rules apply.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: Since your advisor is asking you to convince the collaborators, just tell him that they disagree strongly and that you don't want to ruffle their feathers since "you'll work with them in the future." But you tried, oh, so very hard to convince them. Tweak as needed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: It sounds like you want to fight this, the best way is always through a lawyer.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: In my university authorship rules it's clearly mentioned that "Acquisition of funding, the collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, by themselves, DO NOT JUSTIFY authorship.
"
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: There are two issues that need to be addressed. The first is has your supervisor done enough to warrant authorship. While these rules depend slightly on field and journal, they are usually well documented and no field allows [gift authorship](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12030/what-are-the-minimum-contributions-required-for-co-authorship).
The second issue, assuming your supervisor has done enough to warrant authorship, is author order. As far as I know, the conventions of order are field depend and not generally well documented. If you are in a field that list authors based on contribution, then it is a difficult situation. As your coauthors are willing to accept the ordering, it is not a huge issue. One thing to consider is writing [author contribution statements](http://blogs.nature.com/nautilus/2007/11/post_12.html).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_11: All Australian universities adhere to the 'Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research'; you can search for this. This document spells out who can be co-authors. All universities should have a page on co-authorship policies. Perhaps you could kindly make your supervisor aware of such policies. Maybe then he/she will think twice.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/19
| 397
| 1,706
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was a former college instructor (as an adjunct), but ultimately left academia due to low pay. I have no intention of going back to academia any time soon (for a variety of personal and non-personal reasons). However, I am still interested **in** academia, and would sometimes write about interesting peer-reviewed papers on my own personal blog.
Would writing blog posts about current academic research be considered a form of participation within academia (without having to actually enter into the toxic and less-rewarding atmosphere of academia)?
I understand that I am talking to a 'non-academic' audience (and that there is a difference between popular literature and academic literature), but I would also be helping promote academic literature while also providing critical commentary on it.
For the sake of this question, let's define "academic participation" as "the ability to call myself an academic".<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on the context. This probably wouldn't work in the US. However, I have known of writing a blog to count as a lower level of academic output at Asian universities.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In a comment, you clarify that by "count as academic participation", you mean "I could call myself an academic."
No, you could not call yourself an academic just because you write a blog about academic research. Or, rather, you can call yourself whatever you want but most people interpret the phrase "I am an academic" as meaning "I'm a member of the teaching and/or research staff at a university." Using the phrase to mean anything substantially different from that would be very misleading.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/19
| 325
| 1,399
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I am reading and analyzing a particular case study and then answering its questions, if I am just giving my opinion or a solution, should I 'cite' it? For example, if we are talking about branding and the question is about the power of the brand in the market, if I answer with the following:
'To lead a change in an industry, I think that it really depends on the brand equity and the market concentration factors'. So should I try to 'cite' my opinion? Perhaps someone spoke about this particular point before, but at the same time, I am just giving my view on the matter and the solution to the question.<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on the context. This probably wouldn't work in the US. However, I have known of writing a blog to count as a lower level of academic output at Asian universities.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In a comment, you clarify that by "count as academic participation", you mean "I could call myself an academic."
No, you could not call yourself an academic just because you write a blog about academic research. Or, rather, you can call yourself whatever you want but most people interpret the phrase "I am an academic" as meaning "I'm a member of the teaching and/or research staff at a university." Using the phrase to mean anything substantially different from that would be very misleading.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/19
| 1,241
| 5,182
|
<issue_start>username_0: Many in this community know of the struggle of finding a job in tertiary education after completing a PhD.
However, there are many options available for people who are willing to work overseas in exotic locations in Asia, Africa, and the other developing areas of the world.
I am wondering if working overseas would be detrimental to someone's career. Is it hard to get back into the States/Europe after spending a few years teaching and writing in the developing world? How do search committees view someone who has been away in order to find employment? Let's say the person asking has a PhD in education.<issue_comment>username_1: Exotic is not necessarily bad. You may stand out because of that, but that could be an advantage. If we talk about a low ranking place, you'll need to show that you helped that community, and that you maintained a reasonable publication record. The hard part will be maintaining your network in the region where you want to return.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I did a PhD in philosophy and am currently working in Japan at a university. The majority of my teaching is in English -- and about English -- rather than philosophy.
I'd say there's several things to think about:
(1) **How well does your discipline translate to other countries.** (Your specific example of education translates well on the theory side and very poorly on the teaching methodologies side [at least in Japan]. My field on the other hand is not done in the same way in Japan as compared to the English-speaking world).
(2) **Are your language skills up for the task in these exotic locations?** (The claims of certain nations to English speakers in universities are exaggerated or the degree of preparedness for university level work may be exaggerated -- that's why the opportunities are sitting there for the taking. The offers aren't at Peking University of Seoul National University).
(3) **Do you have the networking skills or publications to get back to your own country or target country after being abroad?** (I continue to publish in English in philosophy, but my teaching time is primarily used teaching English).
(4) **Will you be able to get relevant teaching reviews?** While Japanese law claims that they have a teaching review system for university courses, in practice, they don't. In other words, I have no plausible teaching reviews except for the ones that I personally conduct in my classes (via google forms). I think this negatively impacts my ability to return to the US.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you go to top schools overseas, you should be fine. You can always explain your decision by saying that you needed to travel, help developing countries, explore opportunities. In my field, many Chinese schools have very high-tech requirements in their labs! My old school (not in China) has unlimited funding! So, research wise, it might be a good idea to travel for a year or two to establish a good working relationship with labs and schools.
Many of the professors (engineering) I know will go to the Gulf region and work in Dubai/Kuwait for a sabbatical year or even as a visiting professor (1-3 years) because of the good pay (can get up to 140-160k), benefits (paid housing, car, air tickets, schooling etc), no taxes, less stress (no need to write proposals or get funding).
As long as you keep your contacts in the US/Europe "happy", you should be fine. I know some professors will hold international conferences and put their colleagues on committees! I know some will hold 1-2 days seminars/workshops and invite their previous department chair as a keynote speaker or lecturer for crash-courses (they make easy money out of this).
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: It's not a career killer, but it can make things more difficult. If you are looking for research-oriented jobs, and are doing high-quality research, it should not make a difference (except in cases where your area is only popular in other countries). What the other answers fail to mention, is that it can be a significant disadvantage applying to smaller/more teaching-oriented schools (e.g., most liberal arts colleges) from overseas. Here are a few reasons:
1. Flying you in for interviews is more expensive.
2. Being able to teach well in the US system is important, and overseas applications tend to provide less evidence for this.
3. Many schools want to find candidates who specifically want to be at that institution, or at least are not likely to leave. International applicants need to convince committees not just they want to move to the US, but would be happy at that specific school.
4. At least in my field, we are over-saturated with good domestic candidates, so search committees can afford to throw out applications for small concerns, like ones I mentioned above.
This is not to say it's impossible, it's just a somewhat harder. In my field, where postdocs are common, my general advice to people who want permanent jobs in the US is to try to do their last postdoc in the US (or at least apply to US postdocs as a backup when applying for tenure-track positions).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/19
| 433
| 1,866
|
<issue_start>username_0: My secondary advisor approached me; he is on the program committee of a conference and asked if I were willing to review a research paper that is in my avenue of research. The review is part of the peer-review process, to determine acceptance.
I accepted, but it turns out it he is planning to submit the review himself, just asking me to write it for him.
Should I protest? If they are my words, my name should be on the review. But I don't want to raise a ruckus if it materially doesn't matter anyway.
Do I gain any benefit if it is me who submits the review instead of him?<issue_comment>username_1: No, you gain no benefit if it is you who submits the review instead of him. If you conduct a review on his behalf, you gain the advantage of his mentorship and advice. It will be good experience for you, as you will get to work through a work in progress and understand more deeply how submitted papers are evaluated. If you are concerned about credit, ask him to mention to the editor that he asked you to do the review and these are your comments. Ideally, he should ask the editor for permission before sharing the submitted manuscript with you, as it was sent to him under a condition of confidentiality.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Student from Germany here (Information Science) - I can only speak for my university and my professors, and they are quite strikt about plagiarism. Submitting something written by someone else is just that. Therefore our profs would never allow, nor tolerate such a thing.
Now, I am not sure about your relationship with your adviser, but it seems like any other scientific one to me - so your name should be on the work somewhere, just for the professionalism.
Furthermore I am not speaking about any personal gain you might or might not gain - that's your personal thing.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/19
| 2,111
| 9,402
|
<issue_start>username_0: Are there (general) guidelines for creating an exam? I am a TA, and one of my tasks is it to design a written exam for the students. The students know that it will be based on one book, and on which chapters. I am using the questions after the chapters as guideline (and modify them). Course theme is (from nature science) derivation of formulae (which are also done in the book) and calculation of values by using formulae from the book.
Now my problem is: How many points should I award to which part? The students can choose between either using a hand-written cheat sheet or nothing. In the first case the formulas will not be awarded with points, in the latter they will. But I am not sure how much points I should give to a specific formula. 1 Point, if correct, 0, if not? 5, if completely correct, 2.5, if partly correct, 0, if not?
Thus, is there a general way of doing that, or do I have to experiment with it?<issue_comment>username_1: In education, it is normally advisable to develop assessment prior to teaching. This allows the teacher to be sure that he or she is teaching to the assessment that they designed. When the assessment is made after teaching there is a risk that you will assess things you did not cover thoroughly or even assess things you never taught. Many scoff at this but it is common.
In terms of how much weight to give to various sections, this again is base on what you consider most important. Skills that are more important for students to show mastery should be worth more and lesser skills should be worth less. This is a modified application of bull's eye curriculum.
Lastly,all students should face the same conditions during the assessment. This means everyone has a cheat sheet and their formulas are marked or no one. If the conditions are different you cannot compare the results of one student to another, unless you are conducting an experiment and want to see if a cheat sheet makes a difference. If you can't compare results it is difficult to know who learned something and who didn't
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, there are general guidelines for creating an exam. As a TA, some of the guidelines aren't under your control, but here is how the instructor of record goes about things:
1. Determine the goals for the course. One goal might be "students should be able to apply these 10 equations appropriately in new situations."
2. Provide regular opportunities for students to practice the skills needed for this goal - practice applying equations in new situations. This can be done via homework or quizzes where students get feedback.
3. Design an exam that appropriately measures student ability to complete the goals. Each goal should have a number of questions that match the importance of that goal. The number of points for the full exam is usually determined at the start of the class.
4. Make each part of each question worth points of appropriate difficulty. If there are 100 points for the exam, and each question/equation requires roughly 10 minutes for a student to complete, then there should only be 4-5 questions for a 1-hour exam, and you would divide the points to match the difficulties of the questions. An easier equation problem might be worth 5 points, a harder problem might be broken into parts but be worth 25 points total.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING is to "take" the exam yourself, and make sure you can easily award points to each appropriate answer or partial answer. Adjust the question parts so that the student answers are easy to grade (0 for poor or missing to partial credit to full credit). Ideally, you find a colleague to also "take" the exam to warn you about vague instructions or likely errors.
It surprises me that there are no old exams for you to look at. At my university, it is standard to make an old exam or a "sample" exam available to students (and new TAs) so everyone knows exactly what is expected. You may wish to look for graduate students who have taught the course before and ask to see an old exam.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: A few tips based on my experience teaching undergraduate students for almost 20 years now:
* Make the first exam "easy." First-time teachers are usually the ones who make the most difficult exams. If your experience is the same as mine, you will be surprised at how many will fail your "easy" exam. Make the second exam "easier." Again you will be surprised at how many will fail it. Keep on making it "easier" until you find an acceptable percentage of passing students.
* Answer the exam before giving it and time yourself. Give the students three times the amount of time to answer it. So, for example, for a 1-hour exam, you should be able to answer it in 20 minutes (under the same conditions as the students').
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: In my opinion the most important question is **what should the exam measure?**
Depending on the institution, the type of exam, and the course this can vary a lot. Basically, exams are to learning what thermometers are to temperature. You want to have it as precise as possible, and not to build a barometer instead.
Once you know what you want to measure, check it once more: **are these expectations realistic** given the course and training given to the students? **Are they enough to ensure that passing students will benefit from the follow-up courses?** Here you will usually need some coordination with other courses.
I advise **not to adapt the exam to the level of effort actually produced by the students**, but to the **expected** level of effort. Since my students seem to produce much less effort than I expect, I usually give quite low grades (I always warn them of this fact). This may seem harsh, but in fact I think I am doing them a favor not to blind them with artificially boosted grades that let them believe they will do great with little effort in the following years, which is usually a lie. I have seen too many students stuck in third year with no hope to go forward, after hardly passing the first two years thanks to very generous grades. Of course, this point of view is hugely dependent on the environment.
An exam should be **too short rather than too long** given the allowed time. If it is too long, you will have to boost the grade to be fair, but that will probably give too high grades to students who master only a small portion of the course. If the exam is too short, you can still measure the level of mastery they achieved. The only exception is when you really want to measure their speed, but it is rarely relevant. My personal guideline is that I let my students three to four times as much time than I take to write the complete solution to the exam (I have been trained to take exams quickly all along my studies, your preferred ratio may differ but it is useful to establish a ratio in a way that ensures that time is not too much of an issue).
I advise **against always giving more points to more difficult questions**, especially for numerical grades (a note is in order : in France we grade on 20 points and the passing grade is always 10, and in higher education one can almost always compensate a grade below 10 by better grades in other courses, even in minors). The point is to have a grading scheme which actually matches what you want to measure. I thus usually assign about 8 points to very basic or classical questions, 8 points to questions that are easy but necessitate some understanding of the material (as opposed to reproducing a method seen ten time without the need to actually think), and only 4 points to more sophisticated questions, even if they are long to solve. I try to make this clear to students, so that they first solve the easier questions. The more sophisticated questions thus only serve to do the difference between student with a correct mastery on the course, from truly bright ones. I also want to prevent students who don't really understand what is going on in the course but manage to reproduce standard exercises to get a passing grade. This grading scheme is not necessarily appropriate in other systems, but the important point is that your grading must be tailored to your goal, without letting other principles getting in your way.
Another point to think about is whether you want to have your exam very close to the course itself (which is what student prefer and what gives the highest grades) or on the contrary to have parts which are significantly different, but rely strongly on the course material. This later choice is in order if you want to measure how much your students are able to use what they learned in another context. Be warned that results are often disappointing, and choose this option with care.
On the long run, **try to adjust your exam** depending not on the percentage of passing grades (unless you are forced into it, which often happens), but **depending on the correlation between passing grades and future success of students**. The information is often difficult to obtain, but if you realize that your students struggle to get a passing grade with you but have good success in follow-up courses nonetheless, you should be more gentle in your questions or grading. On the contrary, if many of your passing students struggle a lot with standard follow-up courses, you should probably be harsher.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/19
| 899
| 4,208
|
<issue_start>username_0: Every paper that I have worked on originated from the following timeline: a small team works on data and obtains results; one member is designated first author (always the one who did the biggest chunk of work); first author elaborates a draft version of the paper (may request other members to write one or more sections) and sends it to the rest of the team; all the other members send comments/suggestions; first author implements comments/suggestions and sends a new version; iteration of the process until everyone is happy with the paper.
**Background:** My field is Astrophysics. Even though the methodology behind writing papers varies from field to field, this question should be useful and easily applied across multiple fields. The viability of this methodology should not be the focus of this question.
I am currently writing a paper as the first author for the first time. Whenever I get comments/suggestions I always try to implement them and if I get more than one suggestion for the same thing, I try to find a mid term that allows me to accommodate every contribution. However, sometimes this is just not possible. As an example, I recently got contradictory comments regarding one paragraph in the introduction: one of the collaborators said "Delete it, we don't need this", the other said "add X, Y and Z". I cannot possibly implement both, as it is not possible to both delete a paragraph and add more information to it.
So, I can summarize my concerns in the following questions:
* What factors should I take into account when prioritizing a comment/suggestion (e.g. personal preference as the first author, expertise or reputation of the collaborators who made the comments, ...)
* How to professionally address comments/suggestions that were not implemented/had to be ignored? Will it offend a collaborator if I don't use one of his contributions? Should I contact that person stating that I did not implemented comment A because B?
* Does the answer to this question change in case of trivial (such as rephrasing and paper structure) vs non-trivial (such as results or other relevant scientific contributions) comments/suggestions?
(I find this question to be significantly different from [this one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12996/how-to-effectively-address-conflicting-suggestions-from-reviewers) as I am looking for insight regarding collaborators that are contributing to your work and that you intend to collaborate again in the future. The mentioned questions are about (anonymous) peer-reviewers who are not working with you and are trying to make your work publishable.)<issue_comment>username_1: I handle conflicting suggestions as follows: Consider all suggestions for this point, work out a suggestion based on the other suggestions and send an email to all collaborators and write something like "In this respect I got conflicting suggestions namely... I would suggest to proceed as follows... because... ".
It would be best to collect all the points of conflict in one message.
You may reduce the number of conflicts a bit by adding another step to your workflow: Before starting to write the paper have a session/discussion about the structure of the paper, its focus and the notation. This costs some time and be difficult, but can considerably reduce the number of conflicts. Especially you may point out that some issue has been already discussed in this session.
Oh, and by the way: I would *not* suggest to encourage all coauthors to cc their comments to the whole group of authors and have the discussion like that. Then the thread may loose focus pretty fast and things may get messy.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In some cases both co-authors can be right even if their suggestions are opposite: If a detail is included, it may be necessary to include further details, so either cut or expand. Which you do may depend on the journal you are targetting - you do have one in mind don't you? Some have a tight page limit and thus a lower expectation of the amount of background, while others expect everything to be fully explained. Some work may never fit in the former.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/04/19
| 844
| 3,402
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc researcher in AI field. I was hired as a lead scientist in governmental project (named project A). I need to work on it at least eight hours on week days.
Apart from the study in the project A, there is another topic which is really what I'm interested in (named project B). I started the project B last year, and since then, I studied it after business hour every day with several researchers.
The progress of the project B is somewhat nice and we'll submit a paper by this summer. I'm totally fascinated on the project B. I wish if all of what I have to do would be only the project B.
But it was OK. The project A is also interesting and I can write many paper thanks to the project A and B. Moreover, there are a lot of nice and intelligent friends here.
However, recently, PI assigned me to another project (project C). The project C is totally out of my interest and expertise.
I feel it might be time to leave. Unfortunately, I've not had enough record to get tenure position (but tenure track might be OK). I can go anywhere if I can focus on the project B. Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, it's very difficult to study what he/she wants as a postdoc researcher in CS field.
So, my question is if there is a position allowing me to bring my own research topic and focus on it?
For instance,
* applying for tenure track in some country
* going to private companies to raise money (like sales person)
* spin out and become CEO of startup company (don't laugh at me...)
* persuade the PI to allow me to study the project B (0.01% success rate)
I can not open the location of my work place, but here is one of the worst competitive country on the planet to get tenure due to a low birth rate and long long economic depression... I guess I need go somewhere outside this country.<issue_comment>username_1: As a tenured professor you can choose your research area basically as you want (sometimes there may be some pressure from above to go into specific directions but where I am (Germany) there is freedom of research). **However** you will have many other things to do which can not always choose (particular courses to lecture, administration, meetings, committees...). So it is not like you can do the research you want to do all day.
So, staying where area may not be as bad as you think now: You are assigned to project B now but 1. you may ask to also contribute to project A at the same time or 2. do a good job at project B and then ask your advisor to work on the project you would like.
Personally I don't know anybody who funds his research on some private basis. One guy I know works in some company where his work is a bit close to research and he manages to teach courses at the university and publish papers and books. I don't know if he works part time or not... In Germany you need the title "Privatdozent" to do so or get a "Lehrauftrag" each term.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Consider the time you work on things you do not like a tax on time you work on things you like. Because you won't ever get a 100% rate time on what you like.
If you work part of your official working time per week on some given project and the rest of the time on your favourite, I should think as long it does not exceed 50% tax, that's a pretty good deal (assuming you have something around 37.5-40 hours/week).
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/19
| 2,257
| 10,008
|
<issue_start>username_0: While adding references to a .bib file the other day I found myself putting the title field first as it provided more information about the citations than the author names. After some thought, I wondered why most bibliography formats don't do that to begin with; if the primary goal of references is to provide support for the topic at hand while also giving proper attribution to existing works and to provide avenues for further research by readers, would it not make more sense to put the titles of papers/articles/etc. first and then the author names? It seems to me that the important thing (in terms of the work being written) is not who wrote the cited works but the works themselves, and if citing multiple papers by the same person putting the name first provides somewhat of a distraction from the actual content of the citations. Particularly in the case of collaborative efforts, where a work may have been written by a multitude of people, the title of the work can get pushed aside by the multitude of names (at least when using a format that doesn't just collapse the names to "et al"). What are the underlying reasons for this, or is it just a social thing that happened because researchers like having a significant effect in their fields/their careers depend on it?<issue_comment>username_1: This Question makes sense in practical terms, but includes a misconception in the area of academic culture, when you say, 'if the primary goal of references is to provide support for the topic at hand [...]'. That is not quite right.
Also, disciplined academic writing tends to take the form of a dialogue (or in simple cases a dialectic), where differing perspectives are chucked into an arena and required to fight it out. None of them necessarily has to 'win': finding them all to be wrong is a positive result.
It is very often useful to label a view *primarily* as emerging historically from the body of some identifiable person's work, rather than hovering it vaguely in conceptual space.
**Referencing has two primary goals.**
The **first** is to help interested readers to ***identify and follow-up*** *the material that you have recruited* for your argument, so that they can, if they wish, follow your evidence in detail and, perhaps, find the stuff that you left out. The idea is (partly) that you have openly saved a reader time in either embracing or challenging your position. Under present archival conventions, the tracking-down of sources for this purpose (or any other) is almost always most efficiently done by starting with author name. Scrambling for titles on the web, although I now do it every day, does not (yet) count as an archival convention.
**Second**, referencing is part of the process of ***locating yourself*** in the critical discourse of whatever discipline you are working in. Your writing is in some sense an act of positioning your view in relation to others', even (or perhaps especially) if some other person's view has shifted over time.
For example... In film studies it would seem rather ignorant to talk about 'the male gaze' as a convention of camerawork and editing without (a) attributing the expression to <NAME> and (b) noting that she changed her view over time ([see Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Mulvey), for shorthand).
Merely referring to *ideas* from published articles, blog posts or even comments by anyone is fine in its place (e.g. my doctoral thesis, here and there). For the most part, however, it usually works best to say something like, 'Aristotle proposes [*an impressive idea*]. Hitler disagrees [*here, because of this*].
<NAME> inadvertently resolves that conceptual conflict by suggesting [*that surprising thing*].
That is also why we use the present tense: '<NAME> *says* [something]. <NAME> (while never identifying Barthes) *responds by saying* [something that works far better in the real world].' You are taking part in a present debate, with points of view that are most efficiently located by identifying their authors.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If I compile a bibliography and ask myself what to cite my thoughts are "There was this work by X in 1995..." and sometimes "There was this work by X in journal Y..." but really never "There was this paper Z...". I guess many people's minds work like this. In fact in conference chat people usually refer to the "Smith paper from the 90s" or something like that.
So when I read a paper and look up a reference in the bibliography and see that the respective work is by <NAME> Jones I usually know the paper from the context. So I don't wonder why the authors often come first but why the year often comes last at the same time because these two things are what I find most useful. At second thought this is not the worst solution since beginning and end are somehow more easily to spot than first and second place.
I'd like to add that I read some papers in Physics where the bibliography did not contain the title at all, but only author, journal, number, pages and year.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I have often wondered about the same question and cannot help but speculate that it is mainly due to historical developments. Maybe, in times when research was only a dialogue between a handful of people in each field, rather than hundreds to thousands of researchers worldwide, as it is nowadays, strongly tying concepts and findings to people seemed like a good idea.
Indeed, referring to papers by authors is quite impractical in various ways:
* Often, the same group of authors publishes several papers on different stages or aspects of the same topic. Thus, the author names are always the same and distinguishing the papers based on their author names is impossible. The titles usually serve better to highlight which parts of the work are described in the respective paper.
* Another usual occurrence is for the same group of authors (e.g. from the same lab) to produce joint papers on several different topics. Once again, using author names to distinguish the works is pointless. In fact, it could actively contribute to misunderstandings, as readers may know the respective group of researchers, but they might think of a different project by the same researchers than what the paper author is referring to.
* Projects and concepts tend to be gradually extended by different groups of authors. Such papers on the different extensions are usually connected by their titles, but not by the names of their authors. Just compare how many papers building upon [treemaps](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treemapping) mention *treemap* in their title (along with some specification of the novel extension of the concept), and how many mention *Shneiderman* in their title.
* Titles are chosen, whereas names are not. Sane authors in a given field will not intentionally try to pick a paper title that is the same as another paper title very closely related to their work. On the other hand, it is absolutely possible that several authors in the same subfield share a common surname. (I have more than once read papers where I had no idea (based on just the name) which (w.l.o.g.) Mr. Chen and which Ms. Li of the various possible ones the paper was talking about.)
* In general, of course, an author name can only carry information if the reader has heard about the person's research before. A (well-chosen) title carries information in itself, and thus lowers the hurdle to understanding the text.
So, the question remains why many bibliography formats nowadays still put authors into the foreground. I can see several possible reasons:
* Despite the aforementioned drawbacks, the benefit of changing (e.g. the formatting of established publication channels) is not worth the perceived risk of abandoning traditions. Established venues might also simply fear unnecessarily creating some chaos until authors have adapted to and become used to the change, whereas new venues may be more likely to replicate established practices as closely as possible in order to appear "serious", comparable to the established venues.
* While they carry less information, names are usually shorter than titles. Many titles can be shortened to a few words, but not in a systematical way that would work equally well for all titles.
* Bibliography entries are often not referenced by full names, but sometimes by abbreviations of author names. While titles are more meaningful than author names, the first letter of each word in the title (i.e. including articles and such) is rather less meaningful than the first letter of each author name. Furthermore, at least in fields with contribution-based author ordering, using the first letters of the first few author names is guaranteed to also include the "main" authors, whereas the first few words of the title are not guaranteed to be more important than the last ones.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In mathematics, in each of the several general areas of interest to me, the possible titles are so poor in information-content that they are nearly worthless, while the number of authors making the most meaningful contributions is small-enough so that author+year (with possible suffix "a,b,...") is vastly more effective than giving titles.
Coming at it from the opposite end, "new" authors who've written relatively few things are still far better distinguished by name+year (in terms of information content with the goal of distinguishing them, etc) than titles (once one knows the general field).
Thus, operationally, I look at author first. If recognizable, then I look at year. If author is not recognizable, then I look at the title as guide for *general* subject area, then year (for an idea of where-in-the-progression it is).
(Also, the bibliographic style of [number] is really not helpful in reading, since the number itself has essentially zero information content...)
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/19
| 1,749
| 7,092
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am 27 years old unmarried male teacher. I have been a teacher (lecturer) for the last 6 months in an Engineering institution. My students are 4 to 5 years younger than me.
The problem is that while teaching I have soft corner towards female students. I don't understand whether it is due to opposite gender attraction or due to female students asking more doubts than male students. I help female students more than male students. I know that it is against moral ethics of teacher's profession. But I couldn't change my attitude. Now, I think that male students might have noticed this and they may make complaints against me to the principal.
So what changes can I make?
While teaching how should I give justice equally to both female and male students equally? Or should I quit teaching?<issue_comment>username_1: If you really can't change your actions, find a different profession.
You're aware of the issue - you admit you spend more time helping the females than the males. Find a way to equalize that problem. Be sure that you make your time available to all genders - use office hours, or clarify to all students how to get help from you. Look for the patterns where you realize that you cut off help from the men and continued to help the women - there's like an unconscious bias that you may be able to over come with a pattern.
Changing a pattern like this may not be easy - but it's what's rightfully expected.
Also ponder - why - why do you give women more time? Are you hoping for something more than a teacher/student relationship? Is something more pleasing about them? What's causing the problem, and can you reduce the factors that lead up to it?
I suppose the other alternative is to find a place where you teach only one gender. Then you don't treat your students unequally. Personally, that seems like taking a short cut.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Normally, the problem is the other way round.
For instance, one phenomenon is that I often found with male students is that they override/overrule/overtalk female ones. If that happens more than sporadically, I interrupt them and tell them to let the other student speak out (of course this cuts both ways). I mention this as a concrete example for a trigger/action based approach that works well to reduce imbalance. With this, I get good participation from the whole group.
You talk about "soft spots". Beware, this signals danger. Your student's gender should be strictly taboo for how you deal with them. It is absolutely essential that all your students feel equally respected. Is it that you give more time to females? Then actively allocate more time to males. Is it that you encourage females more? Balance this by introducing some competitive element (such as voting on responses, competitive problem solving); male students tend to like that (of course, I am generalising, it needs playing by ear). Intersperse your presentations with adventurous anecdotes of topic-relevant scientists.
Generally: make a point of addressing more of the neglected students.
BTW, this does not only hold for gender, but also for preference by activity or ability. Activate less able, or less active students. If you do that well, you earned your badge as teacher.
