date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2016/04/27
| 649
| 2,417
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had an interview at a university for a tenure track position. They decided not to give me an offer, but I met a professor there (for the first time) that supported me as a candidate. This professor saw my application, went to my talk, and was not on the search committee, but participated in my campus visit.
I corresponded with this person through e-mail, and the phone, about my career (not just about the position).
Since I didn't get an offer for a job I wanted this year, can I ask this person if they would write me a reference letter for my job search next year?<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username_1: In any case, do not cite your accepted paper as somebody else's work.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
|
2016/04/27
| 151
| 548
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there some webpage with a collection of thousands of theses of undergraduates, graduates, and PhD students from all kinds of sciences and where they are freely accessible like on ArXiv or (mostly) adsabs.harvard.edu?<issue_comment>username_1: researchgate.net has research from many academics who choose to self-upload, might be a good place to start off.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: <http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/search.html>,
<https://oatd.org/>,
or library services of individual universities.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/27
| 844
| 3,454
|
<issue_start>username_0: A paper describes a computational method for solving a problem, and we made a significant improvement to the method and applied it to a new case study. Is it appropriate to publish a response paper?
Most response papers I've seen dispute the findings or methods of the paper they are responding to. Is it reasonable to write a response paper which agrees with the initial paper?
EDIT: It wasn't very clear when I first posted this, but the "response paper" I refer to is a specific mechanism that journals have for responding to an existing paper published in their journal. This is often called a comment or discussion paper. At Nature, they're called ["brief communications arising"](http://www.nature.com/nature/authors/gta/commsarising.html). I might be the only one that calls it a "response paper," actually...<issue_comment>username_1: Every paper, in some way, is a response to everything that it cites. You can respond in agreement as much as you can in disagreement. An improvement is a positive response and you might couch it more in terms of a follow-on or follow-up without having to be negative about the prior results.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To be direct,
>
> Not always
>
>
>
A response paper with respect to an initial paper, *X*, can come under one or more of the following categories.
1. A method that can outperform what is prescribed in *X*
2. An improvement over the method implemented in *X*
3. A conflict of results with that of *X*
4. A different approach to the problem stated in *X*
5. A sequel to *X* by providing additional information or different analysis
From the above, only 1, 3, and *probably* 2, applies so as to disagree with the initial paper, *X*.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In general, 'comments' can be comments in support or comments in disagreement. Usually people tend to only submit comment when they are moved strongly to point out a disagreement.
But, as question specifically referred to Nature's "[brief communication arising](http://www.nature.com/nature/authors/gta/commsarising.html)" (BRA) the answer is NO. The BRA notes that "Submissions should challenge the main conclusions of the Nature paper and contain new, unpublished data to support the arguments.". (i.e., pointing out errors, reinterpreting conclusions, coming to a different end result, comments to refute). Showing that there is an alternative method that is better than that presented in the paper doesn't seem to fall under that 'challenge' to the paper. (Unless perhaps you can write it as challenging some final conclusion that their method is the best possible ever? )
They offer the option to add extensive comments under the paper on the website. But then it will be difficult for others to be able to cite or even find your work. It sounds as if you should find a journal and submit your your method as improvement in XX algorithm/method, citing the original Nature paper.
For comments and criticism there is a brilliant new service of pre- and post-publication reviews called Publons. For example, a [recent and very harsh criticism](http://dx.doi.org/10.14322/publons.r480517) of a sensational paper in Nature. Each review is assigned a DOI, so others may easily cite your comments. Also, it is well covered with Altmetric, which provides quite a visibility to your comment. Yet, no official impact factor for you reply publication.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/28
| 490
| 2,131
|
<issue_start>username_0: Not too complicated of a situation -- I'm graduating with my bachelor's degree (Mathematics) in a couple weeks, but to support my wife, I'm going to get a job for a while before looking at attending a master's program. The soonest I am considering starting a master's degree would be something like Fall semester of 2017.