Under no circumstance treat your teaching as a dating opportunity. It is not. Getting a jealous girlfriend might be an idea to help getting things under control - if you cannot do it yourself, it may be the way to delegate that job to her (and I am not yet entirely sure whether I am joking here).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If you want to do justice to your profession then I would suggest a few tips:
1. Divert your attention to weaker male students and arrange sessions for them.
2. Always maintain direct eye contact with the male students and not with the female students (eventually you should, just avoid it for some time).
3. Motivate men and talk with them whenever you talk to women. (I.e. just devote equal time to both males and females.)
4. You can sometimes give favours to men instead women so that they are more inclined to you for any sort of help whenever it is required.
5. Remind yourself consciously that you have to pay equal attention to all.
Hope this helps.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> should I quit teaching?
>
>
>
Maybe, due the fact:
>
> I couldn't change my attitude. Now, I think that male students might have noticed this and they may make complaints against me to the principal.
>
>
>
**Ans:** Quit is not a solution. If you do not fix your attitude you can make the situation equally bad (i.e., people complaining to the principle, as mentioned in the comments) in other professions too. However, if you start *fixing* yourself from now onward, things can easily get right even in the teaching.
>
> So what changes can I make? While teaching how should I give justice equally to both female and male students equally?
>
>
>
If this all is due to *opposite gender attraction* overwhelming you (as I understood):
>
> The problem is that while teaching I have soft corner towards female students. I don't understand whether it is due to opposite gender attraction or due to female students asking more doubts than male students. I help female students more than male students.
>
>
>
While, you know (but you can't help yourself):
>
> I know that it is against moral ethics of teacher's profession.
>
>
>
And, you've mentioned "unmarried" in the following (if you mean this as one of the factors deforming your attitude):
>
> I am 27 years old unmarried male teacher. I have been a teacher (lecturer) for the last 6 months in an Engineering institution. My students are 4 to 5 years younger than me.
>
>
>
(while being the lecture seems to be a new chapter in your life)
I would suggest you to try to remove "un" ASAP.
OR
Try to get tharapies that would help you control yourself getting into such situation.
Left unchecked may lead to serious implications on your professional life at least.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Overcoming biases is extremely difficult. In order to reduce your bias, you need to identify when (not necessarily why) you give extra attention to the female students. Once you know when you give extra attention, you can work on being fairer. Some possibilities are:
* If you preferable schedule them for office hours, you can use a first-come first-serve sign-up system (online or paper based).
* If the bias is related to answering question after class, you could require students to make an orderly line and address people in order (i.e., take your choice out of it).
* For question in class, you can use a "clicker" device so that people get addressed in order (and not when you see them).
* If you spend more time on each question from females, you could either time your answers, or make sure you finish your answer with "does that answer your question"
* If you grade differently based on gender, you can use anonymous electronic submission.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/19
| 2,349
| 10,854
|
<issue_start>username_0: *Note: This question was asked before GitHub offered free private repositories.*
Short version of my question: Is there a good way to provide students with free, private, Github-like git repositories, that won't become public later?
Background: In computer science, it is considered best practice to use Git (a version control repository) for software development. Many universities want to encourage students to follow those best practices as part of their coursework, so they'd like to encourage students to do the same. However, they don't want student work to be made public, as this creates a temptation for cheating.
Github in particular is popular, as it provides both Git repositories, an easy-to-use web front-end to Git, and a convenient workflow for collaborating using Git. Github is free if you make your repository public; normally, you have to pay for a private repository. Github has a special program for students: as long as you are a student, you can have private repositories for free, if you sign up for their student discount. However, this only lasts as long as you are a student. After two years, the student discount expires, and then the private repositories are locked; if the ex-student wants to retain access to their repositories, the ex-student has 30 days to either pay Github a monthly fee to keep it private, or they can tell Github to make it public and pay nothing.
One university I'm familiar with encourages CS students to sign up for a student Github account and put their projects and homeworks in private repositories. However, empirically, Github's policies seem to encourage a certain number of students to make all their repos public after they graduate and their student status expires -- and then solutions are available on the Internet. Because good software development projects are so labor-intensive to construct, many courses re-use projects for several years in a row. Current students have reported finding this by search and are a bit worried that it'd be so easy for other students to cheat. Therefore, recommending that students use a private Github account seems to create a two-year time bomb that will have unfortunate consequences for courses who plan to use their project for more than two years running.
Is there any good solution to this? Is there a better alternative than Github that can be recommended to students?
In particular, a better alternative should meet the following requirements: allow students to have Git repositories for software development and collaboration with project partners; is free; is private; will remain private over time, without encouraging/requiring alumni to make their solutions public if they want to retain access to their solutions without paying; doesn't create extra work for instructors to constantly search Github to look for inadvertently-public solutions from past semesters.
I've seen [How to deal with student putting their (home)work on github](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/34134/705), but the solutions there aren't workable in this context: creating new projects every semester is not a good solution (it's been tried and leads to pedagogically inferior results).<issue_comment>username_1: **Update January 2019**: GitHub now has [free private repositories](https://blog.github.com/2019-01-07-new-year-new-github/).
---
[Bitbucket](https://bitbucket.org/) offers unlimited private repositories. I use it for this purpose.
You can also host your students' repositories yourself on your own server with [Gitlab](https://about.gitlab.com/) (the community edition is free). This option has the advantage that you aren't asking your students to trust a third party with their data. I sometimes use this option, too. It's very easy to set up.
However, having students' work in repositories that don't *automatically* becomes public doesn't obviate the need to create new projects - students can still opt to post their work publicly. (This is true even if you don't use Git in the course at all.)
Personally, I typically use Bitbucket and ask students to keep their repositories private for the duration of the course (so as not to make cheating *too* easy), but they are free to make them public later. Part of the appeal of project-intensive courses to students is that they create something they can show off to potential employers. I *want* my students to have the option to make their work (which is often very impressive, and which they have put a great deal of effort into) public, so that they can enjoy this benefit. I occasionally see students publish their repositories, put a link on their résumés or LinkedIn profiles, and then continue to improve their projects for months after the course is over, which is extremely gratifying.
I would consider it a disservice to students to prevent them from showing off their work after the course is over or after they graduate, even if I *could* prevent this. My university does not claim ownership of intellectual property produced by students in the context of uncompensated coursework (unless there is an explicit written agreement stating otherwise), so unless their projects also include material which I hold the copyright to, I couldn't stop them from publishing their work even if I wanted to.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two other variations you can use with GitHub that are related but independent of the free "Student Pack" features.
Both of these options are free for instructors and are generally preferable to just telling students to get the Student Pack and set their repositories to private.
Either one may work for your needs, but both have some quirks and tradeoffs currently. There are so many subtle details I can't list them all here, plus they are actively developing and changing things. But here's a summary of my experiences:
1. "**GitHub Classroom**". Last year I tried this option for several assignments one semester. It might work for you, but ultimately I got fed up with the assignments workflow and the fussy "Rosters" it uses. It also prevents students from using the "Fork" feature at all, nor much of any of the other repository admin features. Instead of fork, it has a goofy and error-prone replication feature when they check out an assignment. Another design flaw is that *anyone* who manages to get the assignment link will be granted access to a copy of the assignment, regardless of whether they're in the roster. Administering teams for groups projects is a pain in this mode too.
2. "**GitHub Organization**", **much better for my situation**. Similar to how a company can buy "Organization" configurations from GitHub, these are also available free for educational purposes. It also works even if the student doesn't have the individual "Student Pack" features. So what I've been doing is creating an organization specific to each my course+semester, and requesting GitHub support activate the educational discount. Once that's done (which usually takes less than a day), I can create both public and private repositories within it. I can also create "Teams" with my students in them, to grant them access permissions.
From a professional training perspective, option 2 is much better because the system behaves exactly like they'd encounter in a workplace using GitHub. I typically create a repository for each assignment, containing any baseline files I want them to have, usually set to Private. Then I grant the "team" read access to it. They then create their own fork, which automatically goes in their GitHub account namespace (or potentially in the organization's namespace if you choose to allow that). It will remain private if the upstream is private. Otherwise, they have nearly complete admin features to learn with. Because their homework repositories are forks of mine, it's easy to find all their work, and they can directly grant access to teammates and use any of the fork, branch, merge, etc. features they should be learning. Also, I and my TA automatically retain the ability to access their repositories (read at least), because they forked from the organization.
The only two bugs or design flaws I've had to deal with using GitHub Organizations for coursework are these:
A. The fork of a repository which has team/collaborator permissions automatically COPIES those permissions to the fork, EVEN when the fork is created in the user's namespace. Thus I have to remind them to REMOVE that team as soon as they fork, otherwise the whole class can see their repository contents. I have not found any setting that disables this unwanted inheritance of permissions.
B. You do have to be careful with permissions. For example, if students have already forked a homework repository and you remove the team/collaborators from having read access to the original one, it will instantly and without warning (last time I checked) DELETE all those forks!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It would seem that hosting your own Git server and providing accounts to students is the best alternative. (By "you", I mean your institution, at least the institute or department, if not the university as a whole.)
Going this route allows the university to ensure the repositories will never become public. Any unnecessary trouble of account creation among students could be skipped, as an account could be automatically created for each student (the same way many universities these days automatically create a self-hosted e-mail account for each student).
Lastly, asking students to register with and put their data on *any* 3rd party website (that might even be abroad and thus subject to different standards of privacy) sounds dubious to me, at the very least for reasons of privacy, but depending on your jurisdiction there may even be legal obstacles to it.
*I have written this answer based on my personal experience of working in an institute where an own SVN (back then one of the best practices) was provided to all students. My experience with such a setup were invariably positive.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: One option is to create your own "github", check out [gitlab](https://about.gitlab.com/install). There you can define whatever rules you desire. Downside is that it requires a machine and some manpower to keep it up to date/manage it in general.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: A solution one of my professors used was to have herself be the owner of the repo for each team and then just allow each member access.
That way they the students could learn to use Git without having control over whether the repo went public or not; they could write to the repo, but not change its settings.
(There's really no way around the fact that students can still copy files and put them out publicly, somewhere else, however.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/20
| 2,070
| 8,613
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m thinking about taking a 70-year old math professor as my PhD advisor, in a US school. I like his teaching and research. If I don’t choose him, I would probably have to switch fields, which I can do with some pain, since I have not specialized deeply yet. My main concerns are:
* As he is far more likely than a young supervisor to pass away suddenly due to his age, how should I best plan for this scenario? What will happen to me if it happens?
* He is also far more likely to retire than a young supervisor – could his retirement (in the unspecified future) cause problems for my future career in academia, with respect to references and networking?
Related: [How should I take a potential PhD supervisor's age into account, when planning to follow PhD with habilitation?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/24439)<issue_comment>username_1: My PhD advisor was already retired when I started my PhD. He is in his 80s now. One of my collaborators is due to retire soon; the other is in his 90s. All I can say is that everyone of them has had a tremendous impact on me. They have been the most brilliant people I know.
So I don't see any problem at all with very old PhD advisors. In fact, my experience suggests that you should consider yourself privileged to have an old PhD advisor. A few reasons stand out, at least from my experience:
1. They have a wealth of experience.
2. Old professors are usually kind, generous, and so eager to share with you what they know.
3. They have nothing to lose. They don't have issues that younger professors face such as getting promoted, tenured, or the pressure to publish.
4. Retired professors don't have as many responsibilities as they used to, and so can devote more time advising you. Of course, they probably have other interests they would like to pursue now that they are retired, but research will always be their main interest.
All I wanted to say is that age doesn't matter when it comes to choosing an advisor. Passion is more important. Some professors manage research; some others do research. Choose the latter.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Ultimately it is your decision. But one thing to keep in mind is that an advisor is not only your advisor during your PhD, but also for the next ten years if you stay in academia as you navigate postdocs and then tenure. In the US, it is common to need letters of recommendation from an advisor in one's tenure case, which is probably over ten years from now for you. The actuary tables are not perfect for the onset you're looking at, but in the end, it's your choice to decide whether or not it's worth a risk to work on what you want to work on and work with him instead of transferring fields or institutions.
Another option is to get a secondary outside advisor with this current one in order to mitigate the risk.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: One minor counterpoint to @username_1's answer: rather than age of the professor, consider where they stand in their professional career. Age aside, you want to make sure that they're still highly active in the research community. I made the mistake of being what turned out to be my advisor's last graduate student; not a good position to be in. To present the case more generally: While all the positive points listed by @username_1 were are true of someone close to retirement, they may simply might not care as much about things you care about. Specifically:
* They have no pressure to publish, and consequently, your need to publish doesn't scratch any itch of theirs
* Since they're close to retiring, they won't want to enter extensive collaborations, as they will likely be gone before the work is done. (This is referring to long, multi-year projects, not smaller stuff.)
* Their interest in grant-writing will be far less than yours, for the same reason as the preceding point; multi-year research efforts will likely complete after they're gone.
When researching potential advisors, talk to their graduate students about the number of grants they've applied for in the past two years, the number of new students they've taken on, the number of new collaborations they've started, and the like. You want to make sure they're not winding things down, as that means they'll be less interested in things you care about, such as creating new relationships, writing more papers, and finding new grants.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: You seem to be thinking only about the downsides, but having an experienced supervisor has many benefits as well:
1. Decades of experience as a research mathematician.
2. Decades of experience as an advisor.
3. Connections to lots of other experienced mathematicians.
4. A developed mathematical taste.
I would gauge your decision accordingly, but if he is an accomplished mathematician, you will probably get to know many of his contacts. If, God forbid, something were to happen to him, both the department and his colleagues/friends should be able help you. Looking after orphaned PhD students sometimes doesn't go very well, but I think the risk of being abandoned is much higher as a student of a young and inexperienced advisor (who quit/moved/whatever).
My biggest worry would actually be #4: If he hasn't been keeping up with new developments in mathematics, you might be learning classical theory, learning to think about problems in an old-fashioned way. This can go two ways: (1) gaining solid foundations in an area of mathematics that's still relevant today or (2) learning mathematics that's *not* relevant in modern mathematics. There are many old mathematicians who lead research in modern/new developments. There are also old mathematicians, who haven't substantially changed their focus of attention for 40 years and keep on working on old problems that *your* future colleagues might not find interesting any longer.
If your potential advisor still publishes papers in a range of journals and with younger collaborators from well-known universities, you probably don't have to worry that your knowledge will become obsolete and/or unfashionable any time soon.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> As he is far more likely than a young supervisor to pass away suddenly due to his age, how should I best plan for this scenario? What will happen to me if it happens?
>
>
>
Well, you will need to find another advisor. You will also need to deal with the emotional trauma of having lost your advisor. It sounds like there is no one else at your university in this field, so depending on how far you are along if this happens, you might switch advisors and move into their field, or someone might take you on as your official advisor and not be able to provide you with much help. If your advisor has several former students who are successful academia, one of them might be willing to be a (possibly unofficial) advisor for you. (If this is not the case, look for another advisor now!) I know cases where this has happened (even if the official advisor was still alive, but perhaps just in very poor health, and deteriorating health may be a more likely scenario than sudden death).
>
> He is also far more likely to retire than a young supervisor – could his retirement (in the unspecified future) cause problems for my future career in academia, with respect to references and networking?
>
>
>
As long as he is well connected and respected now, people will still value his letters and students. But, some people stay quite active after retirement and some don't. Certainly having an active advisor can help a lot after graduation (if they organize lots of conferences they'll invite you often, they may continue to suggest problems or involve you in collaborations, talk about your work at conferences, recommendation letters, etc). It may not be quite the same, but if he has a large group of former students who support each other, probably they will provide a good support network for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: For a male who has reached age 70 in the United States their average life expectancy is 84.3 years. So unless it is going to take you upwards of 14 years to get your degree, the odds are very much that your adviser isn't going to die.
The more likely issue is whether or not your adviser is going to retire. Lucky for you, you can easily get an answer to that question. Go ask him.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Try to get another younger co-supervisor. That way you can benefit from the strong sides of both a younger supervisor and an older supervisor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/20
| 291
| 1,228
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had submitted a research proposal to a group during Post Doc application in an university. But I did not join the same university for post doc. Now I got to know that they are conducting the same research I had proposed.
How to deal with this? Though I am not working in the same area now, but it is my future plan.
Is it really good to use other person's proposal?<issue_comment>username_1: Could that topic have been a relatively "generic" topic or a topic that is now fashionable? In which case it is not unlikely that people come up with similar ideas. Fashionable topics are unlikely to be exclusively yours.
However, if it is an exotic idea, you may have been very unlucky. In which case, cut your losses and move on.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I already heard these stories from some colleagues, from time to time.
The point is the specificity of the project proposal.
In many cases, the evolution of a current project might be somehow obvious in the scientific direction of the lab.
So, for example, if they've been working on A and B, and your project proposal is about C, you should not be surprised if they will take that scientific direction.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/20
| 756
| 3,144
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently attended a workshop at a renowned research institute, to which you can participate only if you're invited by the organizers, who were rather well-known researchers.
I'm wondering if there's a point in including this information on my CV? On the one hand, it shows that some recognized people think well enough of me and my work to invite me to this type of event; on the other hand I'm afraid of appearing over-proud of a minor deal.
(For context, I'm a PhD student.)<issue_comment>username_1: If it is "prestigious" and on "invite" only basis, I will definitely add it. For a PhD student, I would add any conference papers you got (for now), you can always change your list of publications later on. Keep in mind that in some fields (computer science), conference papers are weighted much heavily than journal articles!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I'm afraid of appearing over-proud of a minor deal.
>
>
>
In general, **you should not worry about this**. A CV is a document where you are supposed to "sell yourself". Everyone expects you to highlight those things that show your ability, experience, and recognition by prominent people in the field.
This makes many people uncomfortable, since talking up our own achievements is not the norm for most of us. However, it is the right thing to do for a CV. List anything that provides evidence that you are a strong candidate.
*Is it possible to have a CV that appears "over-proud"? Yes, if you did something like clearly exaggerate your experience, or use boastful language. But merely factually listing something you achieved or participated in is not going to create that impression.*
As for this specific workshop, **definitely put it on your CV**. The fact that prominent researchers thought you were worth including in this event speaks well of you. I wouldn't call that a "minor deal", especially for a PhD student.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It wasn't entirely clear how well known this conference is or that it is invitation only, but (at least in math) it's quite common for grad students and some postdocs to list conferences attended on their CV. It makes less sense for, say, a full professor to do this, but at the junior level it is not looked upon poorly. Then it does come across as self-inflating.
So my suggestion: *make a conferences attended section of your CV, and list them, including this one*. (It wasn't clear from your post how you were planning to add it (under awards and honors?), but it would seem weird to me to just have it an item by itself).
Here are a couple of reasons that a conferences attended section can be useful for applications.
* It gives an indication of how active you are. I always want to hire young people who are active.
* It may help remind someone who reads your CV if they met you at some conference.
Keeping such a list may also be useful for your personal reference when you're trying to recall your previous exploits. Many people also keep such a list on their webpage (possibly including upcoming conferences, which is not appropriate for you CV).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/20
| 1,217
| 5,247
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in computer science. My advisor is a Professor in another department and complains that computer science has a poor culture, where people publish lots of rubbish papers instead of a few good ones. My advisor prefers to publish in journal papers rather than conferences, and when my papers have been accepted to (good) conferences didn't want to come to the conferences with me. My advisor has published in computer science conferences in the past but now he seems to have little interest in CS or the CS community.
I am worried that I will not be able to have a career in computer science under these circumstances. What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: My question to you is why would you have non-computer science advisor if you are in the computer science field? That being said, you should change your advisor
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Speak with your supervisor about his long-term goals, and yours. If you want to do hard computer science and he wants to do X, then you need to find a solution. If he's moving away from computer science, but you would be interested in studying the intersection between computer science and X, then you can probably work something out. But you each need to be aware you the other's interests and of your own.
Note that it's quite common for Computer Science PhD's to straddle two fields. Combining Computer Science with another subject almost always yields interesting research. The people in field X are happy to have someone around who understands computers, and the this usually creates new questions, and new opportunities.
The downside is that you have to deal with the conventions of two fields. Do you publish in journals for field X, or in Computer Science conferences. If you have co-authors from field X, what will they think of our strange CS habits. This is all part of the challenge of PhD work, and in the end you will come out with an understanding of two fields. But you have to know whether you care about field X beforehand.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Well there was this guy, A, saying that B's field is on the way out. Turned out, it was the other way round. B's field is now big, A's field is on the way out. (True story)
Whatever the case: do not take a supervisor that does not want to supervise the field you work in. I repeat. Do not take a supervisor that does not want to supervise the field you work in. Either change field or change supervisor. Everything else is a waste of his/her and your time.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Another resource to go to is the director of the graduate program. Depending on how advanced you are into your Ph.D. program, he/she may negotiate some kind of agreement. I remember a case when a Ph.D. student was being neglected by her advisor. I recommended her to get the graduate director to apply some pressure to the advisor, and it worked (she was pretty close to finishing though).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: **In brief: find a different advisor. If this is difficult, then your department should have a “Director of Graduate Studies”, or some similar title, and they should be able to help you.**
Your situation as you describe it sounds odd in several ways. The only reasons I’ve heard of for having an advisor in a different department are if you really want to work with that advisor, or at least in their field. But it sounds like that’s definitely not the case here! So it’s not clear that there’s any good reason for you to be working with this external advisor, rather than someone in your department.
You mention in comments that one potential advisor in your department has previously rejected you. If it was only one, then there should be others to ask, reasonably close to your areas of interest; hopefully, one of them would be happy to take you on.
If you find that multiple faculty members in your department are unwilling to work with you, then the situation is more difficult. There could be many different reasons — perhaps your department has too many PhD students at the moment, so faculty are over-stretched; or possibly the potential advisors feel that your work is not as promising as it should be. But in either case, the director of your department’s graduate programme should be able to help understand and resolve the situation — part of their job is ensuring that no student ends up without a suitable advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: A brief answer (in disagreement to other answers): Your advisor has the right to hold any belief he or she wishes to. It's completely legitimate to criticize CS or any other scientific culture. I didn't see in your post anything that actually harms your PhD, or your chances for academic success. So I don't see a real problem here: just continue to do good job and believe in your work.
There are a lot of great scientists with "negative attitudes", on the surface. It does not mean that they are not going to help you, or even be a very good supervisor to you.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: Find someone who is willing to mentor you in the ways of Computer Science.
Life to short to waste on people with negative attitudes toward your field.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/04/20
| 661
| 2,918
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can anybody post a template letter on how to ask a science journal to serve as a reviewer. Here's what I have..
I would like to serve as a peer reviewer for manuscripts submitted to your esteemed journal, XXX. My areas of expertise are XYZ. I have published n articles in this field and have reviewed manuscripts pertaining to these subjects before.
My CV is enclosed for your perusal<issue_comment>username_1: The best way I've discovered to become a reviewer for a journal is to submit a paper there. In my experience this is almost always followed a few days later by a request to review a relevant article.
Edited to add: I did my first reviews while a graduate student because my PhD supervisor was the editor of a journal. He would send me things occasionally because he considered it part of my training. So, another way to become a reviewer is to know an editor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not an editor of any journal, but I don't think that such a self nomination would be welcome.
You do not become a reviewer because **you** want to become one, but because some editor thinks that you can provide a valuable review.
So, to become a reviewer you have to prove yourself to know your field well, have a good overview of the field, know its history and challenging problems, know the details... You can achieve this by submitting/publishing papers and probably also by giving good talks at conferences and workshops but not by application.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I've seen several such emails before and I personally don't see why not accept - it's not hard to register reviewers into the editorial management system, and reviewers only offer recommendations anyway. The editor can always invite a couple of other "regular" reviewers as well, and if the new reviewer writes a good review, upgrade him to a regular reviewer. If the review is poor, one does not have to forward it to the authors.
If you do send such an email to the publisher, you'll want to provide:
* Your areas of expertise. Try to match these to the keywords the journal uses (e.g. when you submit to the journal, do they ask you to identify which subspecialty your manuscript is in, and if so what are those subspecialties?)
* Some example publications
* A few details about yourself, such as what your job title is, your institution, your qualifications, your website (if you have one)
Don't expect to be invited to review immediately. In fact there's a chance that you never receive anything because the publisher will only register you, and the editors need to be searching the database to see you.
You can also write to the editors. Pick the members of the editorial board whose interests most closely match yours. This makes them aware that they can invite you; however the failure rate will be higher, and there's a good chance they don't act on your email.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/20
| 1,726
| 7,359
|
<issue_start>username_0: Whenever I've heard math professors talk about job prospects in academia, they indicate that the job market has gotten much tougher over the years. Is it true that it is harder now than it used to be to find a good position? If so, why is that?<issue_comment>username_1: The number of tenured/tenure track faculty positions in the US has been on the decline in recent years, partly because of a substantial increase in the amount of teaching done by contingent faculty (adjuncts, full time instructors who aren't on a tenure track, and graduate student TA's.)
The number of PhD graduates in mathematics has been fairly steady at around 1200 per year. Most of these new graduates want to ultimately obtain a tenured faculty position, but there are only about 700-800 such positions available every year.
There's a clear inbalance here between the supply of new PhD's in mathematics and the number of desirable faculty positions that they can chase.
A good source of statistics on this is the annual survey done by the American Mathematical Society.
<http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/survey-reports>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In Germany, increased funding of universities lead to a rise in non-permanent positions, so that nowadays a lot more postdocs compete for the same number of permanent positions.
Let me add a general comment: The specialty about a career in academics is that it (often) takes so many years until you reach a satisfactory (permanent, well-paid) position. People drop out of the process at all stages, and it is not always the good that stay and the bad that leave. On the one hand, you can easily fool yourself to be good enough because it is hard to compare and hard to get an overview. On the other hand, some good people do not like moving every two years until they find something steady, especially if they have a spouse that also tries to build a career. So the job market size in academics relative to the number of qualified applicants is very hard to estimate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with the earlier answers that the fundamental issue is an imbalance between the number academic positions and the number of people aiming for an academic career. However, there's some context that can help explain how things ended up this way. Everything I say will refer to mathematics in the U.S.; some parts certainly generalize beyond that, but I can't say how far.
It has never been truly easy to get a faculty position in mathematics, but during the period from 1945 to roughly 1970, it was easier than it ever had been before or probably ever will be again. There were huge increases in the number of college students, which required lots of faculty hiring, and federal funding for science increased dramatically (especially after Sputnik). Not everybody could get a great job, but lots of people got good jobs, and a successful grad student could reasonably expect to get at least an adequate job. This is not to say nobody fell through the cracks, but there was no concept of an oversupply of graduate students relative to positions. Instead, people worried about an undersupply.
One consequence is that the number of mathematics graduate students increased exponentially. Lots of universities created new graduate programs, or substantially scaled up existing programs. At the time this seemed like a great idea, because these programs were able to place their students in decent jobs, but when the market crashed the profusion of graduate programs led to a terrible oversupply. (It's difficult to kill a graduate program that's still attracting students, and student enrollment is far less sensitive to employment prospects than one might guess.) We're still suffering from this problem today, in that we have a stagnant academic job market but a system of graduate programs that evolved to feed a rapidly growing market.
The end of the golden age had several causes: the growth of universities flattened out, the economy weakened, and federal funding decreased. Several academic generations had become accustomed to a strong job market, and nobody knew quite how to react when it ended. Some people hoped it was a temporary aberration, which would soon return to exponential growth. Others recognized that the era of exponential growth was over, but hoped that an upcoming wave of retirements would open lots of positions. The net effect is that there was no coordinated response, and it took ten or twenty years before it became clear how the job market was going to evolve. The academic hiring turmoil in the 1990's basically amounted to the realizations that the system wasn't going to fix itself and that nobody else seemed capable of fixing it.
One consequence is that universities have gradually become more demanding in the experience they require, because they can. I know people who got tenure-track jobs in the 60's with no publications yet and without having been in charge of even a single class, but that's unheard of nowadays. These increasing demands put a lot of pressure on graduate students, who risk screwing up their careers if they aren't consistently and impressively productive.
The rate of increase is relatively slow, not clearly visible on a year to year basis, but it becomes clear on a scale of decades. The way the ratchet works is that once too many students adapt and start to meet or exceed the current requirements, universities can become even more selective and the difficulty goes up a notch. In an ideal world, this pressure would lead to increasingly talented and well-prepared generations of mathematicians. There's some truth to this, but unfortunately it's largely an arms race that punishes bad luck or inconsistency more than it rewards exceptional success.
A related consequence is that the job market has become more segmented, as the optimal preparation for different career tracks has diverged. Grad students sometimes imagine a prestige-based hierarchy of positions, with research universities at the top, teaching-focused universities and liberal arts colleges in the middle, and community colleges at the bottom, and they believe that even if they fail to get a job at one level of the hierarchy, they can surely find one in a lower level. They are then shocked to discover that it doesn't work that way: each career track has demanding expectations that don't overlap very much, and not many people can put together compelling applications of more than one sort.