Since I'm leaving the school, and I may be moving states with a job, should I go ahead and bring up the question of a letter of recommendation with the professors from whom I think would write them? I have a good reputation with them, so it's not like they'll forget me in a year, but I'd rather have it done sooner while I'm still technically a student than a random email they may miss a year from now.<issue_comment>username_1: Explain this situation to each of the few professors you plan to ask for letters of recommendation from, and ask what they would prefer. Some of them would probably prefer to write you the letters now, while you are fresh in their memory. Others, (ones who are very well disposed to you, or very generous people) might like to wait until you are applying for specific programs, because then they can tailor their responses to the specifics of what you are applying to. Even in that situation, you will feel less awkward if you have already broached the topic with them. Also, you learn if someone you are expecting a recommendation from is actually not willing to write one for you, or feels that they can't recommend you strongly. This will be better to find out now than a year from now.
Plus, your professors might have advice on what kind of job to take in the meantime in your field, or even a connection for a job. You won't know if you don't ask.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To me, receiving a letter of recommendation while you are about to finish school and while you are still fresh in your professor's mind is a great idea. I would ask your professor to write 5 letter of recommendations (or however many schools you plan to apply to) and put them inside a sealed envelope with their signature over the sealing strip.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/28
| 1,633
| 5,431
|
<issue_start>username_0: If some measure of quality improves to 150 % of its original value in a study from condition A to condition B, would it be most appropriate, in terms of scientific writing (computer science specifically), to describe that as:
* >
> a 1.5-fold improvement
>
>
>
* >
> a 1.5× improvement
>
>
>
* >
> performing 1.5 times better
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: The following may seem a bit nitpicking, but such details are what separates the wheat from the chaff:
* >
> a 1.5-fold improvement
>
>
>
**Bad.** This implies that the improvement – not the quality measure – is 1.5 of something else, that is reasonably comparable, e.g., another improvement. This would make sense in a context like:
>
> We compared different performance boosters and found that contrafibulaties yielded a 1.5-fold improvement compared to the improvement by pericombobulations.
>
>
>
(Note that I do not consider the above sentence an example of good writing as it is bound to be misunderstood by somebody, but it’s at least technically correct.)
* >
> a 1.5× improvement
>
>
>
**Very bad.** If I am benign, I read this as “1.5-fold improvement” (see above). If I am not, this does not make any sense at all. Replacing words with mathematical symbols just because they have some semantic relation is a very bad habit as it almost never yields a clear meaning, is bad style, and is indicative of deficiencies in basic mathematical concepts.
* >
> performing 1.5 times better
>
>
>
**[Meh](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meh).** If we are being literal, it has problems similar to “a 1.5-fold improvement”: Does *1.5 times* apply to *better* or something else? Now, linguistically, this is a fixed idiom with a clear meaning, so the situation is not that bad, but I would guess that some non-native speakers misunderstand it. Moreover, idioms do not stylistically mix very well with accurate, quantitative descriptions.
* >
> performing 50 % better
>
>
>
**Almost Good.** Similar to the above, but better, since *50 %* is by far not as likely to be understood to apply to *better* than *1.5 times.*
* >
> performing 1.5 times as well
>
> performing 150 % as well
>
>
>
**Good.** These leave no room for misunderstanding as you make clear what *1.5 times* or *50 %* refer to, and it’s the correct thing, namely “goodness”, i.e., your measure of quality.
* >
> an improvement by 50 %
>
> an improvement to 150 %
>
>
>
**Good** (with sufficient context). Again, it is clear, what the numbers actually refer to.
* >
> performing 50 % better than A
>
> performing 1.5 times as well as A
>
> performing 150 % as well as A
>
> an improvement by 50 % in comparison to A
>
> an improvement to 150 % of A’s performance
>
>
>
**Very Good.** By naming the actual reference, you avoid misunderstandings. However, with sufficient context, the expressions I labelled *good* may be preferable for brevity and avoiding unnecessary redundancy.
Note that all this assumes a measure of quality that increases with quality. If your measure decreases with quality (e.g., runtime), it’s probably best to directly talk about the measure, e.g.:
>
> A’s runtime was 50 % of B’s.
>
> A runs twice as fast as B.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, the expression
>
> 1.5 times better
>
>
>
is to be avoided at all cost. It doesn't have any linguistic meaning. That is because "better" (like "bigger", "more") implies an *addition* to whatever thing is being measured:
>
> this car goes 10 km/h faster than the other one
>
>
>
while "1.5 times" implies a multiplication.
(If we were to assign a meaning to it, because of the "additional" meaning, "1.5 times better" would mean "2.5 times as good").
Furthermore, if "1.5 times better" were to be allowed, what would "50% better" mean? When following the reasoning that would make "1.5 times better" mean "1.5 times as good", this would imply that it meant "50% as good". Which it of course never meant.
My suspicion is that the incorrect phrasing "1.5 times better" got into usage because people are unsure how to write "1.5 times as good as" and connecting it to the thing they are comparing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I usually clarify that like this:
>
> Condition A's performance was 1.5 times that of condition B.
>
>
>
That gets the **condA = 1.5 × condB** thing across, without the ambiguity of “improvement times x”.
---
Or draw them. There's no shame in being *too clear*.
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/asBR8.png)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In general, it's preferable to use the same arithmetic form when discussing relative change in processes of any kind. Consistency shows consideration for the reader. Where I live and translate, the typical writing style tends to like the "x times more than" and the "x-fold" forms mixed with percentages, which is not that easy to interpret as we can see from the discussion here. Percentages not only are more obvious but they also allow comparison with other percentages. So,
* Rule #1, use the same form to compare across your entire discussion or report out of consideration for readers.
* Rule #2, use percentages in preference to "times more/less than" or "-fold" forms, which are not as precise and require interpretation.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/28
| 691
| 3,024
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was looking at submitting to a conference where the call says:
>
> completed work only
>
>
>
Q1: Now what exactly is considered completed work here?
1. That I have already submitted that paper to journals and put a pre-print/working paper version of it online?
2. That it is a complete write-up (i.e. not just an extended abstract) but still rough on the edges and missing some precisions?
or
3. Is that completely up to the organizers and I should have emailed them yesterday to enquire?
Background: Said conference is in the field of Economics/Finance if it makes any difference. There is also a poster session and job market candidates are encouraged to submit which makes me hope that also a not-so-complete "completed work" of mine might be suitable to be submitted. Submissions will be subject to a double-blind review process.
Q2: If I do decide to submit such an "almost-completed work" is it fine to try anyways and worst case I do not get accepted or is that considered bad style and will irritate the organizers and reviewers?<issue_comment>username_1: Completed work consists of work where you've gone through all the steps of formulating your research question, applying a methodology, and generating and analyzing results. Incomplete work is where you're still in the phase of applying your methodology, or you haven't fully analyzed the results to figure out what they mean. A paper or poster on incomplete work might focus on the methodology or preliminary results, but it doesn't fully answer the questions posed when the work began.
There's definitely a judgement call when you can consider work "completed". Oftentimes, the answers to research questions lead to more questions, creating a line of related work that's never really "finished". In this case, you'll need to compartmentalize your results into digestible chunks that can be considered "completed". Describing future work planned on a project doesn't mean that a work is incomplete.
For a work to be "completed", it doesn't necessarily have to have been written up already. That said, you'll probably have to write up the work before submitting anyway. You almost certainly shouldn't be submitting the same work to a journal and a conference. You could try to submit "incomplete" work to the conference, since it's a somewhat fuzzy line, but don't be surprised if you get a rejection if all you've got is the methodology and no results at all.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Though the word *'completed'* is ambiguous in literature, in the context of a scientific conference it would generally mean work in which the results are tangible.
This means that the conference organizers are **not in for**
* Expected results
* Next phase of enhancements
* Reports on work in progress
Though most papers can have a *Future Work* section, your current establishment -- what you are to explain in your manuscript -- should not largely depend on the future work *per se*.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/28
| 1,321
| 5,584
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently completed a postdoc at a prestigious R1 university, in a high profile lab. My publication record is not prolific, but those that I have published as first author are well respected journals, and a handful of middle author publications in top journals as well. I have a consistent teaching record throughout my graduate and postdoc training as well.
I applied to faculty positions at ~30 schools over the past two years, including several that I was not very excited about, but were in my target location and had open positions, so I applied. In total, I've had two on campus interviews and have been offered a faculty position at a low ranking liberal arts university (awards Master's but not PhDs) that seems like somewhat of a good fit for me personally in terms of the teaching I would do and the research interests of the other faculty, but lacks the prestige and resources of larger/more research intensive schools.