I don't want to catastrophize here: the arms race in qualifications doesn't seem to be driving the fraction of people who get tenure-track jobs to zero. (See [here](http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/annual-survey) for plenty of statistics. Long-term employment trends are slow and difficult to discern amidst the noise and economic fluctuations, but there certainly isn't a short-term collapse.) Instead, the primary factor in the worsening job market is the stress and difficulty of meeting the increasing demands.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Departments are not growing as fast as they are all pumping out new PhDs that are looking for fewer jobs.
So being a superstar and having some luck will be a big factor.
This started circa early 70s and has continued in STEM fields since then.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/20
| 2,947
| 12,336
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc and I have been talking to a PhD student about his research, as his interests are closer to mine than to his advisor's. He is generally nice, smart, and hard working. However, I think he has an unrealistic opinion of his own work.
He has written a paper and wants to submit it to the top conference in my field. (I'm in computer science, so we publish in conferences, not journals.) Unfortunately, I don't think his paper has a chance of getting in. His paper would be a long shot even for a second- or third-tier conference. His paper is also dismissive of prior work, which may offend the authors of that prior work (who are likely to be reviewing his paper).
What should I do about this?
It would be helpful to him if someone gave him a reality check and told him to rewrite much of his paper. However, it is not really my responsibility (or place) to do this. (I'm only two years more senior than him.) If he does submit, he will get a reality check from the reviews, but it would be good if he got some more "gentle" or "constructive" feedback.
I have limited experience with advising. Perhaps someone more experienced can tell me what would be appropriate in this situation. I feel like more than a subtle hint is needed.<issue_comment>username_1: It's his advisor's job to set him straight on this, but if his advisor won't do that for whatever reason, you could always bring it up once as friendly advice. Something simple like "By the way, about your paper, you know you shouldn't diss other people's work without a really good reason, right? You'll make enemies. Also, it's a good paper, but X conference is really hard to get into. It might be better suited to Y or Z." Then drop the issue and let him decide for himself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Let's start with the obvious:
>
> I'm only two years more senior than him.
>
>
>
You have a PhD and he has not. You have written (many) papers before and he has not. You know your craft. He does not (yet). And he can learn faster by listening to well-meaning advice from more senior and experienced people. The age-difference does not mean anything. And it seems that you care for his well-being (and his success) and that probably makes your advice even more valuable than the advice of a more experienced, yet indifferent person.
Given that you are qualified to give this advice, you should absolutely tell him the honest truth. Start by:
>
> Would you like to hear my true opinion of your paper? You might not
> like it but I think you should hear it. I think it is better to hear
> it from me than some random reviewer.
>
>
>
And then wait for his answer. If the answer is "No, I do not want to hear your opinion and my paper is so much better than most of the crap they publish in SODA, VLDB or..." then let him know the hard way. Nothing beats delusions better than three strong rejects and merciless bashing from the reviewers. You should also probably let his advisor know what you think of the paper and then let the advisor decide on how to proceed.
Otherwise, if the student is genuinely interested in your opinion then take the time to explain not only what is wrong with his paper but how he can make it better. Explain why he should be more diplomatic in his view of previous work. How he can present his experiments better. How to further clarify his contribution in comparison to the previous works, and so-on. But also state that even if he implements all that, his paper might still not have a chance in first-tier conference.
Of course, my answer is based on the fact that you do not directly supervise this student. If you do, he has no choice but to hear your opinion. And in this case, crap or half-baked papers should not go to prominent conferences. That makes everyone (co-authors, advisors) look bad. Of course rejection is something normal but only when you submit something that actually stands a chance to be accepted.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: This is quite a common scenario. The air of confidence (or maybe arrogance) in the first year of PhD is warranted. You can only advise if he is willing to listen or accept criticisms. However, I doubt that he will at this stage.
My approach would be to provide advice only when he/she asks for it. Otherwise, stay back and let the paper go up in flames; maybe it'll be accepted if the planets are lined up?! He/she will then learn from it or not, in which case only he can save himself. It is worth noting that there are many people who learn by trial-and-error. So this student might be in that category.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Let us start from the assumption that a paper, whether presented to a conference or submitted to a journal, must be about new research that has not been published before.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't think his paper has a chance of getting in
>
>
>
If you think so because of mistakes in the paper then address such mistakes and correct them, or have the student correct them by himself. Once those mistakes are solved, then no issue about the submission and the approval should arise.
>
> His paper is also dismissive of prior work, which may offend the authors of that prior work
>
>
>
As long as the paper is correct, that it dismisses prior authors is of not much interest for science.
>
> What should I do about this? It would be helpful to him if someone gave him a reality check
>
>
>
I wonder where his supervisor and perhaps you (no address intended though) have been throughout the entire time the student was writing the paper. Articles do not write themselves alone and if you believe the entire area or topic the paper is dealing with is erroneous, then you (the supervisor) should have warned the student long ago, not to pursue a false line of research.
If the initial assumption, namely that the paper discovers new lines of research, is wrong, then that is not a paper in the first place, by definition, to be presented anywhere, whether good or bad it may be.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: The age difference does not matter. You can supervise students older than you. When you are the supervisor, you are the person entitled to make a judgement.
They do not believe you? Let them submit, but make clear your name does not go on the paper, you may need to become emphatic on that (lest they try to put your name on the paper clandestinely); often that already sends a message. If it doesn't, they will get the feedback they are asking for from the reviewers.
Overconfident students can become real trouble down the line. This is best handled early on if you feel they fall into this category. As they develop the work, you make clear what the level is that you expect for a mark/publication/degree and give top-quality examples. Most overconfident students are quickly grounded by that; if not, the students may either be actually really capable (and their self-confidence justified, thus not "over"confidence; lucky you), or they are really dangerously far from the ability to judge themselves. The latter case is fortunately rare, but should be strongly avoided where possible.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Let him submit it and let the rejection be the reality check you are talking about. If its as sub-par as you say he will get the reality check, if not, then he gets to publish. win-win?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_1: >
> He has written a paper and wants to submit it to the top conference in
> my field...Unfortunately, I don't think his paper has a chance of
> getting in.
>
>
>
This is not a big deal. I would offer a mild suggestion that a lower tier conference might be better, but ultimately it is fine for him to learn this lesson by experience.
Also, in my field anyway, **long shot submissions are very common, even by experienced researchers.** Quite often the professors I work with want to try submitting (not very exciting) results to the top journal in our field, then gradually go down the list until someone accepts the work. I kind of think "here we go again; this is a waste of time" but it is a very common approach.
And you never know what a top conference or journal is going to accept; the review process can be somewhat arbitrary. So, it can pay off occasionally.
>
> His paper is also dismissive of prior work, which may offend the
> authors of that prior work (who are likely to be reviewing his paper).
>
>
>
This is a much bigger deal, and I think **you ought to point this out clearly and directly.** This endangers the success of any submission.
Presumably, you have been given the opportunity to read the paper and comment on it, and therefore you ought to offer any constructive feedback to help him. It doesn't need to be based on having more experience than him or a higher level position; this is what reviewing papers is about. **Being able to give and receive critical feedback in a direct, constructive way is an important skill for a researcher, and this will be part of the PhD student's learning (and perhaps yours as well).**
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Try not to overthink this. The best education anyone can get is experience, and failure is often the best teacher. As you rightly mentioned it is not your responsibility to take care of this person (it's called co-dependency when you do) and his success or failure is squarely on his/her shoulders. As a friend/colleague you can simply ask if he is interested in a critique of the research and findings. If yes, then be honest. If no, then let it rest. "Gentle" feedback is what a mother gives to 5 year old child.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: As others have clearly displayed, you have a host of options before you. In my opinion, there is only one choice (*a step, if you will*) that absolutely cannot be wrong:
**Talk to the student's adviser.**
My heart grows warm by reading all of the answers/responses that heavily support you and your opinion; they encourage the notion that you know what you're talking about as opposed to blatantly discrediting you. I appreciate that.
But the fact of the matter is, just as you wrote, "I think he has an unrealistic opinion of his own work" there *may exist a possibility* that you have "an unrealistic opinion of his" work. You wouldn't be the first person who had seniority over another and felt that the other person's work was garbage yet turned out to be wrong. In fact, there have been collective groups of people who have shown dissatisfaction or worse towards a singular person's work yet that group ended up being on the wrong side of history. That's not to say that you should lose confidence in your ability to judge another person's research; it's simply a wake-up call to the fact that we can *all be wrong sometimes*. I am suspicious of your authority to call out a PhD student's work when taking into account that it doesn't seem to be likely that you're *that* much more experienced than him (because here you are, getting the guidance of others which is an admirable decision but reveals your lack of experience in judging others' work and having to give feedback on that work).
If I were you, take the safer route. Instead of needlessly risking not only the health of your relationship with this student but also risking the confidence of said student, consider approaching his adviser. At the very least, talk this over with more experienced individuals than yourself before you take it upon yourself to be the bearer of bad news. Like I said, there *is* the possibility that his work *is* good and you're simply wrong. There's no shame in that but there is shame to be had if you don't consider that possibility.
I also can't help but feel that you really shouldn't say anything because it's simply not your responsibility. Unless he directly asked you for your opinion or you're put in a position to give it (like being an adviser or experienced and respected postdoc), you probably should just **talk to the student's adviser**. Pointing out gross research errors is always welcome. Correcting flow or grammar of a research paper is no big deal either. But essentially calling his entire paper garbage is a big deal that warrants the experienced eye of someone at the adviser level.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/20
| 1,032
| 4,074
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently we have written a research paper and posted a preprint on the Arxiv to obtain some non-official peer review and to increase the quality of our paper. Till now we have not submitted this paper to any conference or journal (it is unpublished), but we are interested in sending it to a conference.
While testing our paper for plagiarism using free sites, we obtained results showing 83% plagiarism from the version we posted on the Arxiv. In other words, the software is saying that we plagiarised our own paper. We also tried pulling down our paper from the Arxiv to avoid this plagiarism, but it’s not possible. Does that mean our paper will get rejected by all conferences? What should we do?<issue_comment>username_1: The situation as I understand it:
* You wrote a manuscript A and uploaded it to the arXiv. You do not intend to publish manuscript A in a journal or conference.
* You later wrote a manuscript B. You intend to submit B to a conference. This manuscript B shows 83% overlap with manuscript A.
Thus, you are worried to have problems with publishing manuscript B.
---
While both are your work there is a potential risk somebody may think you are committing self-plagiarism. (As if you would you try to publish both A and B in a journal or conference there could be an actual problem.) To avoid this perception you should make the status of A clear.
You can do this via:
* Adding a footnote to the front page of A saying that it is a draft/technical report/etc. and not intended for publication. You can also include this remark as "comment" in the meta data on arXiv.
* Mentioning the draft A in your paper B, like: "A preliminary version of these results with more detailed proofs is available on arXiv." or whatever fits you context.
Doing either of those should suffice, but doing both might add some extra safety.
(Assuming there is no policy that results must not be circulated beforehand for the conference where you submit. But in mathematics this should virtually never be the case.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: What you should do:
1. Not worry about it.
2. When you upload your paper to a conference/journal, include the arXive paper in your citations.
3. Write a cover letter to the conference chair / editor stating that this paper is based work that you have posted as a pre-print on arXive, and state if/what is additionally in your submission
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> But while testing plagiarism using free sites we found that results were showing 83% plagiarism from our paper only which is posted on Arxiv.
>
>
>
Two questions:
1. Why did you test your paper for plagiarism in the first place? I have submitted about 50 papers and have never done this...partly because I never thought of it and partly because *I know haven't committed plagiarism because I wrote the papers!* Were you in doubt whether you plagiarized or not? I don't get it.
2. If I understood you correctly, you seem concerned that a plagiarism detector *found your paper on the Arxiv*. But that's super weird – a paper cannot plagiarize itself, and you are not the first or ten-thousandth person to post their preprint on the Arxiv. Why would that be a problem?
Based on what you said, it is surprising that you only got 83% plagiarism. I guess the reason that it's not 100% is that you did make some nontrivial modifications in your paper (and neglected to mention that in your question). OK, so...I recommend that you post the updated version on the Arxiv. Then the plagiarism detectors will either figure out what's going on or report that you have plagiarized 100% from a *preprint* with the same authors and title...a puzzle that even the most harried conference editor should be able to sort out.
Finally, since the question was originally posted on Math Overflow, let me say that in mathematics it would look absurd for a paper to cite its own Arxiv preprint. If that is actually a halfway standard convention in other fields, I would be very interested to see examples.
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/04/20
| 799
| 3,476
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was writing a draft for an essay for a Political Philosophy course and I was extremely cramped time so I decided to pull quotes from the authors (Machiavelli and Hobbes) off the internet. Along with the quotes I took some of the leading sentences. I submitted the draft and changed up the quotes and the essay but accidentally emailed the wrong copy to the Teachers Assistant and handed in the proper copy.
I heard back from the department that I have an exploratory meeting about the essay.
What should I do/expect and how can I mitigate this, its my first offence and I don't want it on my record or get kicked out but I know I did something that is wrong.<issue_comment>username_1: When I sat on my department's academic misconduct committee, students would regularly submit different electronic and paper versions of papers. We graded the paper versions and processed the electronic version with TurnItIn. The paper version would generally contain lots of plagiarized material that was absent from the electronic version. As a faculty member it was always difficult to determine what exactly happened. Generally, the students would claim the plagiarism free electronic version was the correct version and they printed the incorrect version.
In your case, it appears the electronically submitted version, presumably the one checked for plagiarism, was the one that had plagiarism and you printed the correct version. This not only seems more feasible (most of us have sent the wrong attachment on an email), there is no obvious benefit for you.
I would suggest you acknowledge that your work practices were sloppy and you should never have produce even a draft with any plagiarism. Your notes need to be very clear when you are taking direct quotes. You also need to acknowledge that you will be more careful when submitting work in the future. Finally, you can explain that there is no benefit for you to have turned in the wrong copy electronically and that you should be assessed on the paper copy after that copy is checked for plagiarism. You should be prepared to hand in the electronic copy of the paper version.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Before going to the meeting, do your homework. Find your school's code of conduct, catalog statements, and/or program handbook and see what is PUBLISHED by the school regarding intentional or unintentional plagiarism. Did you have to sign something on admission or at the beginning of the semester/class/program that acknowledges your understanding of plagiarism rules? What does that say the consequences are?
You can ask for leniency, but be sure you have the policy in hand that shows the committee that they are allowed by their OWN RULES to give a more lenient consequence. Be sure that you admit that you did plagiarize, no excuses. Let them know what you will do differently next time.
I always encourage my students to AVOID QUOTES. Learn and synthesize the author's work, and put it in your own words (with appropriate citation). I have also used TurnItIn as a student and an instructor, and find it to be a useful tool to catch plagiarism. I am proud to say that as a student, I have had plagiarism values on TurnItIn that are consistently 2% or less...primarily because I avoid quotes and work hard to show what I learned rather than assembling knowledge from someone else. (OK, that sounds really snotty and stuck-up, sorry about that!)
Good luck to you!
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/20
| 1,600
| 7,158
|
<issue_start>username_0: In computer science field is common to produce papers that present algorithms that estimate something with a certain accuracy and a certain speed.
Many algorithms can clearly be tuned to have high performances, compromising a bit accuracy, or high accuracy, compromising in this case performances.
When an author proposes a new algorithm he should present empirical results about performances AND empirical results about accuracy.
Is it honest to present result about performances obtained with the algorithm tuned to be fast (and less accurate), and results about accuracy with the algorithm tuned to be precise (and slow)?<issue_comment>username_1: It would be dishonest to do this without mentioning that the algorithm was tuned differently. You ought to specify what the tuning changed and how this affects the results of the algorithm.
You should also list accuracy results for the fast algorithm and speed results for the accurate algorithm. (Your probably also want some numbers for middle of the road tuning too). Not listing the "bad" results isn't dishonest, but it's bad science. If you didn't include these numbers, I'd expect your reviewers to bring it up and ask for them.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To paraphrase your question, "Is it honest to suggest that my algorithm is both fast and accurate when, in fact, it can only be fast and not-so-accurate or accurate and not-so-fast?"
NO!!!
=====
Of course it isn't. Seriously, why do you even need to ask?
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I am just a Master student, so I do not know much of the dynamics of “the game”. Therefore I can only give some spectator opinion.
One of my supervisors likes to have brutally honest plots in his papers. His work focuses on the scaling of parallel algorithms. For starters, he chooses strong scaling instead of weak scaling. The former is taking a fixed problem size and using more processors $P$ to run. Ideally, one would obtain a $1/P$ drop in time. Taking a double-log-plot of time versus process count and also plotting the $1/P$ perfect curve, you see quickly when it goes bad.
Weak scaling is scaling of the problem size with the resources. Then the time needed should stay constant. For problems which become hard to parallelize at some fine level, you will never see anything interesting in weak scaling. With strong scaling you can go into the extremes like “one pixel per core” or “one atom per thread”.
He said that the interesting parts (in science) are those that do not work yet. He surely can make up a plot that makes the algorithm look great. But that is not what he is interested in. He wants to know how far it can be pushed.
I really admire this brutal honesty. If one has results which are only so-so, then this method will clearly show that they are not that great. On the other hand, if you take away all the attack surface yourself, nobody can rip you apart later for hiding anything.
Therefore I would make plots which show how bad the accuracy gets when you optimize for speed. I'd include a honest accuracy vs. speed (or vice versa) plot. Then one can either see whether there is a sweet spot in the middle and how well that actually is.
If your algorithm goes to the very extremes but has a nice middle ground, it is worth mentioning, I guess. And if the extremes are only a few percent slower or less accurate, that also is a result.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Compare apples with apples
--------------------------
Algorithm performance is rarely evaluated in isolation: usually, different algorithms are compared to one another or to some reference algorithm. When doing such a comparison, you should determine conditions in which reference algorithms were evaluated, and evaluate your own algorithm in the same conditions:
* if reference algorithms have comparable accuracy, tune your algorithm to have the same accuracy and compare the performance
* if reference algorithms have similar performance, tune your own to the same performance and compare the accuracy
On the contrary, if you have comparison data in different conditions, it is OK to select the conditions which are most favorable to your algorithm. This is not cheating, but a legitimate analysis of conditions in which your algorithm is the most practical.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In the context of developing algorithms for academic purposes the real 'wall-clock' running time of the program is not important. What is important is the time complexity (see the Big-Oh notation). Usually a few performance tweaks or optimizations to an algorithm do not change the actual time complexity and are thus of little interest.
If an algorithms does change the time complexity, but also changes the accuracy the algorithm has solved a different problem and is not comparable. Still comparing these is a case of serious neglect at least.
Unfortunately, in the real world, only 'trivial' problems, such as sorting a list are so well defined that everybody makes an algorithm that has exactly the same pre- and post-conditions. A good paper comparing algorithms should recognize these difference and investigate their impact.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Until now, I have refrained from joining this site as I did not feel qualified to comment. I left the world of academia two days before I was supposed to have graduated with a BS. (I'll leave my sordid story as a comment). I finally joined this site just because of this question. The answer is **NO**. "Tuned" algorithms from academic researchers bedevil practitioners.
A specific example: I spent two absolutely wonderful years determining how to detect thruster failures on a space vehicle. A previously developed "tuned" algorithm suggested that one could do without the very expensive and failure-prone sensors traditionally used to detect thruster failures by instead using accelerometer and gyro readings. That "tuned" work implicitly assumed perfectly-aligned and perfectly-located thrusters with lots and lots of *oomph*. I, on the other hand, had to deal with the equivalent of a Mack truck on ice with misaligned VW engines and no breaks. I didn't have a simple signal to noise problem to contend with. I had to contend with a noise to signal problem.
I used a Bayesian approach. Hardly anyone understood my mathematics. Another (very expensive) group was consulted to ensure that what I did was sound. They saw the same noise-to-signal problem, but they used a frequentist approach to solve the problem. (Hardly anyone understood their mathematics, either.) While they were frequentists and I was a Bayesianist, they concurred that my approach was valid. In the end, it cost two years of my time and a year of that other group's time. Compare that to $200K for sensors plus a few months of the time needed by a low-level programmer, whose code could easily be understood by all. While I had massive geek fun, investing in me and that other group was stupid from both an economic and maintainability point of view.
I have seen this time and time again over the course of my career.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/21
| 1,562
| 6,872
|
<issue_start>username_0: Each conference is on a different continent but is in the same discipline
(A & H). If my proposal is accepted, I will be chairing both sessions but will obviously have different speakers.
I am concerned that the governing associations may not be pleased due to a fear of redundancy.
Is this an academic faux-pas?
An 'emerging scholar'.<issue_comment>username_1: It would be dishonest to do this without mentioning that the algorithm was tuned differently. You ought to specify what the tuning changed and how this affects the results of the algorithm.
You should also list accuracy results for the fast algorithm and speed results for the accurate algorithm. (Your probably also want some numbers for middle of the road tuning too). Not listing the "bad" results isn't dishonest, but it's bad science. If you didn't include these numbers, I'd expect your reviewers to bring it up and ask for them.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To paraphrase your question, "Is it honest to suggest that my algorithm is both fast and accurate when, in fact, it can only be fast and not-so-accurate or accurate and not-so-fast?"
NO!!!
=====
Of course it isn't. Seriously, why do you even need to ask?
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I am just a Master student, so I do not know much of the dynamics of “the game”. Therefore I can only give some spectator opinion.
One of my supervisors likes to have brutally honest plots in his papers. His work focuses on the scaling of parallel algorithms. For starters, he chooses strong scaling instead of weak scaling. The former is taking a fixed problem size and using more processors $P$ to run. Ideally, one would obtain a $1/P$ drop in time. Taking a double-log-plot of time versus process count and also plotting the $1/P$ perfect curve, you see quickly when it goes bad.
Weak scaling is scaling of the problem size with the resources. Then the time needed should stay constant. For problems which become hard to parallelize at some fine level, you will never see anything interesting in weak scaling. With strong scaling you can go into the extremes like “one pixel per core” or “one atom per thread”.
He said that the interesting parts (in science) are those that do not work yet. He surely can make up a plot that makes the algorithm look great. But that is not what he is interested in. He wants to know how far it can be pushed.
I really admire this brutal honesty. If one has results which are only so-so, then this method will clearly show that they are not that great. On the other hand, if you take away all the attack surface yourself, nobody can rip you apart later for hiding anything.
Therefore I would make plots which show how bad the accuracy gets when you optimize for speed. I'd include a honest accuracy vs. speed (or vice versa) plot. Then one can either see whether there is a sweet spot in the middle and how well that actually is.
If your algorithm goes to the very extremes but has a nice middle ground, it is worth mentioning, I guess. And if the extremes are only a few percent slower or less accurate, that also is a result.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Compare apples with apples
--------------------------
Algorithm performance is rarely evaluated in isolation: usually, different algorithms are compared to one another or to some reference algorithm. When doing such a comparison, you should determine conditions in which reference algorithms were evaluated, and evaluate your own algorithm in the same conditions:
* if reference algorithms have comparable accuracy, tune your algorithm to have the same accuracy and compare the performance
* if reference algorithms have similar performance, tune your own to the same performance and compare the accuracy
On the contrary, if you have comparison data in different conditions, it is OK to select the conditions which are most favorable to your algorithm. This is not cheating, but a legitimate analysis of conditions in which your algorithm is the most practical.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In the context of developing algorithms for academic purposes the real 'wall-clock' running time of the program is not important. What is important is the time complexity (see the Big-Oh notation). Usually a few performance tweaks or optimizations to an algorithm do not change the actual time complexity and are thus of little interest.
If an algorithms does change the time complexity, but also changes the accuracy the algorithm has solved a different problem and is not comparable. Still comparing these is a case of serious neglect at least.
Unfortunately, in the real world, only 'trivial' problems, such as sorting a list are so well defined that everybody makes an algorithm that has exactly the same pre- and post-conditions. A good paper comparing algorithms should recognize these difference and investigate their impact.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Until now, I have refrained from joining this site as I did not feel qualified to comment. I left the world of academia two days before I was supposed to have graduated with a BS. (I'll leave my sordid story as a comment). I finally joined this site just because of this question. The answer is **NO**. "Tuned" algorithms from academic researchers bedevil practitioners.
A specific example: I spent two absolutely wonderful years determining how to detect thruster failures on a space vehicle. A previously developed "tuned" algorithm suggested that one could do without the very expensive and failure-prone sensors traditionally used to detect thruster failures by instead using accelerometer and gyro readings. That "tuned" work implicitly assumed perfectly-aligned and perfectly-located thrusters with lots and lots of *oomph*. I, on the other hand, had to deal with the equivalent of a Mack truck on ice with misaligned VW engines and no breaks. I didn't have a simple signal to noise problem to contend with. I had to contend with a noise to signal problem.
I used a Bayesian approach. Hardly anyone understood my mathematics. Another (very expensive) group was consulted to ensure that what I did was sound. They saw the same noise-to-signal problem, but they used a frequentist approach to solve the problem. (Hardly anyone understood their mathematics, either.) While they were frequentists and I was a Bayesianist, they concurred that my approach was valid. In the end, it cost two years of my time and a year of that other group's time. Compare that to $200K for sensors plus a few months of the time needed by a low-level programmer, whose code could easily be understood by all. While I had massive geek fun, investing in me and that other group was stupid from both an economic and maintainability point of view.
I have seen this time and time again over the course of my career.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/21
| 537
| 2,202
|
<issue_start>username_0: >
> When referencing previous results, should one cite the original
> paper(s) or a recent comprehensive monograph?
>
>
>
Specifically, in my area of interest (a relatively recent branch of mathematics), in the last ten years, several monographs have been published (by different authors) which cover (virtually) all "classical" results and most of contemporary developements organizing them, putting them in their context, and offering extensive references to the original papers.
*To clarify my position:* for the sake of "culture", I've read a few of the original papers in which the results I use most often appear for the first time; however, for the benefit of the reader, I'd rather cite only the most recent (and most comprehensive) source (and possibly point the reader to the additional references therein); in my department, there are researchers following either policies.<issue_comment>username_1: Why not cite both?
>
> The following theorem is due to Doe [37]; see also [28] for a modern exposition and further background.
>
>
>
Here [37] might be Doe's original paper, and [28] the recent monograph.
Math journals rarely have page limits, so there's no disadvantage to including more citations. This way you credit the original author and also point the reader to the resource you think will be most helpful.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The point of citations is to allow your work to be repeated. Therefore you must cite the materials you *used*. Consider if the recent monograph [28] had an error: if you cited the original [37] then that would be most unfair to people repeating you work. In the worst case that annoyed person attempting to repeat your work might publish a letter pointing out that your results could not have been acheived from your citations. That's a hair's breadth from being accused of misconduct.
However you also need to be fair to your reader. Imagine a reader who has tracked down hard-to-find monograph [28], painfully translated the relevant passages, and found it was merely an exposition of Doe [37].
You *must* cite the monograph. You *may also* cite the original paper.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/21
| 499
| 2,050
|
<issue_start>username_0: Hoping someone can shed some light, or at least quell my worrying. Probably the latter. Anyways I emailed a professor with just an introductory email, I had read some of his work and would like to speak about my opportunities at the university if he had the time. He replied the next morning simply asking me to send my undergraduate transcript. I send it off and a week later I get this:
>
> I think your background and qualifications are interesting, and I would strongly encourage you to consider applying to our graduate program. If you have the opportunity, I would also suggest that you physically visit us at XXXX before applying to see whether we have what you are hoping for.
>
>
> Do let me know if you have questions.
>
>
>
I guess it sounds encouraging, but my fear is it may just be him being kind. My question is if I should continue to pursue other potential advisors at this school? Thanks for any light you can shed on the subject.<issue_comment>username_1: It doesn't sound like he is just being kind. Using the wording "strongly encourage" is a good sign. Many US universities do not let individual professors have much of a say in a admissions and his response may be a reflection of that.
Furthermore, many professors are not willing to commit to advising any students before they have been accepted. It sounds like this professor wants you to apply and would be open to talking more if you are accepted (or are visiting).
You can continue to look for advisers, but I'd imagine most of them will say the same thing. It's never a bad idea to see what else is out there, but it's hard for many professors to say much this early in the process.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This relates to a whole bunch of other questions about whether you should stop searching for jobs after you get an informal offer, etc. In the end, the top answer is always the same. If it's a good opportunity, good job! But, keep all of your other options open until it's formalized.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/22
| 872
| 3,545
|
<issue_start>username_0: My understanding is that Masters and PhD students often need to TA -- even if they're already research assistants to a professor.
I'm a first year undergraduate who took courses heavily TA-reliant last semester. My impression is that my TAs (oh they were helpful people) don't really get much out of TAing. The job just covers some of their costs and their tuition.
Sure, you may learn a bit about teaching others, but I doubt that you may learn much after three weeks of doing so. Many of the users on this site were once or are TAs. Do you agree with my view?
If TAing is really a necessary evil, are there better ways to fund your education?<issue_comment>username_1: It may be necessary; some universities require students to TA even if they have other sources of funding. It need not be evil. It depends on your attitude (do you want to help students learn?) and which faculty you are working with (Do they care if you help students? Do they care if you learn something yourself?). Unfortunately you usually do not get to chose who you work with. TAs (and also faculty) should receive training in how to teach, but may not.