Would it be wise to take this position in the hopes that several years of faculty experience will allow me to jump to a different college/university that is a better fit for my professional goals (i.e., more research, higher caliber students, more resources for faculty)? Does this happen often, where someone takes a "starter" appointment and moves to a more fitting situation when it arises, somewhat like a Visiting Assistant Professor position?<issue_comment>username_1: This happens a lot (job hopping for professors) but it's mainly depending on your research whether you get hired.
If the infrastructure is not there for you to do decent research, you're probably only going to do a lot of teaching without getting many grants or publications that would get you a subsequent position. I think you're better of staying in a postdoc position where you have less teaching responsibility. Get a big grant and you can probably choose where you want to go.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The chances of successfully "moving on to bigger and better things" depend on one's discipline, and also what topic one studies within that discipline. Some topics look much more attractive than others to departments/faculties seeking to boost their standing; note that this is, erm, less than perfectly correlated with the actual depth/worth of those topics.
>
> Would it be wise to take this position in the hopes that several years of faculty experience will allow me to jump to a different college/university that is a better fit for my professional goals (i.e., more research, higher caliber students, more resources for faculty)?
>
>
>
This strikes me as risky, if you feel those professional goals are essential to your job satisfaction within the next 4–7 years. It's also the case, at least in my discipline, that people hiring in smaller places are not keen on applicants who give the impression — rightly or wrongly — that they are using such places as stepping stones.
Moreover, it may not be as easy for you to move on to "better things" as you might hope; you'll be up against younger people applying for similar jobs, and your rate of publication — if that is important in your discipline — will almost certainly be lower than those people, especially if you start work somewhere that has fewer resources than the place you did your PhD.
>
> Does this happen often, where someone takes a "starter" appointment and moves to a more fitting situation when it arises, somewhat like a Visiting Assistant Professor position?
>
>
>
I'm afraid I don't have anything more than anecdotes and a very partial sample based on my own discipline.
My own experience, which may differ from yours, is that permanent positions in my sub-discipline were hard to come by in my home country. Consequently, I ended up taking a job in North America which, although not in a liberal arts college, was not too far from the situation you describe as
>
> somewhat of a good fit for me personally in terms of the teaching I would do and the research interests of the other faculty, but lacks the prestige and resources of larger/more research intensive schools.
>
>
>
At the time I did not do so with the intention of moving on, but it was always a possibility I kept in mind, and subsequently I did indeed quit that job to take up a new one elsewhere, which unexpectedly arose. So I guess you could view this story as some evidence to support your initial idea — start somewhere and then move on — but I'd also counsel caution.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You describe the resources as likely insufficient to garner the publications that will fuel the leap up.
Academia abounds with professors who were generally useless at a top lab for a few years and then got hired lower down the food chain in the mistaken hope that some of the magic would have rubbed off on them.
There are not so many people who jumped up because they did something remarkable at a low-prestige uni. One reason is the lack of resources as noted. Another one is that the top places will not hesitate to copy your work without acknowledging you. (Yes, Kevin, this happens, and it happens a lot, and there exists no effective recourse.)
The jump "upwards" is *very* much easier from industry, especially if you manage to be sitting on funding or acces to (or knowledge of) some new instrument.
Another warning: low prestige places are often run by people who are - how to put this politely - mediocre prima donnas. Your experience at a much better place may inspire some unpleasantness on the part of your new colleagues.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/04/28
| 867
| 3,575
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am close to graduating and am going to an assessment center for a very large tech company. One thing we need to do is hold a presentation about one of their products.
I want to stand out a bit from the crowd and show that I spent a lot of time on this presentation. So I had the idea of drawing my own characters and using them in slides to help explain my reasoning etc. (A lot like in the youtube-videos you see nowadays where stuff gets drawn while a person talks).
I find this type of presentation fun to listen to, **but is it unprofessional?** It is my first time at a global giant like this and I'm sure they are fine with more than others since it's in tech, but is this too much? Should I use the normal "boring" slides with one idea/slide etc. ?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, the person talking to your slides should be you, not a cartoon character.
Now, I've seen things like this work for people who are very good presenters and stage performers as well. For example, one of my grad school compatriots was also a serious performing storyteller, and he understood the performance aspect well enough to do all sorts of fun, risky, and showy things in his talks.