There are many other ways to fund education, some of which pay better than being a TA, and some of which are more prestigious. They all have limited supply.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I understand that it might often be thought that one learns little more after TA'ing for a few weeks, or a year, or a few years.
However, I strongly disagree. I have seen no cases where anyone came to a profound understanding of the psychology of 18/20-year-olds even after years of dealing with them. Nor understanding the complicated, self-contradictory goals of lower-division mathematics. Nor... Many research-oriented people in math never do quite catch on, although the norm is an uneasy truce with the seemingly-ineffable realities.
I truly think that until one can nearly-effortlessly do a bit (of course, hours within some limits...) of TA'ing, one has not understood the situation of academic mathematicians, and does not understand the job itself. (The "research" aspect has its own invidious pitfalls, but/and these are fairly different, perhaps opposite, from those of TA'ing.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Sometimes? Here's my notion of when it's evil: When a department admits a ton of graduate students it has no particular inclination to mentor much less graduate because without a steady stream of TAs it can't keep its undergrad classrooms staffed. Been there, did that, burned out.
For Ph.D candidates intending to teach, TAships are not intrinsically evil; well-run (not a guarantee, sadly), they are straight-up job training.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I think TAing helps in evolving a graduate student's character. Teaches him/her how to plan courses, interact with students and enhance public speaking/presentation skills. Its the another road "step" into academia (other than research). Perhaps that why it is necessary in many schools even for those appointed with full research funding.
What I don't like about the current system is that TAs tend to teach the same course over and over again! It gets boring and many loses motivation. Also, there can be many grey and shady areas between professors and TAs/graders. For instance, professors asking TAs to do the bulk of the work, being available for extra office hours, write exams, update notes etc. In such cases, TAs tend to agree to these things "most can't even say No!".
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/22
| 2,874
| 12,302
|
<issue_start>username_0: So, before I tell my story, I'll qualify by saying I have a bit of a guilt complex and its possible I'm overthinking all of this.
I was looking through my university's honor code and I came upon "collusion," in which students are forbidden to work together on assignments unless explicitly authorized. This caused me to realize that I had probably broken this rule last semester on a paper in one of my classes. The class is over, I got an A on the paper and an A- in the class.
To be clear, I didn't see what I was doing as bad at the time. We deliberately avoided sharing outlines with one another, and neither of us saw each other's paper. What we did do, however, was work together for a few hours and compile a single google drive file of "paper ideas" in which we assembled references in the two texts (the paper was a comparison of two philosophers). Neither of us had completely read both authors, so list of references and ideas was helpful. Again, this wasn't an outline, just a long page of notes related to the authors, from which we separated and drew our own outlines and wrote our own papers.
I know ignorance is no excuse, and I feel pretty bad about this situation. I'm wanting to go to my professor and explain the mistake, but I'm concerned about it because it was an honest mistake and I'm not sure I want to drag this other person into it. She is graduating in two weeks while I have another year to go.
I'm just trying to get some feedback as to what I should ethically do as well as potential outcomes of this scenario. I certainly recognize that I shouldn't do what I did again.<issue_comment>username_1: As a personal tutor, I actually have to look at students' papers without giving them original ideas or inadvertently intruding on the authorship of papers by commenting too much. Here are some guidelines I'd recommend:
* Sharing citable resources is generally okay. After all, each student has to assess each resource and figure out how it can be used to support their ideas.
* Sharing excerpts from your paper, original methods/algorithms, solutions, original data, results, and conclusions is not okay, and you should **never** copy any of this if someone shares it with you.
* Sharing potential ideas and approaches can be okay, as long as students do not get to the point at which they are sharing original, grounded ideas or conclusions that can then be used by other students. For example, if one student says that they read some long article and felt that it provided sufficient support for a particular conclusion that they have drawn, another student could then state the same conclusion and support it using the article, perhaps without even reading and assessing it themselves, all without citing the student who shared it originally. However, in certain situations, you might even be able to cite a student's ideas, just as you can cite a professor's ideas if you ask them a question by email, for instance.
Based on what you wrote, I would think that as long as you took the shared notes with a grain of salt, did not copy them directly, and looked at any shared references yourself to verify any points made, what you did was likely fine. Did you include any ideas in your paper that were someone else's, but you claim as your own? Or did someone else use your ideas without citing you? These are the questions you want to be asking.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You are overthinking this. I don't want to make light of academic integrity, but given the cheating that does happen all the time, this is a very minor offense. We all make mistakes, and what you need to do now is learn from your mistake (one of the things you need to learn is to not freak out about making a mistake). The appropriate punishment is what you're experiencing right now. Going to the professor now would be a selfish move that is intended to give you peace of mind at the expense of drama and stress for your fellow student and the professor, so don't do it.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: Nothing that you describe sounds *to me* like academic dishonesty. The point of having other students around is to gain something from interacting with them, and your interactions with your study partner sound like helpful studying together rather than "collusion". If I understand it correctly, you did all the writing independently, but you had each done some reading that the other hadn't, and you used that to suggest to each other what you should go back and read and then write about. For me, the only thing that could be problematic is if you used your friend's references to the text *without yourself going back to the text*. This would be a failure of due diligence and a (rather mild, I think) instance of academic dishonesty, as you are creating the impression that you read something that you didn't read. Again I want to emphasize that *for me* this is quite mild: even professionals sometimes quote things secondhand.
On the other hand, internet strangers can only give you so much absolution. If you are concerned that you might have done something wrong -- and it sounds like you are -- talk to your instructor about it. Be honest, explain that your worry that your actions might possibly be problematic came only upon reading the honor code later, and see what the instructor says. The most likely outcome is that the instructor will largely or completely allay your worries, and you will probably also gain a better understanding of what sort of collaboration is helpful and what is forbidden. There is a chance that the instructor will regard your behavior as actionably problematic, but if so the *honorable thing* would still be to bring it up.
Good luck.
**Added**: The above advice is under the assumption that you have no reason to think your instructor or institution will wildly overreact to what should be, at worst, a minor infraction. I don't really agree with the comments which imply that one can never know whether this will happen: in fact, a student attending a particular institution and a particular course should be able to get some sense of this.
If the OP feels that there is a chance that something bad will happen or feels somehow unqualified to think rationally about it (there are a few hints of that here, honestly) he could take a more intermediate step to figure out which way the wind is blowing. For instance he could talk to an ombudsperson or university official and ask about the legitimacy of such a practice *in general terms*. In another situation he could bring this up hypothetically to the instructor, but in this case that seems like a poor safeguard: since the course is over, I can't think of any reason a student would bring this up to the instructor unless he has performed the practice he's asking about.
Anyway, given that the OP is worried about something that I think but am not completely sure he does not need to worry about, I think he should seek reassurance *in some way*. Maybe others regard this behavior of the OP as being primarily pathological / OCD. I don't see it that way: concern about whether you've violated the honor code is not pathological. The OP is behaving in a way which is atypical of most students I've known, but not atypically *worse*. Moreover, talking to someone will give him a clear idea of the line between collaboration and collusion, which should be helpful to him in his last year of study. Lingering guilty feelings seem much less healthy and productive.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm not actually convinced what you describe qualifies as "collusion."
First off, there's some question about what "work together on assignments" means in this context. It's a bit off a nitpick, but if the assignment was "compare the two philosophers" you're off the hook. If it was "read these two books and then compare these two philosophers," then you might need to consider one of the following courses of action (if you feel you must):
(a) you could contact the professor in question and tell him that you hadn't read the entirety of both texts and that you and another student split the reading to find passages relevant to the papers. Presumably, you each read (at a minimum) the quotes you used.
(b) you could contact an ombudsman or student advocate and explain the same and ask their advice about whether you must report it.
(c) you could absolutely nothing.
If you choose (a), then at most universities a *claim* that an event of academic dishonesty has happened depends on the professor filing it. (b) Depending on the university, there may be a common policy that must be followed -- which could include (i) failing the course, (ii) grade reduction in the course, (iii) a mark on your permanent academic record, (iv) a temporary mark on your academic record, (v) meetings with deans, (vi) remedial academic integrity tutorial, (vii) suspension, (viii) expulsion, (ix) effects on your grades in other courses.
My guess as someone with a philosophy PhD who has taught several courses is that your professor will just laugh this off and appreciate your honesty. If not, I can't imagine anyone thinking what you've described merits anything more than a minor grade deduction -- but again some schools have policies that don't leave much room for discretion.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't believe you have done anything wrong. I agree with your insight that you are overthinking this. I don't recommend you report anything that could indict you or your classmate.
I do recommend that you read about ***Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD)*** and notice if you see yourself matching that illness. My understanding is that many people who suffer from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder experience hyper-moral dilemmas and conundrums like the one you face. From what I have read, the *guilt complex* you mention is a common symptom. You may also wish to read about ***scrupulosity*** and see if that sounds familiar to you.
I'm not a medical doctor or psychologist, so if you think you may be suffering from one of those illnesses (actually, I think the professionals categorize them as a single illness), or something similar, perhaps a visit to an appropriate professional may help you in your life.
I wish you the best of life.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Technically, if you walk down the street shedding skin cells, as humans often do, you're guilty of littering.
Telling you not to worry about this is irresponsible. Not because what you did was even close to wrong. But because you're right. The problem is you need to understand the expectations of the culture you're in. While reading the rules is good, reading the rules won't guarantee that you understand.
Read the rules. Form questions. Ask questions. You don't have to admit to anything. Just talk to an advisor or professor about any questions you have about what the rules mean. Following their guidance is likely safer than second guessing the rules. They may give you permission to do things you never imagined you could do.
I've had students nearly fail because they were trying to be so 'honest', they didn't accept any help.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I would characterize your actions as "borderline." In your shoes, I wouldn't worry about them, but neither would I be in any hurry to repeat them.
You and your friend worked together to create and share a common database. On the other hand, you scrupulously avoided looking at or comparing each other's work. There wasn't any actual copying, but your common efforts lightened the intellectual burden on both of you. I would say that you "collaborated" without "colluding."
If you reported it to the professor, my guess is that the likely response would be similar to mine: "I'll let you off this time, but don't do it again." The actual response could be lighter. I would not rule out that it would be heavier (although I consider this unlikely).
Given the circumstances, just "let sleeping dogs lie." It's not a clear violation, although it is close enough to make some people uncomfortable. <NAME>, a financier, warned his people against "just staying inbounds." He said, "You can do very well hitting the ball down the middle of the court.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/22
| 388
| 1,647
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing my PHD in computer-engineering (1st year), and am publishing at computer science and hardware conferences.
My department receives requests all the time, on confernces with high probability of acceptance. (Usually there are too few submissions, so they request for more) These conferences are prestigious, however the sessions, I participate are very specific to a certain project or topic.
There is a lot of progress on my research, but since I am publishing a lot, it is dilluted into more publications.
Can this later hurt my reputation, if I publish extensively on these sessions?<issue_comment>username_1: Is this a co-located conference/workshop? Based on what I've been told by my adviser/post-docs (I'm also first-year CPE PhD), these types of places aren't where you want the bulk of your research going. You're better off aiming for a higher quality paper at the main conference - it looks better on a CV, and it's far more prestigious.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, you are the Ph.D. Candidate in Computer Science, so more than likely you will be able to answer your own question much better than we can for this specific topic.
Ask yourself: Is the subject of your talk at an appropriate Ph.D. level discourse, and will the audience be able to 'follow' and provide valuable feedback for your project? It is entirely understandable that there will be many small niches for any scientific discipline. As long as you are presenting adequate research for the Ph.D. level and the audience is able to follow along, these are very valuable presentation opportunities.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/22
| 969
| 4,007
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m wondering about whether it might hurt to use the "no derivatives" clause when licensing a scientific article under a Creative Commons license. My impression is that nobody ever creates "derivative works" in academia, that would simply be considered as plagiarism.
A related question is the usefulness of the "share alike" clause. Note for instance that the arXiv proposes both CC BY and CC BY-SA. What is the difference? Are there any derivative works of an article that would not be plagiarism?
I’m only talking about an article, for instance a theorem and a proof in mathematics, not about any kind of computer code which one may want to reuse.<issue_comment>username_1: As Peteris pointed out in his comment, using the "no-derivatives" clause essentially means others can share your work, but that's about it. They can't use parts of your work in presentations; they can't build off of it (and then share it); and so on.
As to whether or not that's harmful - that's probably a matter of opinion, but I'd argue it goes against the principle that in academia, sharing is (usually) a good thing.
According to the license descriptions ([CC BY](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) and [CC BY-SA](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/)), the difference comes in the form of having to use the **same license** if you create a derivative work under CC BY-SA. This is a form of copyleft (I believe) - a way of ensuring that the work and its derivatives remains open and free for others to use (as opposed to being able to create a closed derivative work).
As for your question about derivative works and plagiarism - there's a fundamental difference between the two. Plagiarism is the wholesale copying of a work *and then claiming credit for it*. That's both unethical and usually illegal. Derivative works, however, are where someone modifies, builds upon, or in some other way alters your own work *and gives you credit for the original work*. That's a pillar of modern academia - "to stand on the shoulders of giants", as they say.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It is correct that it is very unlikely anyone is going to hack out chunks of a scientific paper and reuse them in another scientific paper - that would be plagarism, and very unsubtle plagarism at that. However, that's really not the main goal of allowing derivative works. (Plagarism tends to ignore copyright anyway, so worrying you've 'given permission' for it is a bit of a red herring...)
These are things that are (probably or potentially) considered derivatives in the meaning of that clause:
* Edited or annotated extracts for teaching purposes
* Translations of the whole or part of the paper into another language
* Modifications of images and diagrams for reuse in other work (or in writing about your work)
Any of these, if done with appropriate permission and attribution, would not constitute plagarism - and all are fairly useful things to allow.
Some of these may be more useful in certain circumstances than others, of course.
There are also some complexities around databse licensing; depending on the jurisdiction, reusing material from a dataset could always be considered an adaptation. CC [explicitly recommend](https://creativecommons.org/faq/#CC0_use_for_data) against using ND clauses for datasets for this purpose. If your paper contains data tables, this aspect may be worth considering.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Let's say that you do a ground-breaking nuclear physics experiment, and the result is neatly encapsulated in a graph. Which outcome do you want?
(A) The graph starts appearing in review articles and textbooks. The captions say things like, "In a ground-breaking 2016 experiment, Jones et al. showed that ..."
(B) The graph is never reproduced in review articles or textbooks.
Keep in mind also that in the US, your unwise legal attempts to achieve outcome B may be thwarted by the fair use exception to copyright.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/22
| 719
| 3,098
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm about to finish my undergraduate degree in mathematics in France, and expect to be close to the top of my class in a top university here. Next academic year, I will be studying for a master's at UPMC (Pierre and Marie Curie University). I intend to apply for PhD programmes in the US or the UK.
Since I will be only a few months into my master's program when I apply, I expect that some of my letters will be from my undergraduate professors. The head of the math department and a professor I've had for over a year said they would write letters for me, but neither one of them have published anything in the past decade.
How much value is given by the admission program to a letter of recommendation written by a teacher at a foreign university?<issue_comment>username_1: The letter being from a foreign university will not itself be a big problem. I think there's always some difficulty switching systems. The most important qualification which might not be obvious (I treat a general high profile and knowing you well as obvious) is that they should be able to convince the reader that they have a good sense that they know what it takes for a student to succeed in the program they are applying to. On average, professors in France are less familiar with US or UK graduate programs than US or UK professors are, so they have a bit less authority on that topic. That's not a huge problem if the letter is otherwise good, though.
I'm actually much more concerned by you saying that they haven't published in a decade. If they really are unknown to the admissions committees that is not good. You might actually ask them if there are any places in the US or UK where they know people well, and where previous students they've written letters for have gone. You don't have to go to those places (though it's worth thinking about), but if the answer really is that there aren't any, that's a big red flag, and you might think a bit harder about the professors at UPMC (which does have a pretty high international profile).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> How much value is given by the admission program to a letter of recommendation written by a teacher at a foreign university?
>
>
>
A priori, the same value given to other letters. The value will only change if for some reason the letter is less helpful (e.g., has little information to contribute, or doesn't know how to write a useful letter---I would not be too worried about the latter in your case, but it is a common problem for letters from academically undeveloped countries).
I'm less concerned than username_1 about some of your letter writers not being research active. Many people who go to math grad school in the US come from liberal arts schools or schools where many faculty are not research active. This doesn't mean they can't evaluate your preparation, intellectual abilities, motivation, enthusiasm, work ethic, etc. It is true that coming from lesser known schools (within or without of the US or UK) can make it harder to get in top grad schools.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/22
| 602
| 2,643
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently submitted a paper to a Management journal, usually if the manuscript is in the review process, it shows "under review".
This time, once upon submission the status turned "in review". I wonder why it turned like this right away and anyone has any idea if there is actually a difference?<issue_comment>username_1: The letter being from a foreign university will not itself be a big problem. I think there's always some difficulty switching systems. The most important qualification which might not be obvious (I treat a general high profile and knowing you well as obvious) is that they should be able to convince the reader that they have a good sense that they know what it takes for a student to succeed in the program they are applying to. On average, professors in France are less familiar with US or UK graduate programs than US or UK professors are, so they have a bit less authority on that topic. That's not a huge problem if the letter is otherwise good, though.
I'm actually much more concerned by you saying that they haven't published in a decade. If they really are unknown to the admissions committees that is not good. You might actually ask them if there are any places in the US or UK where they know people well, and where previous students they've written letters for have gone. You don't have to go to those places (though it's worth thinking about), but if the answer really is that there aren't any, that's a big red flag, and you might think a bit harder about the professors at UPMC (which does have a pretty high international profile).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> How much value is given by the admission program to a letter of recommendation written by a teacher at a foreign university?
>
>
>
A priori, the same value given to other letters. The value will only change if for some reason the letter is less helpful (e.g., has little information to contribute, or doesn't know how to write a useful letter---I would not be too worried about the latter in your case, but it is a common problem for letters from academically undeveloped countries).
I'm less concerned than username_1 about some of your letter writers not being research active. Many people who go to math grad school in the US come from liberal arts schools or schools where many faculty are not research active. This doesn't mean they can't evaluate your preparation, intellectual abilities, motivation, enthusiasm, work ethic, etc. It is true that coming from lesser known schools (within or without of the US or UK) can make it harder to get in top grad schools.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/22
| 992
| 3,911
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an academic and would like to start a scholarly journal. My reasons are manyfold: primarily I want an open access journal, and think that my field needs an own journal.
How do I start a new open access journal?<issue_comment>username_1: See the list of "OA journal launch services" maintained by the Open Access Directory.
<http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/OA_journal_launch_services>
If you learn about other, similar services not on the OAD list, you could help others by adding them. OAD is a wiki open to public edits.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You shouldn't do this alone if you want to have a respectable open access (OA) journal in your field. The first time after launching a journal is critical: You need a good editorial board and a sustained amount of good submissions until you achieve a good impact factor. This is pretty much impossible without the help of an organization or a professional publisher.
You are probably a member of some kind of scientific society which is active in your field. I suggest that you get some other members on board with this idea and lobby for the society starting an OA journal. There are quite a few OA journals that have been started like this. An example from my field are the [EGU's open access journals](http://www.egu.eu/publications/open-access-journals/), which are a huge success.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Here's a book:
Developing open access journals : a practical guide.
<NAME>.
<https://books.google.com/books?id=sbIVAQAAIAAJ&source=gbs_ViewAPI>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I am not having enough reputation to just post comment on topic.
<http://megamozg.ru/post/7612/> — This article, written in russian, covers topic of creating scientific journal from technical side (software, typesetting, registering in things like DOI and ISSN).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Starting an open access journal will require a significant amount of time from a dedicated group of people with expertise in diverse areas. A great resource I found that explains this process in detail is "[Starting an Open Access Journal, a step-by-step guide](https://www.martineve.com/2012/07/10/starting-an-open-access-journal-a-step-by-step-guide-part-1/)". In addition, there are many books on the topic as well, and online resources which I will list at the end.
Why do you want to start an open access journal? To promote scholarly research in your field, to allow dissemination of knowledge, or to increase your own prestige within the scientific community? It may be possible that you will find your efforts more rewarding and fruitful if you are able to contribute to an open access journal. I have listed a few resources below:
[ArXiv.org](http://www.arxiv.org) - "e-paper" of scientific papers in math, physics, computational finance, computer finance. De Facto publishing platform for many fields.
[oatd.org](http://www.oatd.org) - Fantastic collection of Open Access Theses and Dissertations, free to search, download. Great resource for any open access researcher.
[Wikipedia Directory of Open Access Journals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directory_of_Open_Access_Journals) - Before you begin further development on a new open access journal, be sure to check that a journal with your current focus is not already in existence. In addition performing this research will help you to form your open access journal if you decide to pursue starting an open access journal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: The free open source [**Open Journal Systems** (OJS)](https://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/) ([GitHub](https://github.com/pkp/ojs)) software enables one to easily create and manage all the stages (submission, peer-reviewing, etc.) of an open access journal. It will even aid submitting it to the [Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)](https://doaj.org/).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/22
| 1,052
| 4,257
|
<issue_start>username_0: In many questions on this site, I see the suggestion to contact one's university's "ethics board" (or "ethics committee" or similar) to decide in the case of disputes related to research or general ethics. A few examples of many:
* ["Of course, before deciding any course of action, consider consulting the ethics board at your institution."](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/43153)
* ["You would be well within your rights to object to the professor about the content of the assignment (...), or failing that, to the university's ethics board."](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/55501)
* ["When in doubt, consult with your ethics board and the journal you plan to publish with."](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/62609)
It seems that the authors of the respective answers usually take it for granted that the university has such an "ethics board".
I have studied computer science for six years at a German university, and then kept working at another German university for a bit more than five years while getting my doctorate. Especially while working there, I have been heavily involved in teaching, and I was regularly in touch with groups from various other German and also international universities while doing my research. Yet, in my real-life university experience, in no situation have I ever heard of anything remotely reminiscent of an "ethics board".
Therefore, I am interested in the following set of interrelated questions:
* Do German (or maybe European, in general) universities have anything resembling an "ethics board"?
* Is there a body that regularly resolves ethical disputes (or is the ethics angle maybe not that focused because German universities also have nothing called "honor code" or an "ethics policy" (which I see mentioned on this site, too) that could be used as an objective basis for deciding in the case of disputes)?
* Or is all of this nonsense, and it is just that the nomenclature is so radically different that I do not see the analogy to certain boards and offices that I am well acquainted with in the German universities I have been to?<issue_comment>username_1: There is the notion of *Ethikkommission* (searching for it you will find many hits).
However, this is in my understanding mainly concerned with ethical questions related to research activities, in the sense of question whether a particular research activity is legitimate or if there are ethical or moral concerns against it (rather than academic conduct or misconduct). To interact with it is quiet widespread and routine in the life sciences, I think. In other disciplines it is by and large a non-subject.
For the second quote you link to it could be relevant.
As far as other subjects go I am not sure if there is a uniform naming or legal regulations, but typically universities will have things like:
* *Datenschutzbeauftragte* or a *Datenschutzkommission* for issues related to handling of personal data and alike.
* *Gleichstellungsbeauftragte* or a *Kommission fûr Chancengleicheit* for questions related to equal opportunities and discrimination.
* *Behindertenbeauftragte* for concerns of persons with special needs.
* *Kommission zur Untersuchung von Vorwürfen wissenschaftlichen Fehlverhaltens* for investigations of scientific misconduct.
Instead of a *Kommission* it could also be an *Ausschuss,* or some other variation.
At a university level such committees are often attached to the *Senat,* but they can exist on lower levels, too.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Any academic integrity (or general rules of studies) matter concerning students at my previous German Institutions were handled/decided by the Prüfungsamt (office) based on the Prüfungsordnung (document), both being subject specific, the former being composed of faculty and administrative staff.
For simple questions/advice regarding research ethics you discussed with your supervisor. I have not encountered anything like an ethics board during my bachelors and masters studies in Germany. As others commented there might be ethics boards writing general strategy reports but not interfering with student life.
Again, this all is from my limited experience as student only.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/22
| 1,549
| 6,785
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student at a university in Germany. I already hold a bachelor's degree in an unrelated field from a university abroad, and I also have a solid secondary school background with above
average grades in my school transcript. So I consider myself as having the necessary skills for academic success, in general. However, I am extremely frustrated with the state of my current studies.
I feel the teaching quality is very poor and the syllabus in any given subject is overly demanding. My biggest concerns are
* poor teaching quality that manifests itself as insufficient instruction. An example would be the use of PowerPoint slides. The slides are, as a general rule, borrowed from other academics and often contain numerous mistakes or inconsistencies. I would expect a professor to spend more time at the blackboard actually showing how a problem is being solved visually step by step (as I often see in different online lectures from some other universities which turn out to be more helpful).
* Unnecessarily demanding syllabi and mandatory homework assignments in
most courses. On average, according to my own observations, a 3-hour lecture covers about 30-50 pages of a textbook on technical/mathematical topics. The recommended curriculum for every semester includes 5-6 courses which sums up to 150-300 pages of scientific reading on a weekly basis to keep up with the requirements plus weekly mandatory practical homework assignments.
I would really like to get any feedback or ideas as to how I can act to either change the situation at the university (it's quite ambitious but someone has to do something) or improve my strategies in dealing with it.<issue_comment>username_1: Unfortunately, the German university system can be rather notorious for its orthodoxy—things are often done the way they are because that's the way they've been done. And many courses, particularly in engineering, are taught by faculty members who are way too over-committed time-wise to develop their own instructional materials; lecture slides may be developed by graduate students or postdocs within the professors' institutes or chairs (*Lehrstühle*), rather than bythe professors themselves. Moreover, the initial years of the curriculum in some programs are often used to weed out students who are unqualified, since most universities cannot restrict enrollment beyond requiring a certain minimum GPA in high school.
If you'd like to change the system, just about the only way to do so would be if your school offers students the opportunity to sit on the *Kommission für Lehre* (Committee on Teaching) or its equivalent. Coping with it is a bit easier—there are usually resources offered by the *Fachschaft* (student union) for your program.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is already an answer for your question on *how to change the situation*. I add another to your other question on *how to improve your strategies in dealing with it*. My view is from teaching mathematics in Germany, so its not clear if it applies to other fields as well.
What you describe as "very poor teaching quality" does not strike me as "objectively poor". You describe short "classroom teaching" and "heavy mandatory homework". I may go as far and say that this is not a bug but a feature. It is on purpose. German universities generally work like this in that "teaching" does not happen so much (few hours per course per week), and "learning" happens mostly outside the classroom. Students are considered adults and they are suppose to plan their time and allocate enough time to learn the subject.
For example, when I teach mathematics, the whole "module" usually consists of four parts:
1. **The lecture.** There I am at the blackboard and present things. I explain definitions, state theorem, put them in context, prove them and provide some examples. That I "spend time at the blackboard actually showing how a problem is being solved visually step by step" usually does not happen. I work through examples that may be similar to homework questions but this is slightly different. This is about 2 to 4 hours a week.
2. **Self-study.** The students do this on their own, sometimes alone, sometimes in groups (which I encourage). This happens whenever the students want to. The students are supposed to work through the lecture, check if they got everything right and probably fill in some details. This is also about 2 to 4 hours per week but this varies individually.
3. **Homework.** I give problems for homework. The students have to learn to use mathematics and not only know it. The problems vary from "standard calculation" to "tricky calculation" to "simple application of a definition" to "tricky proof". The student can do homework whenever they want, they can ask me or a TA basically any time if they have questions or get stuck but they have to hand it in on time. This should take roughly 4 to 8 hours a week and is the largest chunk.
4. "**Exercise classes**". Here a TA works work with the students on the homework. Students present what they have, can ask questions, get additional explanations. This is about 2 hours a week.
You see, a small lecture of 4 hours a week will indeed mean about 18 hours work per week. Also, all four part serve their own purpose: In the lecture students shall learn the content and see how the theory in built up. In their self study they strengthen their understanding and "learn to learn mathematics on their own". In the homework they learn mathematical skills, i.e. to actually use mathematics to do something. Also they learn to write down mathematics. In the exercise classes they learn to communicate mathematics (orally) and also to present mathematics.
The lecture is the only place where an instructor has the lead. In the other parts the students are responsible for their learning. Not everybody can do this. Some people fail because than are not able to plan their time, do not have the discipline to work on their own or just don't manage to come to office hours to ask questions.
So in short: I as the lecturer are responsible for good teaching but the students themselves are responsible for their learning. That's sometime tough the realize but once you do, it may really help.
Problems start when the lecturer does not take his responsibility for good teaching serious, does not answer questions, give bad lectures…
So how to deal with this: Take the responsibility for your own learning. Demand good teaching but not expect that the lecturer will show you how to do your homework. Do not come to office hours and say "I have no clue where to start" but ask "I am stuck at this point. I tried this and that but I still stuck. I can make this technique work."
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/04/22
| 1,070
| 4,549
|
<issue_start>username_0: I often work with graduate students at a particular university in Europe (I am in the US), in a kind of supervisory role.
In the past, I've used a shared wiki for this kind of collaboration. The students take informal but very detailed notes on the wiki as they work. I regularly check on the latest contributions, and comment on the wiki directly if I have something to add. This is analogous to the way I can "drop in" on local students and check in/help out whenever I find myself with some free time on my hands (which is much more frequent than my availability for "real" scheduled meetings.)
It is especially useful because the difference in timezones makes it hard to schedule "face to face" meetings over Skype.
A student I am currently working with has informed me that he has dyslexia. His writing speed is slow, so keeping copious notes on a wiki is just not practical. (Even instant messaging is difficult.)
Any suggestions regarding how to facilitate this collaboration?<issue_comment>username_1: Have him take verbal notes and try automatic transcription software to post the notes to the wiki. This might be somewhat faster for him than writing by hand.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are interesting aspects raised by this question, not the least at which end of a distant interaction does the adjustment take place. Should the dyslexic collaborator make adjustments or should the other party make accommodations? The issue of the influence any legislation is also interesting.
If the collaboration arrangement is a formalised one, does any anti-discrimination laws apply at the US end which would require the US party to make adjustments? Not knowing details of local laws I cannot say, but local advice might need to be obtained. Even if it is not a requirement to do anything there may be other imperatives such as the protection of university reputation that could be affected by not being able to enable effective collaborations with disabled students.
At the [European end](http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/law/index_en.htm) the location would indicate if their university should be providing resources to enable adjustments. If it was the [UK](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HyDEhfzTTC4ify6EvISFCTsN2hPLYt4JSd1N9iIPiFQ/edit?usp=sharing) (I know it is not) the the student's university would already have an obligation to support adjustments to enable the participation in the collaboration on equal terms.
Having discussed **who** might have to make adjustments, lets looks at possible means of adjustment. The most obvious mechanism is speech to text software, but even the best software has trouble with non-native (and some native) accents as well as the technical material often contained in Phd research discussions. Many regular uses of text-to-speech use a special "talking-to-the robot" form of speech to ensure accurate transcription.
This leaves two other approaches. The move to a reduced text content or human transcription.
Many dyslexic people find lengthy textual prose difficult. Often diagrams or speech are better. A tools that is often recommended are idea capture using brain-ware mapping. An example of such a Tool is [Inspiration](http://www.inspiration.com/). The research ideas can be captured in diagram form and pasted into a discussion wiki. Using a diagram the dyslexic and non-dyslexic collaborators can communicate on equal terms.
If speech transcription seems to have a rôle then, perhaps, junior researchers, such as undergraduate volunteers could be used to transcribe. This could happen at either end depending on availability of labour or funding.
For a dyslexic student where funding is available there are software solutions that are very helpful in preparing text. Some tools assist in the conversion of non-linear expression into structured text (such as Inspiration as already mentioned), but there are also writing tools. I find [Texthelp gold](https://www.texthelp.com/) can be very useful, but others are available.
I final thought; It is often said [we are two nations divided by a common language](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/74737/what-is-the-origin-of-the-phrase-two-nations-divided-by-a-common-language) and as such there can be linguistic difficulties between the most erudite writers on different continents. Just think how much harder it can be when dyslexia is introduced into the mix. As with both issues dialect or dyslexia, a little tolerance goes a long way.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/23
| 1,199
| 5,199
|
<issue_start>username_0: Any standard presentation starts with an opening slide which displays the title of the presentation, name of the speaker and collaborators, affiliation and some attractive image.
Before any conference presentation the chair of the session usually tells the audience the name of the speaker and the title of the presentation. I have seen the following scenarios happen:
* Speaker completely ignores the title slide and goes straight into the rest of presentation (assumes that after the chair gave the introduction there is no need to repeat his name/title)
* Speaker gives an "extended version of the information". Example: "My name is X and today I will be talking about [insert more verbose version of the title]. I work in University U and collaborate with Y and Z". This can already serve as an introduction or an overview about what will be addressed during the presentation. (Should there be an overview slide for this instead?)
So, how important is the first slide of a presentation? What information should the speaker transmit in it? How much time should the speaker spend with it?
Does it matter if we are talking about a conference presentation vs invited presentation at an institute?
EDIT: Based on comments - I am aware that this question may be opinion-based but, as Dirk stated in the comments, the answer should be "based on how the different options are perceived by the audience", what impact the beginning of the presentation has in the audience and how it sets the rest of the presentation. Also, I should point that I am still in the beginning of my academic's career, and I still don't have a name that everyone will recognize straight away and immediately know what I do.<issue_comment>username_1: My introduction words are:
>
> Hello, I am *< My Name >*. I am going to present our current research on *< Paper Name >*. Before I start, I must remember to thank my coauthors *< Coauthor names >*; and also acknowledge the support of *< Funding Org Names >*
>
>
>
If the chair has already said my name, and the paper title, then I would be skipping the first sentence.
The slide should support this, and unlike all other slides in the presentation, conveys more information than what I say.
For example I don't say my university name, because the logo conveys it better.
* My Name (Bolded on slide)
* Coauther Names
* Paper title
* Funding Org Names/Logos
* University Names/Logos
I think you can skip **date and conference name** because your audience presumable knows when and where they are.
Unless you are obliged otherwise, this can be the only place you show the university and funding org logos/names. Which lets your slides be much more clean and minimal.
**Side note:** Never do an 'Table of contents' overview slide, unless you are doing something over an hour long. Something more like an 'abstract' is better, if your title alone doesn't convey enough.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've heard the following advice: When the people in the audience see somebody they don't know, they'll be asking themselves "What kind of guy is this?" for at least some minutes. I guess anybody does this, mainly subconscious. This implies that it is harder to convey technical information in the first minutes, since people work subconsciously to find out who you are and what they should think of you.
So when I start my presentation I always have at least three sentences that are not technical. This can be "Thanks to the chair for the (nice, warm) introduction.", "Thanks to the organizers (I prefer to give names here) for having me here (at this nice place/great session).", "My name is... and I will speak about... (collaboration with...)...". There could also be a sentence about the meeting in general or one that relates the talk to previous ones at the conference.
This may cost you one or two minutes which you loose for your precious technical content, but I think it's worth it if at least a few people in the audience don't know you already. If you don't spend these few sentences, the chance is higher that you'll loose these people from the very beginning. Anyway, conferences are (in my understanding) as much about people as they are about research. If I go home from a conference and didn't have had nice conversations and met a few new people, it wasn't a good meeting.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: What are you doing and why would you spend months of your life doing it.
* If you are studying microorganisms found in the Baltic sea: why is the Baltic special? Why are the microorganisms interesting? What kind of information, in very broad terms, can they tell you?
* If you introduce a new algorithm to process some data: what was the problem with the previous ones?
And so on. I have attended many talks where I get a fair idea of what they are doing, but I am none the wiser on why would that even be a thing. And I am sure they have their good reasons, but they are probably only evident to an expert in their work, not the general audience.
In short: you have between one and two minutes to convince the audience that your talk is worth listening to and why.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/23
| 1,483
| 6,322
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a TA I conduct computer laboratory classes (the lecture is conducted by one of the professors). These are part-time studies, so labs take place during weekends, 3 clock hours each. Some students are older than me and are mostly male (I'm female). Some students have longer job experience than me, but I still feel I can teach them something important, not particular technologies, but rather an *engineer attitude*.
I prepared detailed written tutorials for these classes, which students follow step by step. At particular steps there are some general remarks included, like *as you just saw, it's a good idea to include validation both at client and at the server site*. The reason I don't say these remarks by myself, is that the speed of work differs significantly from student to student.
The result is that I don't have anything to do during these tutorials. I say a small introduction at the beginning, but it's not extensive, because the theory is covered at the lectures. Students don't ask me for help because the written tutorials address a large set of mistakes that students from previous years already did. When they really don't know what to do, they ask their colleagues.
In rare occasion they ask me a question I rush to them and explain everything, I also say in the beginning that if they have any questions I will be happy to help, so I don't think I deter then from asking for help.
But still I sit silent for most of the time. I only make few rounds around the lab, asking if they achieved the particular step, but they say they did and that's all. The rest of the time I do other things related to the classes (for example review tutorials, check homework, answer emails).
Last year I overheard students saying they like the written tutorials very much, because they are clear and include everything they need. Still I'm worried they can give me bad notes for my teaching, because from their perspective I do nothing and I am of no use to them during labs (last year my final score wasn't count because too few students decided to grade me).
**What could be strategies to make tutorial-based lessons with tutorials more interactive?** Or maybe I should not worry about it?
My idea was to make the tutorials more vague so that they ask more questions but it seems ridiculous. The tutorials are also used by students who could not attend classes or couldn't finish during labs. Also only first part is step-by-step, because the second part contains homework, on which they can practice self-reliance.
**Edit**
This situation also makes them ask if they can do the work at home, without attending labs and just send in homework. I'm ok with that, but I think my department is not.
I also had a situation when student send me an email with finished task during labs instead of showing it to me.<issue_comment>username_1: My introduction words are:
>
> Hello, I am *< My Name >*. I am going to present our current research on *< Paper Name >*. Before I start, I must remember to thank my coauthors *< Coauthor names >*; and also acknowledge the support of *< Funding Org Names >*
>
>
>
If the chair has already said my name, and the paper title, then I would be skipping the first sentence.
The slide should support this, and unlike all other slides in the presentation, conveys more information than what I say.
For example I don't say my university name, because the logo conveys it better.
* My Name (Bolded on slide)
* Coauther Names
* Paper title
* Funding Org Names/Logos
* University Names/Logos
I think you can skip **date and conference name** because your audience presumable knows when and where they are.
Unless you are obliged otherwise, this can be the only place you show the university and funding org logos/names. Which lets your slides be much more clean and minimal.
**Side note:** Never do an 'Table of contents' overview slide, unless you are doing something over an hour long. Something more like an 'abstract' is better, if your title alone doesn't convey enough.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've heard the following advice: When the people in the audience see somebody they don't know, they'll be asking themselves "What kind of guy is this?" for at least some minutes. I guess anybody does this, mainly subconscious. This implies that it is harder to convey technical information in the first minutes, since people work subconsciously to find out who you are and what they should think of you.
So when I start my presentation I always have at least three sentences that are not technical. This can be "Thanks to the chair for the (nice, warm) introduction.", "Thanks to the organizers (I prefer to give names here) for having me here (at this nice place/great session).", "My name is... and I will speak about... (collaboration with...)...". There could also be a sentence about the meeting in general or one that relates the talk to previous ones at the conference.
This may cost you one or two minutes which you loose for your precious technical content, but I think it's worth it if at least a few people in the audience don't know you already. If you don't spend these few sentences, the chance is higher that you'll loose these people from the very beginning. Anyway, conferences are (in my understanding) as much about people as they are about research. If I go home from a conference and didn't have had nice conversations and met a few new people, it wasn't a good meeting.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: What are you doing and why would you spend months of your life doing it.
* If you are studying microorganisms found in the Baltic sea: why is the Baltic special? Why are the microorganisms interesting? What kind of information, in very broad terms, can they tell you?
* If you introduce a new algorithm to process some data: what was the problem with the previous ones?
And so on. I have attended many talks where I get a fair idea of what they are doing, but I am none the wiser on why would that even be a thing. And I am sure they have their good reasons, but they are probably only evident to an expert in their work, not the general audience.
In short: you have between one and two minutes to convince the audience that your talk is worth listening to and why.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/23
| 974
| 4,375
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the past I used to use a lot of Python/R/MATLAB which are the standard in many scientific disciplines. However, recently I have dived into Julia and now everything I'm doing is in Julia (including workshops, blogs, etc. to help teach and promote it!). And there are a lot of very good reasons to use Julia for these kinds of projects.
However, if I am to be publishing algorithms which have Julia code, should I be expecting backlash from reviewers? Should I have alternative versions (like a MATLAB version) also included until Julia gains more acceptance? I am curious as to whether other's past experience with using new tools was a headache, or whether reviewers tend to find it as a little extra novelty.
The field is numerical analysis, more specifically developing new computational methods for stochastic (partial) differential equations. It's written in Julia because from my experience I get massive performance increases over other scripting languages while requiring minimal coding/debugging time. In the paper, everything is written as psudocode for legibility. Note that R/Python/C have language binding tools which can allow someone (with some work) to use the code as a blackbox, but MATLAB users would have to re-implement the code themselves (the langugages are quite similar)<issue_comment>username_1: I tend to get annoyed reading a paper that has its code examples in an atypical language for the area. I don't want to have to learn the language to understand the examples. Unless the paper is *about the language* and its features or advantages or disadvantages, the example code should be as straightforward to understand as possible, and using a toy or hobby language to provide algorithm examples makes the review harder to do. I'm likely to decline to even do the review if I don't think I'll be able to get through it easily. For example, working in high performance computing (my area), unless the paper is about the advantages of a new run-time system with its own language, I don't want to see some sparse matrix algebra routines in Haskell or Julia since I don't come close to speaking or understanding either of those languages. I'd rather you use a made up psuedo-code description of the implementation and not even provide the actual code unless you're making a specific point about the implementation that's part of the new results.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think that the answer to the question in the title is that the programming language plays no role.
Concerning the question if you should use Julia or/and other languages, I think that the answer depends on your goals. If you head to reproducibility, then just using Julia is totally OK. Julia is simple enough to install and fairly simple to read, so that most people who are really interested should have no problem to test your code. If, however, you want that your code is actually used by others, you should provide an implementation in the "native language" of the community. Providing an additional implementation in Julia to promote the language (and I agree, Julia has the potential to become important in many computational fields) is helpful.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There's two questions here. One is about what language you should write in for the purposes of your paper (and the source code related to you paper). The other is how much you want people to adopt your code.
The first is likely to have a small amount of impact on whether your paper gets accepted - in general it's the algorithm that's important, and your implementation is an existence proof and something you can measure performance on. The other consideration is not to scare your audience: don't make them do more work that they have to.
The adoption story is about how many citations your paper gets. To pick a random example, Numerical Recipes has [115,000 citations on Google Scholar](https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=numerical%20recipes&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=). If you write your code with good documentation under an appropriate licence in a language that's accessible and people want to use, they'll use it and you'll get more citations. If you write in an esoteric language that's less likely to happen. Of course, the trick is guessing what the language of the next 20 years might be.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/23
| 2,304
| 9,722
|
<issue_start>username_0: I majored in philosophy, Late in my undergrad career, I decided I wanted to get into linguistics instead, so I applied for PhD programs. I had a 3.95 GPA, had taken around 15 graduate-level courses as an undergrad (5 in B and 10 in A), good recommendation letters (I think) and an interesting writing sample. In linguistics, publications don't really matter much in PhD admissions. I was also at a top 10 institution for linguistics as an undergrad. I applied to 8 schools, got rejected by 6 and waitlisted by 2 top 20 programs. By strange luck (they said so in their emails), despite both schools having gone into their waitlists in previous years, they did not do so that year.
I decided to take a year off and do some research in order to write a better writing sample, which I did. Everyone told me that was the main weakness of my application. I figured I should have a better chance then. Strangely, I did even worse (better in one regard, actually): I reapplied around 6 months ago, and I got rejected by 8 and waitlisted by 1, which is ranked 2 in the world in linguistics and literally my dream school. Again, despite them having gone into their waitlists in previous years, they could not accept me because they weren't able to go into their waitlist again. I even got rejected by the university I did my undergrad in, by the professors who wrote me my recommendation letters, even though I was a perfect fit for their program and they knew how I could handle the coursework and do independent research.
I've enrolled at an unfunded (for the first year, apparently I should likely be able to work as a TA during the second year for funding) MA program since I have no other choice. I'm going to have to live on graduate PLUS loans for at least one year. My question is, should I even bother applying for PhD programs again? Maybe I'm just not good enough. Should I just look for a job instead and ditch my masters program? I know for a fact that this is the only thing I want to do for the rest of my life, but if I can't do it then I might as well give up now before going into debt. I can't even imagine doing anything else with my life though.<issue_comment>username_1: Does your intended field have a future? I have a friend who earned a phd from one of the top schools and yet can't find a job. Simply there are not enough jobs. Maybe you did not get in because the discipline as a whole may be languishing.
Don't assume that you are not good enough. It may not be you, but the field. Some departments are terribly under-funded. They also train students for career that does not exist. Check placement records of your dream program.
I myself have a phd from a top school and now I am a full professor. But if i could choose my major today, i would not choose this field. Me getting into a top program is a curse in disguise. I was locked into what i thought then a dream career. Only now i know sometimes it is wise to change your mind.
Not that i am unhappy or regret my choice. All i want to tell you is think this difficult time as a great opportunity for reality check. Not getting in may be the best thing that happened to you in the long run. It is still disappointing, i know. I got more than my fair share of rejection letters. But trust me, you may be spared from even bigger disappointments.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Based on what you've said, there is little to no evidence that you are "just not good enough" for a PhD in linguistics, so it would be a mistake to not apply again for that reason. Rather, you should try to become more "genre savvy",
which in this case means learning more about the application process and what PhD programs in your field are looking for.
Here are some mistakes -- or, at least, opportunities for future improvement --
that I can see based on what you've said.
1) **The writing sample**: To be honest, I'm not sure exactly what this is. In my field (mathematics), we have a "personal statement", which may or may not be similar to a "writing sample": in fact, it mostly functions as a writing sample, as what is expressed is usually not as important as the clarity of the writing and the reasonableness of the sentiments expressed. But I don't know what it means to contribute a writing sample "in philosophy" versus "in linguistics", and I really don't know what it would mean to spend a year improving the writing sample. I hope that academics in these fields can comment and clarify this point. My best guess at the moment is that you are actually supposed to submit a piece of academic writing *in the chosen field*. If so -- applying to a linguistics PhD program and submitting a writing sample from philosophy is pretty strange: given that you took five graduate courses in linguistics, you certainly didn't need to do that. Why did you do that?
I would not take as a given that your writing sample was the main problem -- rather, you should find out; more on that later -- but I would definitely take steps to improve your writing sample the next time around. You wrote::
"And my professor was supposed to look at my writing sample in linguistics, he didn't end up giving me comments. I got comments from a PhD student who knew his stuff really well so that helped, and he said my sample was good."
You are not getting enough help here. A professor who looks over something like this and has no comments is not helping you at all: it doesn't mean your writing is good or bad or anything: it just means you need to find a different mentor. Getting comments from a PhD student is much more helpful than nothing, but a PhD student will have absolutely zero direct experience with PhD admissions, so he cannot directly help you. You need to find at least one faculty member in linguistics who is willing to give you significant feedback.
2) **Programs applied to**: In my field of mathematics, most students apply to about 6-12 PhD programs. You could get away with applying to the lower end of this range if you choose carefully: almost all students should apply to at least three different tiers of programs. The lowest tier should be such that your faculty mentors say that they expect you to get in there. In my field, anyone who would get waitlisted at a top program could certainly get admitted to a lesser (still wholly reputable) program.
Then next year you apply again to only 9 programs **including the world number two program in your field**. Having had to wait an entire year because you "almost" got into a PhD program, you should have applied to many more programs the second time around and also included a lower tier of programs than you did the first time. While I won't say it was a mistake to apply to the world number two, it is also not so clear how close you came to being admitted. The waitlist is still an ordered list. Unless they said you were *at the top* of the waitlist, it does not necessarily mean that you were very close to being admitted, especially since they told you that they didn't go to the waitlist at all. (Also, for PhD programs you should be making a clear distinction between admission-with-funding and mere admission.)
I would suggest that you apply again to PhD programs, to more of them, and with a larger range. Get a faculty mentor in your current master's program to help you with this.
3) **Guidance and feedback**: You have not gotten good advice. It's hard to get good advice, but it can be almost impossible if you don't stick your neck out and try to get it. I strongly recommend that you write to each of the programs that waitlisted you, carefully (though relatively succinctly) describe your situation, and tell them how helpful it would be to get feedback about improving your application. What is the one thing you should work most on improving? In particular, you have a golden opportunity to do this *at your own undergraduate institution*. For that, I would suggest an in person visit. When you talk to your old professors in person, they are really going to have to open up and tell you what happened. You don't want to be bitter or confrontational about it: rather you should make clear what you are doing, which is getting the feedback you need to improve your application.
In summary, based on what you report about your profile, I myself am surprised that you did not get into a PhD program, given that you applied to 17 of them over two years. I think you're right that people with worse records than yours are getting admitted. This means that *something* in your application is not as it should be. It is your life, after all, so it is worth devoting some energy to the sleuthing here: really suss out the problem before you apply again.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: " I know for a fact that this is the only thing I want to do for the rest of my life, but if I can't do it then I might as well give up now before going into debt. I can't even imagine doing anything else with my life though." Here is your answer.
It is really not about you. A lot of the departments have funding problems and they end up admitting only 3-5 Ph.D. students out of hundreds, others accept those who could somehow secure external funding. Maybe you can try that to improve your chances.
Try again. If possible, apply to more schools (I know application fees might be an issue though). Additionally, have a combination of schools that are not necessarily in the top 20 in Linguistics. Have some mid-ranked schools as well to have a backup plan. As a computer scientist, I would argue that the field of technology, particularly CS, will need more linguists for various AI areas, particularly NLP. Don't give up.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/23
| 372
| 1,635
|
<issue_start>username_0: I used results from derivations of a theoretical physics paper in my paper. Is is appropriate for me to include the derivations with a few adaption specific to my work with citations like: 'most of the derivations can be found in paper XX' or should I just cite the final result of their derivations, without writing an appendix section elaborating the derivations?
a little more to ask : is it considered plagiarism if I write down all the derivations with most of them from their paper and a few adaptions even with proper citations?<issue_comment>username_1: '**most of** the derivations can be found in paper XX'
If by "most of" you mean that there are some simple additional steps missing from the derivation but in essence it is the same derivation, then a simple citation would suffice.
If the derivation is more complex, or if there are significant steps missing from the paper you meant to cite, then I think including them in the appendix would be useful.
It is also possible, that the editor of the specific journal you are submitting to would also have an opinion on this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It's standard to write "The derivation can be found in X and is included in the Appendix for the sake of completeness." It may happen that the reviewers suggest to remove the Appendix but in this way the presence of the derivation should not influence the overall suggestion of the manuscript.
You may well give other reasons than "sake of completeness" (e. g. self-containedness, slightly different derivation...) but some reason and proper reference should be given.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/24
| 480
| 1,976
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was working on a project with my PhD advisor that was going kind of slowly. Now he has hired two masters students to "help" me. They are better at coding than me and seem a lot more interested in and involved with the project than I am. What should I do? This is my only project with my advisor and I think he doesn't think I'm very smart.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I think he doesn't think I'm very smart.
>
>
>
More probaby, instead, he just thinks that you're not enough committed to your project. In fact, you write (bold mine):
>
> They are better at coding than me and **seem a lot more interested in and involved with the project than I am**.
>
>
>
You are a PhD student and this is your project, and you should be the one who boosts the project with work, ideas and enthusiasm: how come that these two students seem *a lot more interested in and involved with the project than you*?!
So, take the bull by the horns and be the booster of your project. Otherwise, it's time you rethink about your motivation in doing a PhD, about your interest in this specific project, and about your future goals. And talk to your advisor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It is time to decide whether to lead or get out of the way. If you choose to get out of the way, you will need to either find a PhD project that does interest you or do something else.
The more interesting and constructive option is to decide to lead. You have presumably spent some time learning the background to the project. The new students do not have that background, but are interested in the project. You should do everything you can to help them succeed. Work with them on deciding what should be coded, bringing your background knowledge to the table. Work with them on turning results into papers. You don't have to code better than them, just make their coding more effective than it would have been without your efforts.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/24
| 845
| 3,981
|
<issue_start>username_0: When submitting a paper to a highly profiled publication, like Nature or Science, author contributions must be clarified. This may include study design; data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation; draft preparation and/or critical editing and review of the manuscript.
Among these aspects, I was wondering how data analysis and data interpretation are different? Consider the boundaries may not be quit clear, because more often it is difficult to analyze data to find true patterns without being able to interpret those patterns.<issue_comment>username_1: I agree that the boundaries are not quite clear in that it is impossible to analyse a set of data without giving some sort of interpretation to them at the same time.
The requirement however doesn't mean that you have to identify a single author for each contribution. For example, you can say that author A contributed to data acquisition, author B to both data analysis and interpretation.
In an experiment, data acquisition can simply mean running the tests without processing the data into more meaningful plots or graphs. The latter falls into the category of data analysis. Discussing what the data mean comes into interpretation. While interpretation cannot be absent in any analysis, and so I cannot imagine an author contributing to analysis but not to interpretation, the reverse may be possible. An author can contribute to interpretation without contributing to analysis.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm frequently on the "data analysis" end of this spectrum when I work together with biological psychologists (or psychological biologists). Basically, I run the analyses, do all kinds of diagnostic checks, plot enlightening plots and discuss all this with the biologists and the psychologists. They in turn look at my plots and know what results make biological/psychological sense, e.g., which biomarkers are frequently associated with what disease or other, or what the recent literature has to say about some specific relationship. Or, much more basic, the biologist can tell me which measurement makes sense, and which one *has* to be a measurement error.
*This* is the relationship between data analysis and data interpretation.
I think that this kind of division of labor makes a lot of sense. Statisticians simply know a lot more about statistics than do psychologists, doctors or biologists. And (sorry) I have seen very disheartening things happen if subject matter experts think they know enough statistics to run complicated analyses themselves. Yes, some psychologists do have an excellent grasp of statistics - but most simply don't. And that's how it should be. After all, I don't expect my car mechanic to be able to repair my refrigerator, either. (It should go without saying that I don't think statisticians shouldn't arrogate any specific subject matter expertise to themselves, either.)
The relationship between subject matter expertise and statistical knowledge is a frequently discussed topic in what is nowadays called Data Science. [I have expounded on my point of view here.](https://datascience.stackexchange.com/a/2406/2853)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: You should certainly be able to do both. Data analysis incorporates data management and statistical analysis. In data interpretation you find out what the data means, how they throw light on your research questions. Data analysis is necessary for interpretation; however, data analysis is also guided by your anticipations, i.e. your research questions which again, hopefully, will relate to what the data will tell you (because you designed your data sampling so).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: In requirement,it doesn't mean that to get the identification entailing a single author viable in each contribution. The author A contributed towards the data acquisition, author B to both data analysis and interpretation given as an example.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/24
| 4,611
| 18,618
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is really difficult for me to decide on this situation: when someone calls me and asks for work-for-hire for his/her thesis. I don't know what to do. I want to help and earn money but I think this way of earning money is unethical.
I think that receiving the title of thesis and giving back prepared manuscript is the intention that some people have, when asking for their thesis to be written.
There are plenty of websites offering such services!
The question is that: Is it legal and or ethical to write someone else's master's thesis as work-for-hire?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> when someone calls me and asks for work-for-hire for his/her thesis; I don't know what to do
>
>
>
Just say NO.
>
> I am struggling to earn money
>
>
>
There are plenty of ways to make money. Why do you want to do this? Writing a thesis is not an easy way to make money.
>
> I think this way of earning money is not good
>
>
>
Okay. Then why do you want to do it?
>
> However there are plenty of websites offering such services
>
>
>
There are plenty of websites offering good jobs, why not pick some other **decent** jobs?
Now, back to your main question,
>
> Is it legal to write someone else's master's thesis as work-for-hire?
>
>
>
I am not a lawyer. I don't know the answer in your location. In my location, I do know that you will bear serious consequences if you write someone else's master's thesis and get caught . There are cases that people did this and their own degree would be revoked by the Ministry of Education.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Think about it this way: Eventually one of those people for whom you write the thesis will be working for your stockbroker and influencing your investments, or working for your doctor or a hospital and influencing your medical care, or working for your government and influencing permits and regulations, or ...
Leaving aside the potential immediate consequences for your "principal" and yourself, you would be making the world a worse place for everyone.
Does that answer your question?
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are aware (or have enough reasons to believe) that your work is going to be used as a thesis, you may be considered a co-conspirator, a necessary accessory to crime, or something else, depending on your jurisdiction. So, in my non informed opinion, you are not legally safe.
You point out that there are many of these cases, and they seem to get away. The problem with a broken system is that, at some point, someone is bound to annoy the wrong person: think the surgeon operating on the minister's son, or the Dean's favourite student not getting the top grade, and then heads will roll, and you may find yourself being the scapegoat for the whole country.
Lastly, the existence of websites is not guarantee of legality. First of all, it will be difficult to find out who is actually behind it, and second, it may be difficult to enforce punishments. For example, I am based in Europe, and I am pretty sure if I started writing theses for US students, it would be nearly impossible for the Department of Education to get to me: they would have to get an extradition (if even possible), get my country to cancel my degree, etc. You, on the other hand, are in the same country, and therefore, accessible to the full weight of the law.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As a former academic editor, I agree. You are absolutely right!
Whether or not the act is legal, writing someone else's thesis is helping them commit fraud. You would be helping him or her to obtain a degree that he or she has not earned. The question is, do you wish to participate in that kind of activity? I think you have answered your own question.
Yes, there are (depressingly) many, many, thesis "services" out there. There are many people doing dishonest things in the world. That doesn't make them less dishonest.