If something like this isn't already you, however, then I would advise not trying it for the first time in a potentially high stakes presentation like this. Conservative may be relatively boring, but it's also safer, and it won't be boring, if your material is good.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Doing something a lot different like this would be similar to performing a circus stunt. If you pull it off right, it could make a great impression. If you mess it up, it can be a big mishap.
If you are really in to this idea, I would suggest balancing both cartoons and technical diagrams. After all, your cartoons would only help in drawing attention and it is your main content of the presentation that would benefit you in the end.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In my experience, it all depends on the seniority of the people in your audience. The more senior they are, the more they'll appreciate a low-level presentation.
Have a look at the sort of presentation McKinseys give to techy middle managers, and the thing they present to the Board. The former might be quite technical. The latter often looks like something out of a frikkin' children's book.
They can do that, because their authority is established (by the eye-watering fees) before they say the first word; you may not have that luxury. And pitching it right, and not being seen to talk down to them, is a very subtle art. So if you don't have someone alongside you, preparing and giving the presentation with you, who knows exactly what they are doing and is an expert in that subtle art, then DO NOT DO THIS.
Instead, play it very very safe and very very straight. So design your cartoon characters, get it out of your system, and then remove EVERY SINGLE ONE from your presentation. Do not yield to the temptation to leave even a single one in. ["Murder your darlings"](http://www.easywaytowrite.com/ArtMurder.html). (But do save them as a set of fragments for possible future use.)
And whatever level your audience is, try to ensure that by the end of the presentation, they feel that *they* are smart, and that you are an authority.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: More than anything, that would be unnecessary- possibly ineffective.
Instead, you could go with power-point smart art graphics, or even try infographics to visually present your ideas.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/28
| 1,415
| 6,139
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been having doubts about the progress I've been making during the start of my PhD. About 2 weeks before I was due to go abroad for a placement at another lab I raised these concerns with my supervisor and they traveled the length of the country a week later to meet me in person to help with how I was feeling.
Now two months have passed (I'm still overseas), and my project is well overdue for a third party progress review within my department. This shook me again when it was brought to my attention, and I started to worry about the progress I've been making again. Adding to this, discussions with the experts at the overseas lab have made me question the value of my research as a whole, and whether or not anything I've done so far or will do for the next 8 months or so is actually worth anything - regardless of whether or not I'd made any real progress with it. (Which I haven't, but that's a whole topic in and of itself).
This has left me feeling terrible and I'm having thoughts of quitting my PhD. I told my supervisor how I was feeling again two weeks ago and they promised a phone call to talk about it, but they don't seem to have found the time. I'm so concerned that I want to raise the issues over their head, but I don't know whether I've given them enough time to respond. Part of this is because I'm out here to do an independent piece of work and not my PhD, so I wouldn't have noticed any changes that we could have implemented in my PhD project. I also haven't actively bugged them about how I'm feeling, as sending constant email reminders makes me feel even worse.
I could raise these issues with my third party project reviewer, as that's largely what they're there for, but I don't know if I've done enough myself to rectify the situation before raising the issue higher up in the 'chain of command'. Should I?<issue_comment>username_1: Your university has a responsibility to provide you with adequate pastoral care. If these issues are related to your well being you should talk to your student support services. If they are related to the managemt of your project and the progress you've been able to make as a result then keep emailing your supervisor and reviewer. If it's both, do both.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The straightforward answer to your question 'have I given my supervisor enough time?' is **no**.
You are having doubts. Having doubts is common. Doing you PhD may or may not be the best thing for you. You work may or may not be important. Your supervisor may or may not be supervising you well. You may or may not be making good progress (although working on a completely different project is not really part of your PhD). But your case is almost certainly not exceptional. You say that your supervisor already traveled a significant distance to talk to you before. That's a lot of effort to go to.
Your doubts are not really issues that your supervisor needs to fix; they are your thoughts and feelings that you need to work through, with some input from your supervisor. You don't want to 'take it over their head', but you can ask for advice from others who might be willing to give it. I would not expect the 'third party review' to be the right place for that, although you might consider afterwards asking that person if they would meet up with you over coffee one time to give you some perspective on your worries. They might legitimately be able to put some context on the relevance of your work (depending a bit how friendly/competitive your field is).
Being overdue the review without realising it almost certainly should not worry you so much. If it's overdue because your supervisor doesn't think you are ready, you should probably already be aware of that. It being overdue because they think its a pointless piece of bureaucracy, or at least that the deadline is stupid, would be perfectly normal, particularly when you are overseas working on a different project.
I would suggest emailing your supervisor again, saying that your feelings are really bothering you, and that it would help if you can fix a definite time to skype, even if it has to be some weeks away. They could well be very very busy.
Also, do not make hasty decisions. Unless something specific comes up (eg. a high-paying job offer you are really interested in), I would think there is no need to come to a conclusion in less than a couple of months, and it may well not be sensible to do so. You probably didn't decide to do a PhD on a whim, so don't let sudden feelings now override that. If over a sustained period of time you decide that your PhD really isn't right for you then feel free to quit. But don't throw it away until you are sure.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with 'username_2' points but also consider these.
As a recent PhD graduate and a student Union representative for the duration I came across a lot of issues and as a rule of thumb (at least in the UK) I recommend complaining (but make sure this is not detrimental to your progress). A lot of academics treat their job as a cushy position for life and operate as slave drivers (AKA PhD student supervisors) with no regard for you. Don't quite, but feel free to use it as a threat to get the job done (loosing a PhD student after a few months has a terrible effect on an academics career as the decision is not taken likely). Note this does not apply to the supervisor that does their job or better still goes above and beyond.
All in all it's your PhD and you are paying to get it (even if you have a scholarship), so you expect to gain something out of it with receiving the support you are paying for. University's treat everything as a business except their 'customer care' because most people don't demand the quality they deserve.
Another important note, if you are a lazy person who hasn't done anything and do the things above they will throw you out, but if you have achieved the basic things expected of PhD students and not receiving the due service you will win.
Again use the above as a fluid guidance in your decision making process.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/04/29
| 638
| 2,754
|
<issue_start>username_0: *This question is about Computer Science firstly, I don't know if it applies to other domains*
I am a PC member of some international conference in my field. I got a large number of papers to review, so I need to find subreviewers for many of them. Most of the time I would give the paper to a colleague that I know would be interested in reading it ... but I know only so many people interested in so many different topics, and there remains some papers for which I have no idea of whom could review it.
So I'm doing the following: search the web for any researcher in this domain who is active, has publications matching the keywords of the paper, does not seem to have any conflict of interest with the authors, and, preferably, published to this conference before.... and ask this person to act as subreviewer.
Is this common practice? I *have* received conference papers from complete strangers before, but this was only rare occasions (say a few percent), but I feel I'm doing this for almost 1/4th of my assigned papers. Is there any way to address this person, other than the standard EasyChair message?<issue_comment>username_1: *I am a CS guy and can answer this question.*
Yes of course. That is what conference chairs do perhaps. As you told the person has already published in past conferences like this. If some researcher is active in the field of his/her research arena and agreeing to review the manuscript. This is what is called *peer-review*. My recommendation would be to contact the researchers through academic e-mail ids of theirs to make it more transparent.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my experience it may make sense to send subreviews out for people who are junior than you and you know that they can replace your particular expertise (e.g. your postdocs, possibly senior PhD students). Note that you are responsible for their reviews in this case. Otherwise, unless you are a Scientific Committee Chair, it is not strictly your job to select reviewers, or you would have been asked to do that in the first place.
I personally do not give out subreviews for precisely this reason - if I am editor, or in the scientific committee (which selects reviewers), of course, I do select reviewers, and that's what my job description is; but when I am asked to review, I assume they want *me* and *my* expertise and not some variation of *me*. However, some conferences explicitly permit subreviewers, so it really depends on the situation.
In any case, I probably would consider a subreview to be directly your responsibility, so if the subreviewer messes up, it's your job to fix it - or if it is contentious, but not questioned by you, to defend the review.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/29
| 845
| 3,455
|
<issue_start>username_0: Does the submission number in any way influence the way a paper is treated?
For instance, is it likely that an early submission will be picked up by a member of the program committee, rather than being handed over to a subreferee? When I'm going through a list, I do have a tendency to be more concentrated on the first few elements.