It sounds a bit as if someone is pressuring you to do this. If this is true, then for me, dealing with such a person involves finding the wording with which I am comfortable making my stand. Sometimes setting the individual decision in a larger context helps to de-personalize it - I might say that I had considered it, but have decided not to take on full thesis projects as a rule. Or, maybe, I would say that I am going to stick with editing projects for now. Both of these statements relate what my decision is. That is not arguable. I get to say what my decision is. If the person continued to try to argue, I simply repeat what I said, until s/he got it that I was serious. A friend of mine is great at saying, very politely, in many kinds of situations, "I'm sorry, that is not going to work for me," and then offering an alternative. She is voicing a personal preference, against which others can have no legitimate or polite argument. However, every situation is different - each person has to say what reflects his or her thoughts and boundaries.
If this person is desperate because they "have to graduate in May" or whatever, being a former advisor, I would recommend they send see their advisor and confess the truth. Then, try to figure out some options. The world doesn't usually end if students have to finish a course or two over the summer, perhaps you could offer your services for that time. Many students struggle with a large project without supervison. Having a writing coach to keep them on track (you) can help a lot.
If you are an editor struggling for money, that is a familiar problem! More marketing may be necessary, and/or check if your rates are what they should be. If no one ever hesitates when you quote, you may be undercharging. Also, making sure all of your friends know what you are doing, giving them business cards or a flyer, (relatively inexpensive) can help because if you have thirty friends/acquaintances, and they each have thirty, then *someone* in that 900 must need some editing. This is actually a useful way to search for "regular" jobs too. When I was editing I did find it did take time for marketing to pay off - it seemed like people would file my name away, and when the time came (like six months later) suddenly I would get a bunch of calls.
Hope some of this is helpful; please disregard the rest! And please excuse any typos - I am edited out for today!
Good luck.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: I don't feel competent to comment on the the legal or ethical aspects of your situation; my answer is strictly economical.
You should simply demand so much money that you would be equally happy whether your prospective client utilizes your services or not. (This principle is actually independent of the kind of service.)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: While being able to write up your own work is an important part of the education, the students who use these thesis writing services are not going to stay in academia, they only need to have a degree as a pure formality to get a job outside of academia. Usually, only a fraction of what they learned is of use to them. With very high tuition fees to deal with, these students often have multiple jobs and suffer from sleep deprivation as a result. From their perspective, it's quite reasonable to cut corners to get the degree they need asap.
We also need to keep in mind here that someone doing the thesis writing work won't be able to do a lot of nontrivial research work for the student. This means that if the student is able to outsource the bulk of the total effort for research and writing to a thesis writing service, then it follows that the research part is quite trivial. We can thus safely conclude that the academic value of such a degree is quite low, we're certainly not talking about Ph.D theses in hard sciences like physics or chemistry, instead it could be a master thesis in a soft science like sociology. But in practice, as I pointed out above, it's typically going to be used by students who need the degree as a pure formality.
As far as pure academic work is concerned, it is uncommon for people to not write up their own research work, but there are exceptional cases e.g. if a scientist suffers from dyslexia. Also, non-native English speakers may have difficulties writing up their scientific papers, Elsevier has a professional scientific writing service for such scientists.
<NAME> is a notable example of a great scientists who was [so bad at writing that his mother had to write his thesis for him](http://www.vigyanprasar.gov.in/scientists/NBohr.htm):
>
> Bohr could never master the language he spoke or wrote. In fact in his school, Bohr’s worst subject had been Danish composition. It is said that even for writing a postcard Bohr would first prepare a draft. Bohr was not at all comfortable in writing. He dictated his entire doctoral thesis to his mother. While Bohr’s father thought that a PhD student should write his own thesis but his mother firmly believed the task was hopeless. Most of Bohr’s later work and correspondence was dictated to his wife and his secretaries or co-workers. He took long time to write a paper. Seven or eight drafts were very common. Bohr shaped his ideas while orally communicating with other fellow physicists.
>
>
>
In conclusion, while at first sight it may not look ethical to work for a thesis writing company, if we take into account the context in which these companies operates, that should lead to a different view. Context matters because it's no good applying very strict ethical norms selectively, e.g. if you don't want to work on ethical grounds for a thesis writing company and instead consider getting a job at McDonald's, are you then going to consider the ethics of selling Big Macs to obese people?
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: In my country, cheating on the exams, plagiarizing, or getting someone to write your thesis are kind of normal. Imagine trying to remember formulas from your courses, to honestly solve your exam problems, while half of the people in the classroom have their textbooks on their knees and the proctor on the exam pretends he doesn't see. That was how my high-school graduation exam worked. "A mere formality", in the words of one of my teachers.
Now, you would expect this sort of academic dishonesty wouldn't go too far. It turns out that it works at the undergraduate level, too. Only this time, people are more mature, and in a 150 students class, so only 5 don't cheat on the exams, given the opportunity. Then there are the diploma theses. Everyone has to have one, but only 10-15 people go to advisors who are asking them to do actual research. Strangely enough, none of those 10-15 people gets to start a PhD at the university. They just leave the country for a place with a little less corruption.
Getting a PhD in my country follows a few distinct paths. The hard way is to find an advisor who has both a grant and interest for science. The easier ways are to be a professor's relative, or outright bribe a professor, or to be someone with political or financial power. To get the PhD the easy way, you only need a thesis. This is a formality. This is where OP comes in.
Once you have the thesis, the professor makes a thesis committee whose job is to award you the PhD. The committee, and the professor, cost you lots of money. Some professors want just money but there are others who like finer things like art and Japanese cuisine. In any case, this is well worth it. With a PhD you can be a researcher, an assistant professor, or a politician. As a professor, you are so untouchable that you can do things like throw all your students' notebooks over the window and pass the exam only the first ten who bring them back (sorry for not linking this, but I heard it on the bus).
Since the easy way is much easier than the hard way, we have lots of people in the system who just collect salaries. They also have permanent positions in the universities, while the guys who get the grants sit on unpaid "researcher" positions until they get fed up and leave the country.
So back to OP's question, yes, it's definitely wrong, but, if it was my country, the guy would get his thesis written anyway, even if he has to google translate the thesis of someone from Holland. The way to think about things is this: if there are enough people to turn a blind eye to academic dishonesty, soon enough their country would become like mine, i.e. a country whose former prime minister plagiarized his PhD thesis. Or where Italians come to get medical degrees from fake universities. In my country, mobsters, or politicians who happen to be jailed, can also write books in prison, and their term would be reduced. This is a small industry and it was started by another of our prime ministers (the advisor of the one who plagiarized his thesis) who also got jailed for corruption. The way this works, is you ask someone to write the book for you, and, then, there is a university professor to certify the book is scientific. Practically, in every university, there is a professor like that. I could name of the top of my head at least ten famous guys who produced valuable scientific works while in prison, while I barely wrote my own PhD thesis.
In conclusion, if you like how academia works in my country, sure, do the guy's thesis. Maybe you'll end up working for him.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> The primary question is that: Is it legal to write someone else's master's thesis as work-for-hire?
>
>
>
### No, it is not illegal in the US to ghostwrite someone else's thesis.
The [source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostwriter#Academic) is a former [Texas Tech professor](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/09/unemployed-professor-texas-tech_n_1412585.html) who did this to get through hard times.
Your other question about what you *should* do has been beaten to death by other, highly-upvoted answers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Just let's treat this as a theoretical problem.
1. We are now putting ethics aside and focusing on the legal aspect.
(I BELIEVE that what I am presenting is COMMON - meaning that it is true for many countries, and for sure is in line with the European Union laws).
2. If you do not have samples (let's say - patient's blood) you can pay a company that will arrange a clinical trial and pay the patients for participating in this trial. Data acquired this way are legal.
3. If you do not have a PCR machine in the lab you can ask another company to do the PCR for you and pay them for it. This is legal.
4. If you can not interpret the results you could pay a consulting company to write you a report, analyze the samples. You will have to pay them for it. It is legal. This report might be of course big and vast - meeting full requirements of a thesis. This is still legal.
BUT
If a person takes this report - discards the first page with the company's logo, writes his name on it and claims they have written it - this is illegal.
So writing a thesis/report for someone is actually legal, and it is best if you never knew what this is actually for.
The actual fraud is when a Ph.D. student signs a disclosure where he states that this work is his own.
Now if you know that this report is going to be used to commit fraud - then you should have ethical dilemmas - and they are there for a reason.
If you decide to write it anyway - do not tell anyone about it because it may cost you your academic career.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Let me complement the other answers by pointing out what and how helping with a thesis is legal and ethical:
* Expert help during a thesis in itself is both legal and ethical.
As @username_9 points out that typical situations range from getting samples over measurements to data analysis. In addition, you'd typically discuss the interpretation with colleagues and your supervisor and in my field (natural sciences) having someone proofread your thesis is even recommended (and as legal as using spell correcting software).
It is also legal and ethical for the student to pay someone to typeset their text and to make high-quality graphics/drawings/diagrams according to the student's instructions/draft and from the student's data (though that would be considered a luxury).
* But the student (here: Germany) declares which help they had for the thesis. This has to include (typically in the form of acknowledgements) everyone from the TA that took samples/did measurements (who would not endanger instrument by letting other people's master students fiddle around with it) to the supervisor and colleagues for helpful discussion and advice and proofreading friends/family.
* If that does not leave enough own work, there are no ethical problems but the student will fail because of poor performance. In order to avoid this, it is advisable to discuss with the supervisor *beforehand* which help will be obtained and what is the student's very own work in the thesis.
* I'd also consider an opposite ethical point of view: for everything that is not to be done by the student and that is not considered luxury the institute/project and not the student should pay. This way, there is no discussion whether it is OK to have help for sampling, measurements, data analysis consulting.
I do consulting, also for students. However, that's on the basis that the institute pays (hired me as remote-working part-time postdoc instead of as a freelancer - but that'd just legal contract details).
If I had the impression someone may be tempted to omit the proper acknowledgements, here are some steps to take:
* Ask the student whether this consulting has the OK of the supervisor. This can be done when asking who is to pay: the institute or the student. Suggest that the default is the institute should pay, and that you'll accordingly send an offer for the consulting to the institute.
(business perspective: even though universities are very bad at paying in time)
* In the consulting contract, make the student sign that
+ they will properly acknowledge this help in any work using the results of this consulting
+ as far as this consulting constitutes proper research authorship, you'll be co-author of any papers that use the results of this consulting
+ the use of figures/diagrams/tables in theses is permitted on proper acknowledgement ("Courtesy of ...."/"with kind permission by ...")
+ you'll get an electronic copy of the thesis (this gives you the means of checking whether your reserved copyrights are violated).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/24
| 852
| 3,230
|
<issue_start>username_0: From searching online, I see that the salaries for math adjunct professors are about 36k. That's insanely low for New York City standards. An undergraduate business school student that graduates from a decent program will make 3x more money in his first year of work than a Math Phd Adjunct Prof. My question is: What else do these adjunct professors do to make ends meet? Do they typically take on another job? A summer job? Work night shifts at a bar?<issue_comment>username_1: Someone taking such a job almost always is not depending on it as the sole source of income. They may have a spouse who has a more high-paying job in or near New York City. Alternatively, they may be independently wealthy or retired, or at least have enough money to make ends meet for a year or two while they are forced to stay in the city for some reason.
Certainly, someone who takes such a job is doing it because, for whatever reason, they want to be teaching instead of doing something making more money, and they are lucky enough to have another source of income so that they can teach.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: 30% of households in *Manhattan* have an income lower than 36k, according to [census data](http://statisticalatlas.com/county-subdivision/New-York/New-York-County/Manhattan/Household-Income); 36k is actually above the average income for an African-American or Hispanic household in Manhattan. You're right that it's hard to get by on that amount of money, but plenty of people manage it.
**EDIT:** A good point in the comment below: typically graduate stipends are well below this number (31k is the highest I have ever heard for a graduate stipend in math; I'm sure the CUNY stipends are much lower). Of course, most people don't want to live like a grad student forever, but it's not as though it's impossible to survive.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I worked as a math adjunct in NYC for most of the prior decade, making about that much income, no other job, and expenses of about $25K/year. I have a partner who splits expenses with me 50/50 (prior to moving in together we had other roommates who did the same). We live in a nice neighborhood in Brooklyn, but it's very far from Manhattan; we live frugally but comfortably (no kids).
In discussions at school (we've had ongoing contract negotiations for a few years now), the impression that most *other* staff has is that adjuncts are either public high-school teachers moonlighting for supplemental cash, or spouses of other full-time employed people doing the same. I'm not sure I agree with that characterization (it certainly wasn't true for me).
One other thing about teaching in NYC (at least at CUNY): unlike almost any other location, adjuncts here get full health benefits (up until last year via the PSC-CUNY union; now from CUNY directly). So that's actually an enormous leg up over the same job in other locations. Also: You can easily get by without a car here. All things considered, I was able to save more money adjuncting in NYC than I could previously in Boston.
**Edit:** [PSC-CUNY Adjunct Rights and Benefits](http://www.psc-cuny.org/members/adjunct-rights-and-benefits)
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/04/24
| 183
| 804
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently taking up a bachelor's degree in history at a distance-learning college. Since history is not a popular degree in that school, they don't revise their history books/ modules regularly. In fact, most of the modules they gave me were published about twenty years ago and contain few typos and outdated information. Should I make a fuss about this, or should I just correct the errors myself?
By the way, in general, the old references are still informative and useful.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes. They need to be corrected. Otherwise, other students might learn wrong information. Overall, everyone should get updated and state-of-art information.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Just send an email. Most authors keep an errata on their website.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/24
| 2,802
| 12,326
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a fourth-year undergraduate looking to apply to graduate physics program this year.
My problem is this: I don't know how to pick a study/research area for graduate school. I enjoy my undergraduate courses greatly yet I have no idea how I could develop an interest in a specific topic.
For example, I enjoyed my electromagnetism class but I know there are hundreds of research areas in that field. Moreover, there are hundreds of other research areas that I've never even been exposed to. I've tried to look at papers but many feel a bit inaccessible because they are highly technical and specialized. Often, it's hard for me to understand what's going on there.
In summary, here are the two problems that I've come up against:
1. The topics I've studied as an undergraduate are far-removed from the frontiers of research.
2. I don't have the prerequisite knowledge to understand many of the methods and results of papers that I read.
So my question is this:
**Is there any method to effectively 'explore' research topics without having a background?**<issue_comment>username_1: A paper is a condensation of thousands of hours of hard work. Do not feel discouraged if you can't understand a paper even after reading it multiple times. You gain more understanding with experience, but even professors find it hard to understand papers outside their own specialisation(s). They are not very different from you when it comes to understanding a subject quite foreign to them. The problem with research papers is that they omit background information which is well-known to specialists working in the same field, but almost always unknown to those outside the field.
Nevertheless, some papers may be more accessible than others. In my field (engineering), review papers are usually more accessible than regular papers. Review papers give you a taste of the state of the art without necessarily going into the technical details, and you will get an idea of the most important literatures and possible future research directions on the subject. The problem might be in identifying which research papers are review papers, because while some of them are published in review journals (close to my field this would be *Annual Reviews of Fluid Mechanics*, for example), some are published in regular journals, and they don't necessarily carry the word 'review' in their titles. Asking PhD students in your department may help.
When reading regular research papers, it is a good idea to read the abstract, introduction, and conclusion first before reading anything else.
Reading recently published PhD or Master's theses is also a good idea, as they are usually more accessible than the more condensed form of research papers.
Finally, popular science magazines and talks or research bulletins published by research institutes but tailored for the general public might be useful if you want to know what topics are current and who are the researchers active in those areas.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a good question and I'm sure you're going to get a lot of "try doing X" style answers - however, I think it's important to zoom out for a second and remember that there are two forces which decide what topics researchers investigate.
The first comes from within - what you are most motivated and passionate to research, giving you a strong pull factor in that direction. Alternatively, some topics you will find totally and utterly boring, and there is a strong push factor there. When you are young, it can feel like this force is the only force guiding your learning, since you pick your elective modules, you choose which Wikipedia articles to read, etc. This is probably why you feel that choosing a good topic is going to be really important going forwards.
The second force comes from academia itself. Some topics are "sexy" and funding opens up for those topics, pulling researchers in. Other topics go out of fashion, pushing researchers away. This force is created by the hundreds of thousands of people working and funding academic research right now, and is totally out of your control. The significance of this force grows as you mature through your academic career, so while right now you probably barely feel it (beyond the fact that the electives you can choose from are decided by academics), in the future you will be acutely aware of it and how much of an influence it has on your research area. If you ever listen to someone accomplished explain their academic career path, they'll always tell you it was "unusual" because they started in X and ended up doing Y. "Unusual" career paths are so common place that these days i'd only be surprised if someone said they started working on X when they were 25 and now at 60 their still working on X. *That* would be unusual. Of the hundreds of researchers I have ever met, I can only think of 2 or 3 people like that.
So long story short, I wouldn't bother researching around to find other topics you *may or may not* be interested in, because it simply doesn't work like that - particularly in practical/applied Physics or life sciences. You will get funding and find mentors only in the topics society/academia finds most important. To go against the flow in this regard early on is to commit career suicide, since everything you do will be that much harder. No mentors, no funding, no one wants to accept your poster presentation, no one wants to publish your paper, no one asks you to review anything, etc. So from that point of view, if you want to make smart early-career decisions, look at new/expanding areas of research and find a way to make it your own. Learn to enjoy it because you are the best at it and you are energized by the progress you make, not necessarily the subject matter itself. Keep the things you love as hobbies, or save them until tenure :)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I was in your shoes approximately 7 years ago when I graduated with a degree in a biology-related field. I am now studying this as a Ph.D. student, but encountered similar challenges of not even knowing the state of the field at the time of my graduation. There are some ways to overcome this at various stages of your pre-graduate and post-graduate career.
1. Volunteer in a physics lab, a related engineering lab, or even expand your search to tangential fields like biophysics and even math. The point is to get you exposure to an actual research environment. You might look up questions related to picking a good lab to get experience as an undergraduate, and how to land a spot. Many undergraduate programs maintain websites where professors post openings in their labs.
2. Find a mentor, for instance one of your physics professors. Let them know that you are interested in pursuing this as a graduate student, but that you feel you do not know where to begin. Many people will be very accommodating. If you join a research lab (point 1), your advisor there can also serve this function. They can help break down research papers, assuming you've made a good attempt on your own.
3. Take seminar classes where you review research papers under the guidance of a professor and/or teaching assistant. This would be an excellent place to ask very basic questions and get a solid foundation.
4. If you are like me, maybe you will graduate with slightly too little experience/knowledge and decide to work full time as a technician or assistant in a lab for one to a few years. This can actually be a good setting to see what it is like to have to get up and commit a whole day to research for an extended period of time, in spite of failure, in spite of crummy co-workers, or whatever the situation might be. Many graduate students who come straight from undergrad go through a difficult period of acclimating to full-time research, which can often mean quite a bit more than 40 hours/week. You will also get to see how academic research labs work or do not work. As a technician I spoke to all the surrounding labs to learn about their research and get a sense for how their labs worked as small businesses. For some people, doing this cements their interest in graduate school, and for others, they recognize that it might not be a good fit for them, or maybe they decide to go to graduate school for something else.
In the end, like fish in the sea, there are more research topics that would interest you than you could possibly pursue in one lifetime. Thus, the point is often just to find one that suits you and pursue it fully. Then there are the techniques that you use. As you gain experience, you will find that even within one field, there are different techniques for studying the same thing, and maybe you prefer that over something else. I like applying machine learning and high performance computing to my research questions because it intrinsically interests me, gives me options for work outside of academia, and has not been applied much in my subfield, which limits chances of getting "scooped," but did not figure this out until my second year in graduate school.
I also found out that I really like hardware programming, DAQ, and design work, but had no background before graduate school. Thus, graduate school is also a place where you learn about yourself, and you do not necessarily need to have all of the answers - just enough to be dangerous. You can enter with an open mind because it is mostly a learning experience. You need to publish, and if you want to stay in academia, maybe publish an "important" (read: widely cited; read: popular) paper, but you will also likely post-doc, which is another stage for personal growth and exploration.
Physics is also widely generalizable to many areas, from biology to social sciences and finance, and if you have experience with high performance computing, even more areas, although this is not necessary. One of my thesis committee members is a physicist who is applying his training to genomics and has changed his entire field multiple times. Just work on getting exposure, keep an open mind, and good luck!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: In the UK we have Doctoral Training Centres which allow you to spend a year doing short projects and exploring your interests within a wider field. After a year you can choose a supervisor and complete your PhD in the conventional manner. Maybe something similar would suit you?
P.S. I got into electromag at an undergrad level and am now doing a PhD in photonics/optics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The best way to find out about research topics is to talk to researchers. Researchers love to talk about what they do, especially if you are interested. Luckily, you are in an academic department, which is a great place to interact with researchers.
Do any of your professors participate in active research? Ask them what projects they are working on. Ask them if they've always researched the same area. Ask them what they worked on as graduate students. Who taught your electromagnetism class? Go ask them if they use any EM in their research.
Are there graduate students? Ask them what they're working on.
Are there colloquia given by outside researchers at your institution? These talks are specifically designed to teach you something about the speaker's current research. You can hear about what people do. Bring a pen and paper. Write down key words to look up later. If a talk seemed interesting (even if two thirds was way over your head), hang around for a few minutes after and ask the speaker a question. Say "I'm a senior thinking about grad school. How many grad students are in your group? Are you looking for more?"
When researchers use jargon or say something you don't understand ask them to clarify. Don't be afraid, they know you're an undergraduate. They won't think you're not smart enough for asking. They'll think you're insightful and interested.
Later go look up some key words from the discussion on the internet. Don't look up the latest papers. Look it up on [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Physics) or [HyperPhysics](http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hph.html) or [Stack Exchange](https://physics.stackexchange.com/). If you're still interested, go back and ask more questions.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/04/24
| 544
| 2,450
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in a situation where I've probably bitten off more than I can chew. I decided to do my master's thesis on an original (as in, invented by me) machine learning algorithm, which I believe (and my advisor agrees) is interesting and might have something to contribute to the academia.
As a part of the thesis I wanted to implement the algorithm. However, implementing it is turning out to be a major pain. I've been working on the implementation for several months and the end is still nowhere in sight. Due to this, I'd like to change my thesis to be simply a description about the algorithm and comparison of it to existing, similar algorithms.
So my question is, is it feasible to have an original, unproven and untested idea as the main focus of your thesis? This feels iffy to me: master's thesis is supposed to be a sign of academic maturity, but nothing seems more unacademic to me than publishing an untested and unproven idea in the form of thesis, and not even having a working implementation of it.
I'd really appreciate advise, dragging this thesis is really getting the better of me. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: If you have made an original contribution to your field and added to what the community knows, that would seem to me to be sufficient for a master's thesis. Many theses at this level do not even reach that level, and students essentially end up writing review papers for their theses. On the other hand, what you have done does not necessarily reach the standards for a particularly good masters-level thesis. If you are planning to continue in a doctoral program, what will matter will not be whether your thesis is adequate, but whether it is strong enough that your thesis supervisor will give you a very strong letter of recommendation. If your advisor feels that you could have implemented the algorithm, but instead you gave up, that will affect the strength of the recommendation they may give you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Write a chapter of your thesis in the shape of a review paper, which is good enough to submit for publication. Submit it. Write another chapter which builds on the review and uses that as an argument for the derivation of a new algorithm. Present the algorithm. In the discussion, highlight the steps needed to implement the algorithm and point out the problems encountered when you tried implementing it yourself. That's a MSc for me.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/25
| 4,914
| 19,858
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been in the PhD program for a couple years now and I feel like people have a lot of expectations about the way I should think and feel about things. Not just my technical competence, but also my motivations and personality. I am wondering if my motivations disqualify me from being a good PhD student.
1. People expect me to have a specific research area I'm very interested in. I would be fine working in any area and I'm not particularly passionate about any specific field. They also expected me to know who I wanted to work with before I applied to the school (or even choose the school based on the advisor), and I only started thinking about that during visit weekend, when professors pitched their research to the students.
2. I chose which schools to apply to based on the US News rankings, and I went to grad school because it was more prestigious than the jobs I would be capable of getting. It seems like nobody in grad school does this, even though I feel like for most people it is natural to go with the most prestigious option.
3. People expect me to go to talks and read papers for fun. I don't understand how most people could possibly find talks fun. Honestly I would rather watch a movie or play tennis. I also find papers boring and difficult to read, unless they are in very soft subjects with no math.
4. When people come to my school to give talks, people invite us to meet with the speaker one on one. I have no idea what students would talk to the speaker about or why they would want to sign up to talk to a stranger. I guess they could collaborate with the speaker on research, but I would expect the professors to set up these kinds of collaborations instead of the students. (It would seem weird to finagle my own collaborations because the advisor might not want to collaborate with those people.)
5. I have seen professors leave my university and expect their students to go with them. I think if my advisor left my university, I wouldn't want to leave, because I have good friends here and I am dating someone. It seems weird to be expected to uproot your life and move across the country just because your boss is leaving.
6. I follow my advisor's instructions on things and once in a while he says that I need to be more independent. But if I did that I would be going against what my advisor tells me to do, and I think it's weird that my advisor tells me to do things and then tells me not to do what he tells me to do. He said he expects me to "push back" and I find that kind of intimidating, because he is a professor after all.<issue_comment>username_1: You have been in the PhD program for a couple of years now, and still surviving.
Presumably you have passed the qualifying exams / oral exams, and did ok for the coursework. I would say that you are doing well, from the perspective of a fellow graduate student.
I think the only personality trait you need now is perseverance. Only think about the rest once you have completed your PhD and decide whether you want to continue in academia.
The fact that your adviser wants you to disagree with him sometimes is a sign that you have a good advisor who doesn't mind being challenged.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It seems to me that many of these points could hit on very superficial differences — e.g., use of different words to describe essentially the same thing, or emphasis of one type of feeling over another, although most people have both. On the other hand, taken together these *could* be signs that you are not interested in a long term (i.e., post-PhD) academic career. Or not: that's up to you to figure out. Let me quickly address your points:
>
> 1) People expect me to have a specific research area I'm very interested in. I would be fine working in any area and I'm not particularly passionate about any specific field."
>
>
>
The negative way to spin that is that you're not passionate about anything. The positive way is that you're interested in *everything* and willing to be versatile. I am a tenured academic, and construing the above sentences in the positive way as I did applies pretty well to me. Why are modular forms or Shimura varieties more interesting than Galois cohomology or geometry of numbers? Answer: they're not, and I think it's *slightly* weird that most of my colleagues work exclusively in just one or two of these areas.
>
> They also expected me to know who I wanted to work with before I applied to the school (or even choose the school based on the advisor), and I only started thinking about that during visit weekend, when professors pitched their research to the students.
>
>
>
You didn't mention your academic field. In mine (mathematics), most American PhD students don't give any serious thought to their research area until their second year. So… clearly not a fundamental tenet of "PhD personalities".
>
> 2) I chose which schools to apply to based on the US News rankings...
>
>
>
So? I see no issue here whatsoever.
>
> 3) People expect me to go to talks and read papers for fun. I don't understand how most people could possibly find talks fun. Honestly I would rather watch a movie or play tennis.
>
>
>
This seems like a conflation of what "fun" means. There is professional fun and leisure fun. You watch movies in the evenings and on weekends, and (except for weekend conferences, which I freely admit are not necessarily the events that I look forward to with bated breath) you attend talks during normal business hours. On the other hand if you *never* read papers except when specifically asked / required to do so, that could be a problem.
>
> I also find papers boring and difficult to read, unless they are in very soft subjects with no math.
>
>
>
You didn't say what field you are in. (If it's math, this is concerning!) It is also worth pointing out that reading papers is **really hard** for most graduate students for the first 1–5 years or so.
>
> 4) When people come to my school to give talks, people invite us to meet with the speaker one on one. I have no idea what students would talk to the speaker about or why they would want to sign up to talk to a stranger.
>
>
>
I felt exactly the same way as a graduate student. Why would a famous mathematician want to meet a 24 year-old who is not yet fully fluent in the language the mathematician has been speaking for the last 20–40 years? I found it very strange that some of my classmates saw no awkwardness there. Now as a thesis advisor I wish my students interacted more with visiting mathematicians…
Somewhere between being a grad student and advising them I began to view myself as a professional. I now know that most academic jobs are offered based on some prior knowledge of or interaction with the candidate, so having visiting luminaries be able to connect a name to a face and view you as someone who is actively participating in the profession is very valuable. Getting students to understand, believe in and take part in their own professional development is one of my major goals these days (I've just accepted the job of departmental graduate coordinator)
>
> 5) I have seen professors leave my university and expect their students to go with them. I think if my advisor left my university, I wouldn't want to leave, because I have good friends here and I am dating someone.
>
>
>
Here I think you are probably suffering from "small sample size" issues. The majority of graduate students do not leave when their advisor leaves. It's nice for the advisor to offer the option, but it is not practical in many cases… for the reasons you say. On the other hand, if the idea of being uprooted seems sufficiently bad to you, then the academic lifestyle may prove unappealing, because the "uprooting" is probably going to happen several times before (if!) you land a tenure-track job.