Thus, is it a good idea, knowing that I'll be on time for the conference deadline, to submit a good draft a few days/weeks before in order to rank higher in the submission number, then update with a polished version?<issue_comment>username_1: With a typical peer-reviewed conference, submission number has absolutely no effect on the way a paper is treated. Lots of excellent well-established folks submit at the last minute, and paper assignment is generally not done until the deadline is passed. Furthermore, paper assignment is often done with the assistance of a paper-handling system like [EasyChair](http://www.easychair.org/), which includes randomization and non-order-based heuristics.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> For instance, is it likely that an early submission will be picked up by a member of the program committee, rather than being handed over to a subreferee? When I'm going through a list, I do have a tendency to be more concentrated on the first few elements.
>
>
>
PC members often bid to review the papers that are closed to their research area. Because these papers may be relevant to their research, it would also take less time to review, and it would be easier to review since they already have a lot of background.
AFAIK, even for very established researchers, only a small fractions of submissions are closed to their research area. So indexes is very unlikely to be a priority.
After review bidding, there are papers, from the tittle and abstract, that everybody want to review, e.g.:
* [All You Ever Wanted to Know About Sex (but might have been afraid to ask)](https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~ejschwar/papers/oakland10.pdf). Opps...[this link](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0312976569) is correct :)
* [Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend](http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2735085)
There are also papers that sound so scary/weird that nobody want to review. Therefore, the conference chairs have to do the tedious and labor-intensive task of assigning papers to PC members. This process eliminates any tiny influence of indexes that may have.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: AFAIK the following is a general overview of how the review process works for most conferences:
1. Submissions are collected until the relevant deadline.
2. The submitted papers are assigned to reviewers.
3. Reviewers review the papers and hand in their scores.
4. Papers are accepted or rejected based on the scores and the reviews.
I have never heard of a process where papers are assigned to reviewers on the fly, before all of them are received. For many reasons (managing reviewer workload, reviewer/subject match, fairness...) papers are assigned to reviewers after the submission period is over and all papers are handed in. Thus, it does not matter *when* a paper is received, as long as the submission is made within the relevant period
Introducing the submission date (or a similar variable) as a factor into submission evaluation process would mean extra work for the organizers, without contributing value to the end result.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/29
| 6,933
| 27,719
|
<issue_start>username_0: When my supervisor pitched the PhD to me, it was all about analyzing "big data". I had BSc/MSc experience in wet-lab biology (mainly culturing cells), however I wanted to branch out into Bioinformatics since I am, and always have been, fairly good at programming in C, and data analysis in general.
I chose this particular PhD because the idea was we take a particular tissue from a mouse, run all kinds of different assays on the same pool of cells, and then create an analysis that would essentially get more information out of the data than any 1 assay alone could tell us, by integrating the data together in clever ways. That was the plan anyway.
What actually happened was that the protocol to get this tissue out of the mouse had yet to be developed, and without the tissue there would be no sequencing, and without sequencing there would be no data. So for the first year I had to roll up my sleeves (figuratively), and learn how to kill a mouse quickly and painlessly, to cut out and purify that 1 tissue I needed for sequencing. Again, in reality, this wasn't so simple. Although you don't/didn't need a licence in Germany/Europe to just kill a healthy mouse and take out some tissue (only to kill it in stressful ways, or if it's a mouse with a special phenotype), I feel you should still ideally be taught. Unfortunately, although other PhDs/Postdocs in my lab work with mice, I couldn't get anyone to teach me at the time, so the whole experience was pretty traumatic. I started off by filling up cages with CO2 (completely) and then putting the mice in, rather than what I now know you should do, which is to slowly increase the CO2. This will forever haunt me. I later learned to do cervical dislocation, which is better for everyone.
However, after I was able to sacrifice and extract the tissue I needed, I started getting asked to do more and more frankly grotesque experiments. Draining all the blood from a semi-conscious mouse. Implantation of electrodes. Cold room experiments. I can think of several more, but it's not really suitable for here. Of course this was all legal and above board - and important science that needed to be done - however I just cannot personally continue doing this sort of work. It all makes me feel slightly sick, and more importantly, I hate myself for doing it. What started off as probably 20-40 mice for the data I needed, is probably now at 500-600. Maybe more. I stopped counting.
But the reality I face now is that there are still 2 more years to my PhD to go, and I really don't/can't continue this for another 24 months. I have explained the situation to my PI, but he tells me quite bluntly - "this is what you are required to do as part of your PhD". On one occasion he said if I didn't do it, that's OK, but "you won't have enough data for your PhD defense."