>
> 6) I follow my advisor's instructions on things and once in a while he says that I need to be more independent. But if I did that I would be going against what my advisor tells me to do, and I think it's weird that my advisor tells me to do things and then tells me not to do what he tells me to do.
>
>
>
I think you are not properly understanding what your advisor wants. You make it sound like he wants you to sometimes stand up and refuse to do what he asks. That's insubordination / contrariness. Independence means that you do what your advisor asks *and* you do other things on top of it that you thought of yourself.
In summary: I see nothing definitive here. I could try to read the tea leaves but… **it doesn't matter what you or I think right now**. Unless you are miserable and/or failing out of the program, you should continue on in the PhD program, both doing your best work and doing your best to be happy about it. As you proceed, keep an eye out for both things. As you near graduation, you will have a better idea of where to proceed from there. You don't need to "figure out your personality" as a second year student, and I don't see much of anything positive coming from it. Definitely resist the idea that you must have a similar personality and/or similar practices to those around you in order to be successful. Even — especially — in academia, there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: Every grad student must face his/her demons eventually, and I think the process has started in your case. One thing that stands out in your questions is "am I what 'people' expect of a regular grad student?" That is, the sum total of your questions is an attempt to evaluate whether or not you fit the mould. I suspect you are going to come across only unsatisfactory answers, since you already know that your expectations and personality are *different*. But I won't jump at the conclusion that you are an *unsuitable* grad student.
Try to think about what you want from this program. You say you chose this program as an alternative to jobs, hoping to find better jobs upon completion. But pursuing a PhD is unlike any 9-to-5 job. It is unlike any thing you might have experienced in your internships. Make no mistake, successfully completing a PhD program does require dedication, hard work, and mastery over at least one (sub-sub-sub-...) topic. You can't conjure dedication and hard work out of thin air. That requires *motivation*.
In an academic sense, you have been having fun so far... In two years, you haven't figured out a direction -- not necessarily an exact problem -- for your research. Time to reflect whether a PhD is really necessary for your goal of finding a better job, or whether you can do it already with the help of umpteen MOOCs available (almost) for free on the internet. Set a timeline for your decision. You will not be able to escape hard work anywhere; if you choose to stay, then buckle up.
If you think that nearly every topic is as interesting as the other, then pick a one that builds on your current strengths. Let's say you have already done work in topic X (read your CV to find possible candidates X). Ask your supervisor to steer you toward suitable problems in X. Supervisors are helpful in setting *meaningful* and *achievable* goals. But take it upon yourself to dive into it. Your prior background will take care of boredom and incomprehension. Read, experiment, discuss, refine, repeat. In a couple of iterations, you will not only have a problem statement, but something that you will very likely be passionate about.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I will disagree with many of the other answers: a great many of the attitudes you express strike me as red flags. If you were my student, I would be quite concerned that you do not understand what it means to be successful in graduate school, or what it requires.
(You say you are a "couple" years into your PhD, but it's not clear what that means. And it makes a big difference, because independence and motivation are among the most important things students learn in their first years in grad school. If you are a first-year student: no problem, most first-years haven't learned how to work independently or motivate themselves yet. But if a fourth-year hasn't learned these skills yet, I'd be extremely concerned.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Pete's answer is, as usual, great. I just want to elaborate on this issue:
>
> 3. People expect me to go to talks and read papers for fun. I don't understand how most people could possibly find talks fun. Honestly I would rather watch a movie or play tennis. I also find papers boring and difficult to read, unless they are in very soft subjects with no math.
>
>
>
This was the main comment that worried me, but as Pete says, the discrepancy between what you say and what I expect may be partly a matter of word choice. But I think a better question might be:
* Do you enjoy learning about and discussing your subject?
If your answer to this no, then this *is* a big red flag. Otherwise, yes, there are different interpretations of fun, and here is a probable reason for your lack of enjoyment of talks/papers:
What should make these enjoyable is that you understand (at least parts of) them and learn something. Depending on the talk or paper, it takes a certain level of sophistication to appreciate it. You wouldn't expect a 4rd grader to enjoy reading *<NAME>* even if they know most of the words, or (normally) expect a toddler to appreciate the taste of a good beer. Learning how to read in grade school isn't necessarily enjoyable, but being able to read and reading books at your level can be very enjoyable. It does take a lot of effort to get yourself to a level where you can enjoy research talks and papers, and even then, some talk and papers are just unenjoyable. As with most pursuits, there will be more pleasant and less pleasant parts, and what to do is a question of your overall experience.
**Edit:** By the way, <NAME> has nice suggestions on getting things out of (math) talks as a grad student [here](http://math.stanford.edu/~vakil/potentialstudents.html) and [here](http://math.stanford.edu/~vakil/threethings.html). Check it out.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: 1. The only issue I see is if you won't accept a more specific area of research. Maybe your advisor could help you narrow it down.
2. No issue here, since you didn't have a focus to guide you.
3. I'm not sure most people do it for fun. More to acquire greater knowledge. Not everything will be useful to your research, but you could gain exposure to information that helps you better able to understand / model your research.
4. Access to an expert, who might be able to point you in the right direction. You can't expect them to partner with everyone.
5. I'd expect this to vary based on individual circumstances.
6. I think he wants you to say something if you feel that there is a better direction to go.
What most of this sounds like is how to leverage resources. Anytime you can leverage someone else's research, gives you more time to work on the specifics of your research. If you feel comfortable with your progress towards your goals than don't worry. On the other hand spending time at talks or reading papers could get further than you'd get on your own. Hope this helps a bit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: A few thoughts...
>
> People expect me to have a specific research area I'm very interested
> in. I would be fine working in any area and I'm not
> particularly passionate about any specific field.
>
>
>
Maybe you're passionate about *learning*, or *research*, rather than the particular subject. But when you get deeply involved in a project, and start contributing your own ideas, you may become passionate about that project.
>
> People expect me to go to talks and read papers for fun.
>
>
>
A few talks and papers are fun, but most aren't. And even the ones that are entertaining require some work on my part to understand them. I don't read papers or attend talks expecting to have fun, I do so in the hope that I might learn something useful or get some good ideas.
Now, if I find something interesting in a paper, I might excitedly describe it to someone else. That might give the other person the impression that I found the paper fun and easy to read. But chances are I slogged my way through it until I got the point.
>
> I have seen professors leave my university and expect their students to
> go with them.
>
>
>
That's your choice. Following your advisor to a new university is not a given.
>
> I follow my advisor's instructions on things and once in a while he
> says that I need to be more independent.
>
>
>
It's difficult for a lot of students to make the transition from seeing a teacher as the all-knowing font of wisdom, to an advisor, and eventually a colleague. But it's your PhD, and the advisor is just there to... advise. It might be helpful to think of your advisor as you would your doctor. If your doctor recommended surgery, for example, I'm sure you'd ask some questions before agreeing. And after listening to the pros and cons, you might still choose a different treatment plan.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> I follow my advisor's instructions on things and once in a while he says that I need to be more independent. But if I did that I would be going against what my advisor tells me to do, and I think it's weird that my advisor tells me to do things and then tells me not to do what he tells me to do.
>
>
>
He's your *advisor*; he's there to advise you. He's not your boss (though see below).
Part of the purpose of the course is for you to develop your skills in independent thought and reasoning. Your advisor is expecting you to engage in intellectual debate and discussion with him/her about your work and the tasks comprising it.
Simply following instructions is not good enough!
This is not specific to academia; you'll find it in industry, too. A "yes" man is obedient but not valuable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: An academic career is probably one of the most competitive jobs you can choose. If you are not extremely passionate about it, you will fail.
In my country (Germany), if you are enrolled as a Ph.D. student, you have three years to finish your degree. After 18 months your work until then will be evaluated. If you don't deliver, you will be kicked out. (This is, because you are wasting public resources. If you do your Ph.D. as an "extern", you can take as long as you want, but will have no resources and no support to speak of. That is the path people take who are working other jobs and want a title for career reasons, but not go into academia.)
Finally, I don't understand why you would want to waste your life on something you are obviously not interested in. Do what really interests you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: >
> People expect me to have a specific research area I'm very interested
> in. I would be fine working in any area and I'm not particularly
> passionate about any specific field.
>
>
>
This seems to be your only problem. The other issues stem out of your lack of passion for what you are researching into. Each PhD program is different and each field is different, but I think very few people find passion right when they start any PhD program. It would be like falling in love with the first girl you meet.
In the beginning of most PhD programs, you are exposed to a great variety of new research methods that you can use to better understand the world around you. Then you suddenly find yourself being able to research into issues that concern you. That is when you develop your passion. Just keep studying hard, be patient, and keep your mind open and you will find something you are interested in.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/25
| 346
| 1,534
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am developing an algorithm, and I want to compare its performance with various existing state-of-the art methods. I would like to contact the authors of these methods and ask if they can send me the code for their methods.
What should I tell them? Should I say that I am developing a method that is in some way an alternative to their method? Or is enough to ask to say that I want to do generic comparisons?<issue_comment>username_1: You will want to show mathematically that your algorithm performs better than existing methods.
Before you contact anyone, learn a bit about [Big-O notation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation). The real comparison won't be running benchmarks, it will be analysis of your algorithm and theirs. (The other authors have probably already done their part by publishing analyses of their algorithms, or someone else has.) So, you probably don't need the code.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Tell them what you told us. You are working on a different algorithm and implementation for the same problem and you'd like to compare to the state of the art. You've read their papers (cite them), and you'd like to see if their code is available for cross-comparison.
If they don't make theirs available, you may have to reimplement their algorithm in your code as well. This latter case is pretty common. There's a chance you might not do this as well as them, so there's some incentive for them to give you their code to get a proper comparison done.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/04/25
| 508
| 2,182
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a master student at one of the best universities in Europe. As I am studying finance, I would like to have an experience in the US or London.
I will have to start working on my master thesis next year, and I would like to use this opportunity to go abroad to an important institution; my idea would be to write to a professor and ask him if he would be interested in co-supervising my master thesis; I would not be paid of course but would enjoy the experience.
Is this considered proper or is it rude / weird?
Of course I will look at professor that works in an area that interests me, but I probably wouldn't be able to specify a particular topic right now (I will do an internship next semester where I plan to find a particular problem to work on, but I don't know yet).
The start of this thesis would be next year, but I think I should start contacting people now for this kind of proposal.
So in conclusion is this something that happens? Should I really do more research before contacting a professor? How can such an interaction be phrased?<issue_comment>username_1: You will want to show mathematically that your algorithm performs better than existing methods.
Before you contact anyone, learn a bit about [Big-O notation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation). The real comparison won't be running benchmarks, it will be analysis of your algorithm and theirs. (The other authors have probably already done their part by publishing analyses of their algorithms, or someone else has.) So, you probably don't need the code.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Tell them what you told us. You are working on a different algorithm and implementation for the same problem and you'd like to compare to the state of the art. You've read their papers (cite them), and you'd like to see if their code is available for cross-comparison.
If they don't make theirs available, you may have to reimplement their algorithm in your code as well. This latter case is pretty common. There's a chance you might not do this as well as them, so there's some incentive for them to give you their code to get a proper comparison done.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/04/25
| 1,835
| 7,274
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have what might seem like the nicest problem in the world: I've got offered funding for both of my dream PhD's. I am stunned, incredulous, gobsmacked, but also deeply confused: both are with supervisors I would absolutely love to work with, both are topics that genuinely fascinate me. Having to choose one feels like Sophie's choice to me - as soon as I imagine choosing one I start grieving the other.
My question is, would it be madness to switch to part-time mode and pursue both? One is funded by ESRC and the other one, by AHRC; there are parallels in the subject matter but the projects and research methods are completely different, so there is no way I could unite the two (although my two prospective supervisors know and extensively quote each other). The field is humanities (cultural/visual studies in one case, same but with a good dash of social sciences in the other).
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: From an **academic** standpoint, I'm pretty sure this is a bad idea - but as I don't have a PhD I'll leave it to those who do to explain why!
From an **administrative** standpoint, the answer seems to be "no, you can't do this" - or, at least, you can't do it and still get both funded positions.
If you're seriously considering this I'd strongly advise you talk to your institution(s) student offices to be sure - but from a quick skim through the [ESRC postgraduate funding guide](http://www.esrc.ac.uk/files/skills-and-careers/studentships/postgraduate-funding-guide-for-accredited-doctoral-training-centres/):
>
> If a student already holds an award from, or is otherwise financially supported by, another organisation and the ESRC considers that award, or other form of support, to be sufficient to cover maintenance and/or tuition fees, the student will not be eligible for an award from the ESRC.
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> Students who have already received government funding for Master’s-level or PhD-level training may apply for further funding from an accredited DTC but the total length of funding available plus previous government funding will not normally exceed four years for full-time study (or the part-time equivalent).
>
>
> Students who receive other governmental studentship support are not eligible for an ESRC award.
>
>
>
I would assume that the other six research councils have more or less identical policies. This guide is for students funded through a DTC; again, though, I suspect the basic policies are the same for any other type of studentship.
While it doesn't specifically address your situation, it does seem to say - at least to me - that they won't fund a PhD if you're already receiving funding from elsewhere. You *might* be able to finesse it if one was unfunded, or had fees-only funding from a non-RCUK source.
Unfortunately, I think you're going to have to make a rather sharp decision in the next few days - good luck, and I don't envy you it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: From the academic standpoint, this might not be completely absurd, but, IMHO, it is rather pointless...
The most important part is that PhDs are usually hard. If you are good enough to properly do two at the same time, you could redirect this talent, and effort, into a **stellar** phd, which helps you to get a proper job as PI and then research whatever you want, because with a stellar phd, you would be a rockstar anyway :)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Andrew mostly covered why this is administratively impossible, but I think it's also worth addressing the misunderstanding of what a Ph.D. is embedded in this question. <NAME> said it [better than I can](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/17245/13), but Ph.D.'s are not merit badges. More is not better. Getting a Ph.D. on one of these topics will not stop you from working on the other. Working with one of these advisors officially will not stop you from staying in touch with the other, and potentially collaborating in the future. You **want** to have ideas about other stuff to work on once you finish your dissertation.
I don't envy having to make the choice, and you will have to close one the doors part of the way to actually finish your degree. But you don't have to slam it all the way shut, and you never know when ideas you know thought you had set to the side will come right back to you.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: From a purely practical point of view, if you are open with your funding agencies and they allow you to keep the funding for both PhDs, then I would keep both options on the table, and evaluate them by exploring what you think is right for you as an individual - you know yourself the best.
There is the argument that you are depriving someone else of PhD funding by holding two scholarships. But equally it could be argued that, because you are spending an extra 3-4 years as a PhD student (time that, under the one-PhD scenario, you would spend as a postdoc), during those last 3 years you are effectively opening up Postdoctoral funding to someone else. So perhaps the ethics balances out.
I'm speaking as someone who got funding to do a year long exchange to another laboratory, followed by a Masters, both of which occurred within my PhD. They have effectively added 2 years and a few months to my PhD project, and this extra time has definitely been well spent. I know that you might be looking at an extra 3 or 4 years if you choose to do both.
There is no rule that says all PhD students have to have the same or similar experience, and doing two PhD's, if you choose to and think it is the right thing for yourself, would definitely make you unique and would help increase the diversity of academic experiences that exist.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: Part-time made me smile. It makes little sense to speak about working hours when referring to a PhD. In the end you need one thesis in order to graduate. One, not two halves. If you are going to deliver the same research in a much longer time, with more probabilities that something goes wrong, you can imagine the position of the institution. So what about instead of doing two PhDs in parallel, doing one after the other? ...but wait a second, after the first PhD you can get a much better position (and curriculum) as a postdoc! Wouldn't you go for that?
That is to say that brilliant people get many offers and have to take choices. You cannot fully know all the consequences, so the motivations may appear weak and you may be worried about mistaking. However choosing and going down a path, whatever it is, is much better than getting stuck at the fork, which is the only thing you should regret.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: OK, all the other answers have been negative, but why not.
My idea is that a PhD takes 40-50 hours of your time up per week. On busy weeks it can be 60, but generally, 40-50 for three years completion.
If you have enough self-discipline, I am sure you can do it!
Just set out different days you'll work at each University if possible.
Teaching may be tricky, but nothing that you can't work around.
The funding issue they mention is possibly a problem, but not definitely.
Best of luck, I am sure you're not the first person to do it.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/04/25
| 917
| 3,851
|
<issue_start>username_0: I took an exam which was very difficult. I am a senior in college and this is the first time I failed an exam. I was surprised to find out most of my classmates, which usually don't do as well, got an A on the exam.
Apparently, I found out after the exam that they got their hands on the solutions from last years exam, which happened to be exactly the same. Nothing was changed. It seemed that a little more than half the class had the solutions to the exam since everyone was talking about how it was exactly the same as the review. The review was never online or posted by the professor, he only gave us a review which was very different than the exam and didn't include solutions.
Is it fine for me to feel upset, I feel like I put in so much effort studying for nothing. I was planning on talking to the professor, bring it up slowly and tell him how I feel. I know my university has an honor code but, I'm not sure if professors can do this since I have never seen it done before. Is it okay for me to talk to him, or am I exaggerating? I feel like he is going to go against me.<issue_comment>username_1: If the class is graded on a fixed scale (e.g., 90% is an A, 80% is a B, ...) then I do not see how you have a complaint. Your grade is simply a reflection of what you know (or in this case didn't know). The behavior of the other students (studying the past exam solutions) means their grades are not necessarily a reflection of what they know, but that is not your concern.
If the class is graded on a curve, then your grade would be unfairly influenced by the students who had the exam ahead of time. I would be concerned if I graded on a curve. If everyone had access to the exam in advance, but not necessarily the solutions, I do not see this as manifestly unfair. That said, I would suggest mentioning your concerns to the teacher. If only some students had prior access to the exam (and possibly the solutions), than this is manifestly unfair. I would mention your concerns to the teacher and escalate from there.
As for possible outcomes, this is messy. If the teacher is unaware that only some students had access to the prior exams, they may attempt to fix the issue. What they can do depends on the department/university regulations and what the syllabus says (e.g., they might invalidate the exam, grade on a fixed scale, identify students who may have colluded). If the teacher is aware and does not care, going over their head, is likely not going to be productive, but should still be done. For example, if no rules were broken by the professor, the department chair would likely face major backlash from the faculty if they attempted to interfere with the teaching of another faculty member. More likely the chair might through out the exam or attempt to punish students for colluding. In reality, it would likely just go as a little unwritten black mark against the teacher.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, that is extremely common in Turkey.
When I discuss this with a professor, I got sort of this reply:
"A lecturer has a pool of questions for exams, and in a few years there may very well be repetitions of those questions, you can not just continuously prepare new questions for every exam."
There maybe such lecturers but it is rare and, as I understood, very time-consuming activity both in terms of preparation and evaluation.
Open ended assignments, like class presentations might be a better idea to both reduce workload for a lecturer and still keep originality, though it may not be suitable for especially preliminary courses, like Calculus.
All in all, in this World at least there are two ways to accomplish something, with honesty and with shortcut. The arduous way, of course, much better in long run. Don't consider much about others easy grades.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/25
| 319
| 1,301
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am updating my CV and applying to jobs in medical research. I am wondering if I should put all the trials that I have worked on with various other doctors or just the most significant ones? I have like 40 research trials I have worked on and it seems immodest and overdone.<issue_comment>username_1: Ah, this is a good question!
Unlike a resumé, in which one includes only the experiences/skills that are relevant to the position being applied for, a CV is meant to document all reasonable academic endeavors and accomplishments. In some cases, lines on your CV will be only loosely related to your main research interest; my CV for instance includes several co-authored papers I am not particularly keen on.
I don't know that there is any hard-and-fast 'rule' stating your CV must be complete, good and bad, but it has been my impression over the years that one includes pretty much everything. If you've ever wondered why your department chair's CV is 35 pages long, now you know why.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: As far as I know, professors, senior researchers and alike have two resumes: a short one (1-3pages) listing main milestones, and a long one, which can be up to 50pages (longest I have encountered), listing all and every thing they did.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/25
| 441
| 1,515
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have read research claiming the idea of multiple styles of learning does not hold up. If so, what does the research say is the best form of learning/teaching?<issue_comment>username_1: Recent eagle's-eye overview of best-practice study methods: Dunlosky, John, et al. "What works, what doesn't." *Scientific American Mind* 24.4 (2013): 46-53.
Gold star winners:
* **Self-testing.** That is: doing homework exercises and checking the answers.
* **Distributed practice.** Studying regularly in batches over time (not cramming).
Runners-up (mixed evidence):
* **Elaborative interrogation.**
* **Self-explanation.**
* **Interleaved practice.** ("Mixed practice")
What doesn't work:
* **Highlighting.**
* **Rereading.**
* **Summarization, keyword mnemonics, and imagery for text learning.**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **Multimodal Learning**
as per the article *Multimedia design: the effects of relating multimodal information*, <NAME> and <NAME>
>
> A statistically significant effect was observed on word memorisation
> in the different information presentation modes, suggesting better
> processing when there is co-referencing of the different sources,
> especially when the encoding and tests modes are the same.
>
>
>
In general, people learn better when the material is presented from multiple types of media: text, audio, video, etc.
The article is linked here:
<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2729.2000.00127.x/abstract>
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/25
| 763
| 3,278
|
<issue_start>username_0: I read the "[Ten Simple Rules for a Good Poster Presentation](http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030102)" article by <NAME> and <NAME>. It gives me the general idea of how to prepare a poster.
However, I wonder whether I should add references to the poster as many parts have strong (advanced) knowledge acquired from other works? If yes, where is recommended for references in a portrait A0 poster. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: This may be a somewhat discipline-dependent question (and you don't specify yours), but I can say that I have often seen references on posters -- and just about as often not. When I have seen them, they have generally been in the lower right-hand corner (for most left-to-right languages, the last place anyone generally looks). Not uncommonly they are in smaller type than the rest of the poster, to save space.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think this depends a lot on the nature of and venue for the poster. Are you talking about a conference poster that accompanies an article in the proceedings, and the proceedings are published by the time of the conference? If so, then one of the main purposes of your poster is to get people to read your paper. Your paper already has all the relevant references, and so (in most cases) there's no need to waste valuable space repeating them on the poster.
If you are talking about a poster that does *not* accompany a published paper, then you should use your best judgment about whether references serve a useful purpose. If the material you present has a particularly strong relationship or dependency on past work by yourself or others, and you think your audience might want to consult this past work for themselves, then by all means provide references. To save space, I would make these only as long as necessary to identify the referenced works.
Another possibility might be for you to leave the references off the poster but include them in a handout for interested visitors. At all my poster talks, I print off several A4-size copies of the poster and hand them out to people who wander by to have a look. My posters don't normally include references, but if I thought they were necessary, I'd print them on the reverse of the handout.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: You're quite likely to end up with a few points that probably should be cited. For example previous work as background to why you did your work, or how you interpreted it. In this case there are a couple of reasons to refernce the work:
* For the interested reader (who may even be more interested in the backgreound than in what you did).
* As a courtesy (and in the vast majority of cases that's all it is) to the people who have worked in the field before. This is particularly useful if the authors of an important piece of work might be at the conference.
However, there's not much room for such background on a poster, it should be nearly full of your own work (another reason why a cited, very brief, summary is good). So you shouldn't have many references. My last poster had 2. The one before had 3, of which 2 were self-references to the two methods I was showing off on the poster.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/26
| 1,709
| 7,484
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have this class where at the beginning of the term the lecturer pretty much randomly creates groups of 5 people (who usually do not know each other at all) and assigns them a project.
At the end of the term we do a presentation and a written exam. A friend of mine who took this class before told me that the lecturer will ask me to evaluate the other members.
Three people in our team were just terrible. They did not care at all, they did not even respond to emails, never arranged any workshops, and only came once or twice to other workshops we suggested, with the only one person remaining in the team besides me; so two of us pretty much did the project.
However, I really do not want to tell in the paper that they did not do anything. I do not care that they did not do anything, and I do not feel comfortable talking behind their backs. It should be the lecturer's responsibility to figure out who did what by asking the right questions in the exam and in the presentation, I believe.
So do I just leave those parts blank in the exam, or explain how I feel?<issue_comment>username_1: Evaluating your fellow students should be a supervised exercise of constructive criticism, e.g., after a presentation given by them. I hope this is what the lecturer will do.
Anyway, if you are assigned this you need to do it. I would give the bare facts for the students that didn't really involve themselves. I.e., I would state exactly what each team member contributed to the project. And if they only suggested a color for a button then I would state that. I would then proceed with providing an honest evaluation of the student that did all the work with you and for the others just say that they could have involved themselves more in the project.
I know that this feels a bit like being a tattletale, but it is actually them that behaved unethically by not working with you on the assignment. The only thing you should have done differently is having a frank discussion regarding their involvement (with them and with the lecturer) at an early stage. Resolving issues like this during team work is actually something you need to learn during your studies. And it appears like you haven't. Thus, you should add this as self-criticism to the evaluation and ask the lecturer to teach you methods of handling such issues.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Internal peer reviews can provide information that an instructor simply can't glean from a written exam and oral presentations.
I am currently teaching a course where the students have to do an end-of-semester presentation on a project they've been working on for the last six weeks or so. Each team has six members, and the time schedule we have available means I have just about five minutes per group to ask questions. That doesn't give me a lot of time to investigate group dynamics and decide who was productive and who wasn't on a meaningful level.
I therefore rely on a peer evaluation to help understand what went on in the group. Did everyone contribute their fair share, or did a few people "freeload" of the rest of the group? Did people work together well, or was there a lot of friction inside the group? Sometimes I can tell this from the presentation, but a lot of times, I can't.
However, this only works if everybody participates honestly. You can choose to decline and say nothing about what the other group members have done or not done, but then you also have to be willing to live with the consequence that those students will get the same grade as you have earned without doing anything to actually earn the grade.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Hide your pride and give them the praise for the things they did well (but don't lie). Of course, you can take more credit saying you "led the project", but don't throw others under the bus. This will help your professional reputation, they will know they are indebted to you (whether they ever pay it back, it's okay if they don't), and you know not to work with them in the future if you don't have to. Really, it's a choice between pissing someone off or doing someone an (unintentional) favor when it doesn't really change anything to you (since you already did the project and it likely won't change your grade).
As username_2 stated, from the presentation and the writing in the exam it's quite obvious who did the work, so there's no reason for you to go at them. A simple "Johnathan did a good job getting the information for the introduction of Section ###" where that's the section they sent you 1-2 sentences; that's all you (and the other that did the work) have to hint to the lecturer to get the point across (especially if that's all they said in the presentation).
In total, if the lecturer doesn't see it, then you're fighting a losing battle where you can't really gain anything. So you might as well be nice, but tell the truth in the nicest way possible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Since it appears that you did actively try to engage the other members of your group in the project, I will answer based on that assumption. If you did not actively try to involve them, well that is a different problem to address.
I have had a number of such encounters throughout my time in school, and my response was to be as objective and honest as I could be without looking like I was trying to put them down. Just state exactly what they did to help the project, nothing more, nothing less. If they didn't do anything, say that. Their grade is not your responsibility, so if you are asked to review their work, don't make it your responsibility to make them look good. Simply state exactly how much work by each person, and leave it to the professor/instructor to assign the grade.
Be careful to not let personal feelings get involved, and to grade everyone by the same standard. You could even create a rubric or break down involvement by sections of the project.
In my opinion, trying to make it look like they did more in the project than they actually did, so that they get a better grade is actually doing a greater disservice to them, than giving an impartial review that shows they didn't really do much. The reason for this is that it *can* reinforce their theory that they can get by without really doing much work, and relying on other people to pick up their slack, and if they continue on like that, it will most likely come back to bite them later. Better that they do poorly in a course now and learn they can't, than learning it later by possibly getting fired from a job.
**Note:** Be sure to consider whether or not you and the other active member in your group may have shut out the other members from participating, thus relegating them to a position where they weren't able to do much to help with the project.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: When I was a student a very long time ago….. (Just before the web was invented.) We had a joint project in teams of 5.
* At the end of the project we were each given 100 points
* Told to divide them between the other 4 team members in relationship to the contribution they made.
* Each person had their highest and lowest points drops, leaving the 2 middle set of points.
* No one was told how many points they we given, so even if you know what points one person gave you, you could not work out what someone else did.
The mark was divided between the team members based on the above.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/26
| 380
| 1,607
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just read an article where the description of a software package was lifted *verbatim* from the package's site itself.
It's a whole paragraph where not a single comma was changed. There are no quotations, nothing to indicate that this is a verbatim transcription of text. The site of the package is properly cited though, nothing is being hidden.
I understand that the description of a package created by the author is the best source to understand what that package does, but copy/pasting about 12 lines of text (single column) seems a bit excessive.
To what extent is this acceptable?<issue_comment>username_1: As long as a proper reference and quotation indications are provided, there is nothing wrong with it - as with any other type of verbatim text copy. However; it is debatable whether this is a desirable approach, and this may vary with the traditions in individual fields.
If no reference is given it is (a mild form of) plagiarism.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a vast number of different citation standards, I assume the journal in question adheres to one of them. In most journals' implementation of the citation standards, it is denoted how a direct quote should be demarked, eg. with "" or >><< or *italics* etc.
If the article fails to live up to that, they are guilty of breaching the citation standard. Since we are talking about a full paragraph, but not anything were they present any deep thoughts, it is probably severe enough that it should be avoided, but definitely not severe enough to be punishable by any standards.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/26
| 1,734
| 7,209
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been shortlisted in the Phd application process at a research institution in a neighboring European Country.
I have therefore been invited to go there for a serie of interviews, visits to their laboratories and informal meetings. All of this will last from Tuesday to Friday and the institution is paying for all travel/hotel expenses.
Since I have never visited that city, and the interviews take the whole week, I would enjoy spending the weekend there and flying later on sunday.
In the forms they provided they write explicitly
>
> Please note that you are expected to arrive on Tuesday and depart on
> Friday
>
>
>
Would it be bad form, or put me in a bad light, if I politely asked to delay the return flight to sunday? Of course I would take care of my accommodation expenses for the extra days.<issue_comment>username_1: If you make it completely clear at the time of asking that you would cover all additional expenses, then staying for a day or two extra would be regarded as perfectly normal and reasonable. (Academics travelling to conferences and workshops do this sort of thing all the time.)
Indeed, it may even be regarded as a positive sign: if you do join their PhD programme, then you'll be living in the city for several years, so the fact that you want to get to know the place in advance demonstrates that you're serious about your application.
My guess is that the somewhat intimidating wording "expected ... to depart on Friday" is intended to make it clear that you can't depart *before* Friday.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Send them an email. If they haven't booked your flight, usually people will understand and will let you fly out later, though they will likely not pay for the extra nights of lodging. As long as the prices over the weekend aren't substantially higher, most of the time everyone involved thinks its a good idea for you to make sure you enjoy the city!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Just providing an extra perspective on this topic, but perhaps the "Arrive on Monday Leave on Friday" means that you are required to attend all 5 days of their scheduled interview process, and not necessarily that you are not allowed to spend extra time in their city. To me it seems they have that sentence in there to ensure someone doesn't arrive late, or leave early, or only attends 3 days of their workshop meanwhile the university is paying all travel expenses. Just another perspective to think about.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: People in academia do this all the time. Just don't call it vacation or staying with friends, but rather say that you would like to stay for the weekend and get an impression of the city. Since it is a major concern most places that new Ph.D. students actually grows to like the place, such an initiative on your part will likely be appreciated.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I can confirm that I did exactly that (travelling around the country while between interviews) earlier this year.
While I was between my PhD interviews at universities in the US, I took the time during the weekdays to travel and do some sightseeing around the way. Since the interviews were all on weekends (and their scheduled timings were around Thursday to Monday), I was able to get quite a bit of travelling done in the meantime.
From what I understand, the arrival and departure dates are the dates you are expected to be at the institution, and they do not mandate when and how you can arrive or depart. In fact, many of the other candidates I spoke with were also from overseas, and were also doing a good amount of sightseeing in between their interviews.
Just email the admissions officers and tell them directly that you want to stay for a few extra days at your own expense, and I see absolutely no reason for them to deny this request.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> "Please note that you are expected to arrive on Tuesday and depart on Friday"
>
>
>
To see what this means, consider what kinds of requests and questions they usually receive from candidates, and in which other ways they could write this.
They did not write:
>
> "Please note that you need to arrive on Tuesday and depart on Friday"
>
>
>
They wrote what they expect. This means if you don't contact them you are implicitly confirming that you'll do as expected. It also means if you want to do things differently, you should contact them, let them know, and - since they are paying - work out how to split the bill.
Being a penny pincher does not make a great impression, so since this is for an interview you should offer to pay for additional expenses due to the longer stay, and also for a difference in cost of the flight, if there is any (but not pocket the difference if it's in your favor).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: In general, I'd be very wary of coming off as "That annoying guy who is going to make us do more work." They are putting in a **TON** of work logistically to organize this trip, which is why they have very specific guidelines about dates.
If you request a different set of guidelines than everyone else, then you risk forever being "That entitled guy who has to be different and give us more work. Now we have to worry two more days no matter what he says otherwise. Great. We wanted to be done with this Friday so we could have a weekend with friends and relax finally." I guarantee they want to be DONE with this on that Friday, and you will be in their minds until you leave.
Recruiting trips are very high stress and high maintenance in general for departments, you would be putting a strain on them, no matter what they say, and no matter whether you say you will pay your way. It has a very high chance of being perceived as an imposition.
Think about perception and first impressions, coming off as entitled/high maintenance. Unless you are so talented that it doesn't matter, and you actually don't care (i.e., you do have a sense of entitlement) then do what ya' gotta do. If you are fighting for a spot, or have some concern for your hosts' feelings (which you likely do because you posted here) then I'd think twice.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I did this exactly in March. I politely stated that I would really love to get to know the city and stay a whole week. I told the university I was obviously going to pay for the extra days.
The university actually answered they liked my idea and even invited me to a cultural event held that weekend at the university!
Just make sure you give good reasons ( you want to know the city you would be living in for the next 4 years!) and be clear about the fact that you would pay for the extra days.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: It is normal to ask for a direct/return flight a few days before/after the period your are expected to spend at the university. The cost is roughly the same for the university.
However, you are expected to pay yourself for the extra hotel nights you may need for your stay. The university will cover the expenses for the hotel nights required for the "official stay" period from monday to friday.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/26
| 822
| 3,664
|
<issue_start>username_0: Background: I'll be starting a 1.5 - 2 year master's program in mathematics this coming Fall in the US. Because of my non-degree graduate courses relevant to the program and my research interest, I can easily fulfill the requirements of this program within a year. However, my main goal is to gain and tangible research experience in preparation for a Ph.D program so I plan to remain in this program for 2 years.
Question: Will my application to Ph.D programs and fellowships be diluted if admissions folks see that my second year in this Master's program consisted mostly of research with at most one class per semester?
I want to reduce the course load as much as possible in order to give me time and flexibility to do research with the benefit of less tuition fees (if any). However, this all would be moot if such decision would raise red flags among admission committees.
Besides focusing more on research than classes, any other things I should look into while in this program?<issue_comment>username_1: Background: I am the director of graduate admissions in the pure math department of my university.
---
EDIT: since this is still getting upvoted ~7 years later, I should remark that since I wrote it I moved to a different university and am no longer very involved with graduate admissions (every department has different service needs, and I've decided that it's more useful at the moment for me to do other things). I still basically agree with what I said, though the trend seems to be for the GRE to become optional and even when it is required for its score to carry less weight. I personally never thought it was particularly useful, but mentioned it since some people care about it a lot.
---
In my experience, we basically ignore "research" conducted by undergraduate and masters students (unless is it truly remarkable, in which case you will almost certainly not need advice on the internet to get into a strong PhD program). It just isn't a good predictor of whether or not you will be successful in a PhD program. You will get very different advice from people who are not mathematicians, but you should ignore it -- graduate programs in math are very different from graduate programs in the other sciences. This advice also might not apply if you are applying to departments of applied mathematics.
What we care about are
1. The courses you have taken, and
2. Your grades, and
3. Your letters of recommendation, and
4. Your GRE scores.
The above list is un-ordered; different members of the committee weight the above factors differently.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Let me complement @username_1's answer with a perspective from applied math. I'm on the admissions committee of a graduate program in applied math and I've advised MS thesis students who have gone on to top applied math programs.
Research at the Master's level can have a very positive impact on your application, if it is substantive and especially if it leads to publication in a respected journal, or if it enables your letter writers who supervised the research to give stronger evaluations of you.
Research that merely involves, say, implementing a known algorithm and applying it to a slightly different problem may not be given much weight. Research that is presented in a sloppy way can even be a negative.
But top MS students are often able to do research of high caliber in applied math. For instance, some of my MS students already had one or two high-quality papers accepted to journals like SISC and SINUM; partly as a result of this, they had their pick of top doctoral programs.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/04/26
| 500
| 2,079
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have conducted experiment that had unexpected result which goes against consensus in my community and I worry whether it will be accepted by other researchers. For that reason I would like to make all my work public - the resources, the programs, the results.. Is there online service where I can publish the data for free and obtain DOI number that I can reference in my paper?
It makes over 2GB when packed.
I have heard that such services exist for people in biology and medical research but I work on transportation systems which is rather different (we do not produce so much data usually). I plan to submit the paper to journal published by IEEE.<issue_comment>username_1: [Figshare](https://figshare.com/features):
* Files up to 5GB
* 20 GB private space, unlimited space for public data
* Get a DOI
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You could also use [Zenodo](https://zenodo.org/), which I personally prefer over Figshare since it is an open platform run by a scientific institution (the CERN) instead of a for-profit (compare the [privacy policies of zenodo](https://zenodo.org/privacy-policy) and [figshare](https://figshare.com/privacy) to get an idea on why this matters). They also [guarantee](https://zenodo.org/faq) that, should they ever shut down, they will migrate your data to another platform (and until then, your data is on the same infrastructure as the data created by the Large Hadron Collider (LHC)).
Their size limit is 2 GB per file, and you can add multiple files to a single dataset upload (which means you may not even need to pack your data, if it can be sensibly split into multiple files of <2 GB - and if you need more space, you can contact them). Finally, you also get a DOI for your data (which will be updated to point to the new home of your data if they ever shut down). Right now, it can be used free of charge while they develop a sustainability plan (later, they may charge you for uploading larger datasets, but there will always be a free tier with reasonable sizes).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/26
| 1,392
| 6,048
|
<issue_start>username_0: Two years into my PhD, I am troubled by a situation that made me having to decide on whether to focus mainly on my supervisor's assigned project or my own project as part of my thesis.
The story begins like this. My supervisor promised me a PhD project at the beginning of my PhD to attract me to join his lab (I have my own PhD studentship with all funding attached at that point). But after I joined the lab, I found out that the project is never meant to be done as no one in our lab works in that area or possess the technique.
He then assigned me a few projects that come to the lab from collaborators. The projects did not pan out well due to miscommunications with the collaborators that involve multiple parties, and I begin to lose interest in them to the point that I just want to get them over with. When the assigned projects get stuck in limbo, I started to work on my own project, as I really want to finish my PhD. Doing my own project is difficult as the project involves some knowledge that falls outside the expertise of my supervisor, but I persevere and the project starts to take shape. I am fairly confident that I can get a publication out of it and should be able to write my thesis with it.
My supervisor is unhappy about this, but he lets me do my work as he was occupied with other matters. Recently my supervisor told me that he expects me to treat those assigned projects as my PhD project and to include them in my thesis. I am happy to work on those projects as my side projects, but I want to focus mainly on my own project as it is beginning to take shape. However my supervisor wishes me to work mainly on those assigned projects, and he made it clear that he is not interested with my own project.
My impression is that a PhD student should be able to determine what projects to work on and to include in the thesis. Obviously I am happy to do some side projects to keep my supervisor happy, but I am hoping that I should be able to decide what I want to work on without offending my supervisor.
Any opinion and advice is much appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> My impression is that a PhD student should be able to determine what projects to work on and to include in the thesis. Obviously I am happy to do some side projects to keep my supervisor happy, but I am hoping that I should be able to decide what I want to work on without offending my supervisor.
>
>
>
In an ideal world, yes. In reality, there are practicalities to consider:
* At least here in Europe the biggest factor is what the grant that pays for you says. If you are, for instance, funded via an H2020 project, you are *most certainly not* free to decide what you want to work on. Your money comes with a clear "description of work", and substantial deviations from this work plan need to be justified. Other grants may be less (or, in case of industrial funding, even more) strict, but there is certainly no universal rule that as a PhD student you should be free to work on whatever.
* Another factor is the strategic research plan of your advisor. Your advisor has, or at least should have, a long-term plan, and if your project does not fit in with the plan, your project may be, speaking bluntly, a waste of time and money for him, even if it is an otherwise nice project.
* There is also the problem that your advisor also requires some competency in your project, both to help you when you are stuck and to evaluate your progress and final dissertation. Many advisors will be unwilling to supervise students on research attempts that are too far outside their core expertise (usually also in combination with the previous point, that those are often simply not very valuable to their long-term goals).
* Finally, your advisor may also be wary that the project may not be academically promising enough. I have seen often that younger researchers tend to confuse projects that are "interesting to work on" with those that are "likely to lead to interesting results". You should at least consider *why* your advisor is "not interested in your results", and ask yourself the question whether other senior academics will feel the same.
Of course this does not mean that you always need to slave for your advisor and should bury all ambitions of developing projects on your own. In practice, the best PhD students juggle their own interests with the interests of their advisor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Having previously worked in a research granting agency in Ireland, I thought I would include a few comments, at least from my perspective. For us, the goal of the PhD, MSc, and post-doc, was always to ensure that the grantee created sufficient new knowledge that would expand the overall knowledge in their field. This could be through novel techniques, industrial applications, entire new areas of expertise, etc.
When it came to the project that the grantee applied for, a requirement was that the supervisor also signed up to the project. This involved them undertaking that they would guide the grantee through the completion of their chosen project. If a grantee felt that the supervisor was trying to derail the project, or move it in a direction that was not in line with the stated goals and objectives, then there was an onus on the grantee to inform their awarding authority.
We would occasionally get a similar issue to yours. This was the advice we gave to them. Speak to your supervisor regarding the matter, and see if there has been a miscommunication, or some compromise that you can both work to. This can include switching supervisors, agreeing to move you project to be in line with their area, or seeing is there is a way to match the needs of both people in a final thesis. The same applied in reverse with the supervisor and the grantee.
Failing that, I would write a letter to them, explaining your issues, and asking them to reply to you in this manner. I would also copy your granting agency/sponsor, on the letter, explaining the matter.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/27
| 266
| 1,042
|
<issue_start>username_0: One reference book I'm reading contains religious undertones in favor of Christianity. In one chapter, for example, the author quoted a biblical verse in support of her claim that the 21st century is the "Asian Century".<issue_comment>username_1: The same as you do (hopefully) with every other reference: be **critical** about it and only take it as serious as you think you can.
Or:
What would you do if the book writes "When I threw a coin, it was head, therefore the 21th century seems to be..." ?
Take the parts and conclusions which seem reasonable but, as always, be aware of bullshit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It largely depends on the institution at which you are studying, and the topic you are studying. If you are studying Engineering at MIT, then I would have severe reservations at the content of the book, and the use of the references. If, however, you are studying theology at Oral Roberts, then there is a clear need to review the book it light of the subject matter.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/27
| 989
| 4,366
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose you are an instructor and you have given a (midterm or final) exam. This is a substantial portion of the grade; a student who misses it has little chance of passing the class. (I have in mind a college course, but maybe this a question in high school as well.)
Suppose that a few students don't show up for the exam. Of course, if the students were ill or had personal emergencies, you would like to give them a chance to make up the exam. You send them an email after the exam, but hear nothing back for a few days.
After those few days, you grade the rest of the exams, and would like to return them to the class and post solutions online so that your students can learn from their mistakes
However, if any of the students who missed the exam will later ask for a makeup, then they will have the advantage of seeing the solutions. While you certainly wouldn't give them an identical exam, it seems like this would still be a substantial advantage.
What is the fair thing for you to do here?
EDIT:
I thank <NAME>. for commenting. However, the referenced question is about a quite different situation; it has nothing to do with discussing or posting solutions for the rest of the class.<issue_comment>username_1: Don't give the same exam as a makeup exam. Rather, write a separate exam to use for makeups. Even if you haven't given out a set of solutions or returned graded papers, students who took the main exam are likely to have shared information about the exam with students who need to take a makeup.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Hopefully you are providing your students with enough review material that they understand the format and content of the exam such that seeing an additional complete exam (with solutions and feedback) will not provide an advantage. If that is not the case, then you need to address that and not when you will post the solutions.
The other thing to consider is what the concern about "advantages" are. As a teacher, the goal of the exam is two fold. To accurately assess what students know and provide feedback to the students so they can improve. From this vantage, it is quite possible that a student who has additional review material specific to the test is actually at a disadvantage since the grade and feedback will not reflect what the student knows.
The "advantage" you are probably concerned with is if the student's grade will be artificially inflated. Keeping a level playing field regarding grading on make up exams can be incredibly difficult. Again, the presence of a solutions to a past exam is essentially irrelevant to solving the issue. Further, while the student taking the makeup exam may receive a benefit, it does not disadvantage the other students.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Here's what I do.
For midterm exams, complete answer sheets are distributed immediately in the next class session; but no makeup tests are given for any reason. I give 3 such exams throughout the semester and drop one of them to mitigate for any illness, etc. If you have only one midterm and went on the same path, you could consider replacing the midterm with an identical final exam grade.
For final exams, makeup tests are possible up to halfway through the following semester (by college policy); but final exams are not returned and answer sheets are never distributed (again, college policy: completed final exams are kept in a Vault maintained by the registrar on campus for 1 year, in case of disputes, etc.).
The more assessments you give, the easier it is to have a "no makeups but drop N" policy, I think, which supports immediately handing back tests with feedback and answer sheets.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: This might surprise some but young people don't use email that much. Yes they have an email address and yes the will send you an email because they know that that is how you communicate. But they rarely check it because of the spam and the other ways of communicating that are available to them. If I need to talk to a student I literally have to talk to them face to face if I don't reach them through social media.
I would suggest waiting to give the exams back until you have literally spoken to the students who missed the exam. After this you can make a decision that is fair for the context
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/27
| 1,339
| 6,072
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have published two conference papers at one conference in physics with two other authors and I am the first author in both articles. And I am currently in the second year of my PhD Thesis and these were my first published papers at all.
I have trouble with one of those articles and I am constantly thinking about it. The positive thing about this paper (as well as for the second) is, that it is very interesting for my scientific community and also for the authorities for decision making about a political charged topic. I used a fancy method and the results are good.
Firstly, I was satisfied with this paper. I thought it its "just" a conference paper and spending to much time for writing, wouldn't pay off, because this paper doesn't even count for my PhD-Thesis. So, all in all I was very happy with presenting it at this conference.
The bad thing is, that I was very stressed, when I wrote it. The statistical analysis took a long time and I had not much time, due to caring for my newborn child. I finished writing and correcting this paper (with the other authors) shortly before submitting it. After the reviewer mentioned a very small revision (a more detailed abstract, spelling error or a hint for a better literature reference), I recognized that three sentences within the results had to be changed and also two or three sentences within the discussion. I fixed it, showed it to my supervisor (I don't know how carefully he read it) and now it is published.
After reading it again after some time and very often, I found some mistakes, especially in the parts which I fixed lately after the revision. At first I didn't realized them, but after reading it again and again, I found more and more: A typo as well as at least three grammar mistakes, which are in my opinion not that bad and I only recognized them by reading it a lot (two of them are even in the abstract), but that doesn't makes it better (I don't have an eye for grammar). In the corrected sentences in the discussion I partially used wordings which are more common to say, but uncommon to write in science. Because its my first publication I was more focused on writing things correctly, but after asking other people, I now think, that it is not so handsome and sloppy. There are some other sloppy wordings in other parts of the paper, but I think its not that big of a problem due to the proofreaders didn't complain, but the sum of the mistakes makes me feel very bad about this paper.
Another point is the discussion: The results are great, but the discussion could have been way more precise with a better interpretation, less focus on repeating the results and a stronger focus on other literature. After rethinking it, I would have done it quite differently.
All in all I regret publishing this paper and I fear that I am in my scientific community now known for bad writing style. And another problem is, it is forever available by Google Search and it could have a significant negative influence on my career, because everybody who writes my name in Google search, will find it very easily. I think many people don't differentiate between conference papers and journal papers.
Has anybody been in a similar situation or can you give me any advice for dealing with it? I think an errata for grammar mistakes wouldn't be justifiable.
By the way: The second conference paper has got a better style.<issue_comment>username_1: I have felt the same on my first conference paper. I see two main options:
* publish (make public) a kind of "full" erratum, the paper as you wish it should have been written (for typos and grammar), for instance on your website, or on a preprint hosting service. Make it clear in the paper that it is an improved or corrected version of the published conference paper (forr instance, highlight the modifications), shared for the sake of readers.
* perhaps more useful for your thesis: write a journal paper with more details and discussion, updated references, using your experience. Then you can differ much more from the original paper. You might have more feedback from the reviewers, because quite often, conference papers are reviewed in a fastest way than for journals. For these reviews, you can get more improvement venues. This is why, in many domains, there is a differentiation between conference and journal papers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is one very easy answer to your problem.
**Relax. Do nothing. It's fine.**
Really. Your data is good, your results are interesting, people are reading your work, and you haven't found anything particularly wrong with your science. This is more than most of us can say about our first forays into publishing.
That being said, maybe you should work on how much you let small problems get to you if you want to survive in academia. If grammar errors and awkward formulations in a published paper already make you be unable to sleep, I worry that the real setbacks that characterise academic work (experiments that are not working out, unjustly rejected papers, dozens and dozens of faculty applications that you never hear back on, ...) will do to you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Don't worry about it. Maybe when you are 65, and a world-famous scientist, and you publish your "collected works", you can include a revised version of this paper. But until then, go forward and don't worry about the past.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If you contribute to your community as a reviewer you will quickly gain some needed perspective. The average quality of conference papers is really not very high. This is why they typically don't count as publications. The purpose is to communicate recent/ongoing research results to your community and often time constraints require that these documents be less polished than archival publications. That's perfectly alright.
View these early publications for what they are and don't stress because they're not perfect. Conference papers seldom are and shouldn't be expected to be.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/27
| 800
| 3,507
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a PhD student and I need to choose a dissertation committee as I will be graduating soon. (I already have a postdoc lined up.) It seems the only function of this committee is to read my thesis, attend my defense, and decide whether to grant me a PhD.
**Assuming my dissertation committee serves its purpose and grants me a PhD, what further relevance do they have? How should I choose my committee?** In particular, is my committee still important after I graduate?
The reason I'm asking is because I don't really know who to choose. It seems like I should just ask whoever in my department is available. Should I be considering other factors? For example, it is good to have "famous" researchers on my committee?
I asked my advisor and she didn't voice an opinion and said it was essentially up to me who to choose.<issue_comment>username_1: I have felt the same on my first conference paper. I see two main options:
* publish (make public) a kind of "full" erratum, the paper as you wish it should have been written (for typos and grammar), for instance on your website, or on a preprint hosting service. Make it clear in the paper that it is an improved or corrected version of the published conference paper (forr instance, highlight the modifications), shared for the sake of readers.
* perhaps more useful for your thesis: write a journal paper with more details and discussion, updated references, using your experience. Then you can differ much more from the original paper. You might have more feedback from the reviewers, because quite often, conference papers are reviewed in a fastest way than for journals. For these reviews, you can get more improvement venues. This is why, in many domains, there is a differentiation between conference and journal papers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is one very easy answer to your problem.
**Relax. Do nothing. It's fine.**
Really. Your data is good, your results are interesting, people are reading your work, and you haven't found anything particularly wrong with your science. This is more than most of us can say about our first forays into publishing.
That being said, maybe you should work on how much you let small problems get to you if you want to survive in academia. If grammar errors and awkward formulations in a published paper already make you be unable to sleep, I worry that the real setbacks that characterise academic work (experiments that are not working out, unjustly rejected papers, dozens and dozens of faculty applications that you never hear back on, ...) will do to you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Don't worry about it. Maybe when you are 65, and a world-famous scientist, and you publish your "collected works", you can include a revised version of this paper. But until then, go forward and don't worry about the past.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If you contribute to your community as a reviewer you will quickly gain some needed perspective. The average quality of conference papers is really not very high. This is why they typically don't count as publications. The purpose is to communicate recent/ongoing research results to your community and often time constraints require that these documents be less polished than archival publications. That's perfectly alright.
View these early publications for what they are and don't stress because they're not perfect. Conference papers seldom are and shouldn't be expected to be.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/27
| 727
| 3,174
|
<issue_start>username_0: At University,say the lecturers hand out past papers with solutions for the students to revise from for an upcoming exam.
Is it common practise for the exam to contain a couple of the exact same questions
which are in the previous past exams?
Is it common for the exam to contain questions which the lecturer has put in the assessed worksheets throughout the semester but has already handed out the solutions to?<issue_comment>username_1: If you hadn't included the "graduate school" tag, I would say this is both common and appropriate. My exams for undergrads are about half familiar material, that I've specifically indicated to them could appear on the exam. That way, most everyone who studies can at least pass.
But ideally, grad school should be more challenging than that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the U.S., in mathematics, by 2016 (as opposed to decades back, perhaps), I think it's by far most often the case that the only real "filter/gatekeeping" for grad school is admission in the first place. There are "qualifying exams" and/or equivalent "require courses", but these are rarely used as filters; rather, they are devices to induce students to study more broadly than they might have otherwise. Yes, at some point there is the entirely-different enterprise of thesis-writing, and skills relevant to timed exams have very little to do with thesis-writing skills.
Since the qualifying exams and/or required courses are meant to encourage a bit of breadth, and to make a case for the utility and sense of that, it is reasonable to be *coooperative* with students in such situations, rather than be their adversary or skeptic. In particular, giving many good sample-solutions, illustrating the virtues of the ideas being discussed, is surely a good thing. Give archetypes for "expert" solutions.
Further, one might argue that in basic graduate mathematics the list of key ideas is really not so large, and part of what we should convey/sell is indeed the simplicity of things when seen from a slightly more sophisticated vantage. Therefore, I do not want to contrive clever problems that *obscure* the simplicity I'm trying to claim/show.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: For general theoretical papers, it is customary to have a few questions repeated over the past years. Taken in a *proper sense* this will compel students to learn certain important concepts of the course. Also having the paper entirely different each time might make some to rule out questions as improbable questions hence not capturing the rationale behind the *learning* aspect of the exam.
For courses with mathematical concepts, it would be ideal to add a more intuition in the selection of questions. You may utilize the same concepts with different data for calculation for each exam.
Concretely, the question paper should encompass important concepts covered in the course. A student who has learned entirely what was taught should be able to score higher marks, and with intelligent application, score complete marks. A student who has learned a satisfactory amount of the portions should be able to at least pass.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/27
| 264
| 1,161
|
<issue_start>username_0: My friend wants an old assignment which I have done few semesters ago. I want to know whether it's ok to give the assignment to him and whether it's going to be a problem for me in the future. (I have already done that subject, but still following the degree) Please let me know.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no single right answer here. The answer depends from university to university, and even from faculty member to faculty member. For example, one professor in my department believes everything should be sharable, while another believes that it's wrong to share old materials.
So you'll need to see what the policy of the instructor teaching your friend's class is.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If an instructor returns an assignment to a student. The instructor cannot possible expect the student to hide the results. This is one reason why many instructors do not allow students to keep a mid-term or final exam.
As long as your friend does not try to submit the work as his own this should not be a problem. This is assuming of course that there is no policy at your institution about this matter.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/27
| 714
| 2,711
|
<issue_start>username_0: My colleagues and I are planning to submit to a conference which adopts double-blind review. The deadline of the conference is **in 3 weeks**. The work we plan to submit is built on our previous work that has just been **accepted 2 weeks ago**.
The first paper was actually submitted 6 months ago, but it was rejected at the first time. That's why there is only a very small gap of time between the two papers.
We need to cite the first paper, and its title together with the list of authors already appeared in the list of accepted papers on the conference website.
We can try to cite it as somebody else' work. However, any reviewers can conclude that this is the work of the same group. In this case, do we violate the double-blind review policy?
How should we proceed? We desperately want to submit to this conference, waiting should be the very last option.<issue_comment>username_1: In any case, do not cite your accepted paper as somebody else's work.
I've seen research presented in two parts in Conferences. Ask the organisers about that.
On the other hand, I just found out [these guidelines](http://www.journals.elsevier.com/social-science-and-medicine/policies/double-blind-peer-review-guidelines/):
>
> * Use the third person to refer to work the Authors have previously undertaken.
>
>
>
e.g. "...has been shown before [Anonymous, 2007]" instead of "we have shown..."
>
> * Cite papers published by the Author in the text as follows: ‘[Anonymous, 2007]’.
> * For blinding in the reference list: ‘[Anonymous 2007] Details omitted for double-blind reviewing.’
>
>
>
Other advice is given in [this Q&A](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/23961/47141).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I've been in a similar situation before. After consulting with the conference chair, we decided to place an anonymized version of the accepted paper in a dropbox folder and cite it anonymously as our own with a link to that dropbox file in the reference. I also added a footnote in the paper to explain that this previous work is accepted but not yet published, and how this previous work contributed something totally different from the work presented in the paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> conference which adopts double-blind review.
>
>
>
Just remember that it's always "reasonable effort at being double-blind" rather than actual double-blind and your question becomes moot. You're doing nothing wrong by citing a recent previous paper of yours if it's justifiable on the merits ignoring the question of review.
H-o-w-e-v-e-r - check whether the conference has specific rules about these cases and follow them to the letter.
Upvotes: 2
|