That is total nonsense of course. I've already published and the data analysis - which I am now spending most of my time doing - has gone great. I'll be publishing some of the tools pretty soon too. The problem is that if I stop killing mice, my boss is going to really make things miserable for me for the next two years - and the end result of that might even be I'm asked to stop working on the PhD. I don't know exactly how or through what mechanism I would get kicked off the PhD, but my boss/PI is obviously a lot more senior than me and he's paying me every month (which he reminds me of, every month), and we both know if I don't kill the mice, some one else is going to have to.
What should I do?
**EDIT:**
Out of respect for the German PhD system, I should point out that my supervisor isn't German - and I'm confident that another supervisor would have handled the issue very differently. Whilst I'm not confident it is an isolated case, I don't think in this scenario there was anything the Institute (or affiliated University) could have done better/differently.
Honestly, the take home message for me is that I wish I had asked this question sooner, had received all of the kind and encouraging words earlier, and then maybe I would have had the courage to do the right thing before it grew into something more difficult. Thank you all so much!<issue_comment>username_1: You are two years into a four-year PhD, or perhaps you have completed four years out of six. It may seem long, but it's still early in your academic career. It's not too late to quit and restart, and you might even be able to jumpstart into a new PhD position using the work you've already done.
That might be your best option. Stop your current PhD. Not abruptly, but accept you will have no more data, finish and submit publications in progress, and meanwhile search for a new supervisor/plan where you don't have to kill your conscience. Your papers exist, and you have a valid explanation for a possible gap.
Change while you still can.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: **Explore whether you can salvage some of the work and not completely start over.**
Given that you have completed a substantial amount of work, you might be able to somewhat shift your project focus and complete it.
I would start by discussing this with your advisor. Communicate that you just can't continue to kill mice, and you will have to stop your PhD and start over on a new topic if it comes to that. However, you want to explore if there was any way you could shift the focus and complete the PhD. This request is really quite understandable, given that your work has shifted to something quite different than what you expected to do.
So far your advisor has not been very flexible on this point, but he might become more flexible once he realizes he may lose you from the project.
I would also ask your advisor if you could continue related work under a new supervisor, if he remains unwilling for you to change the focus while working for him. This would require finding a new, supportive supervisor,.
**Another option to explore is PhD by publication**
This is quite common in Europe. If you can get several good publications out of the work you have done so far, you might be able to switch to a different project, add a couple more papers, and get a PhD based on that.
The challenge here is that the work has to be somewhat related. However, it doesn't have to be on exactly the same topic.
**Ultimately, you may have to start over.**
As username_1's answer states, it is probably worth it if that is your only option. However, I wouldn't quite give up on salvaging your current PhD yet.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: On the basis of the information you've given, I think you should **look for a new supervisor as soon as possible**. Regardless of whether you manage to adapt the focus of your work, your current supervisor does not sound like someone you want to work with.
>
> I couldn't get anyone to teach me at the time, so the whole experience was pretty traumatic
>
>
>
No one should have to figure out how to humanely kill animals by trial and error.
>
> he tells me quite bluntly - "this is what you are required to do as part of your PhD"
>
>
>
This is your project, and if you can find an alternative way of addressing the aims of the project then you are entitled to.
>
> he's paying me every month (which he reminds me of, every month)
>
>
>
It sounds like he wants a technician, not a PhD student. Doing a PhD is not about unquestioningly doing the bidding of a supervisor.
Other answers have made good suggestions about how to make sure that you don't just have to throw away the progress that you have already made. But find another supervisor to continue your work under!
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: ### I'm going to assume that this question is for real – that important research is being done, and live mice must be killed in order to conduct the research.
(Sorry for that caveat, but there's something rather fishy about this question, especially in light of Emilie's comment. If the O.P. was a newer user, I'd guess we were being trolled.)
Your question ends with:
>
> we both know if I don't kill the mice, some one else is going to have to.
>
>
>
So why not have someone else kill the mice?
Part of this problem seems to stem from the early trauma you experienced by not being properly trained in the first place. So, lesson #1 for the research team would be to not make that mistake again. The advisor should admit that his callous attitude was a wrong one, and then help you solve the problem so that you can get on with your research.
Next, find someone who can kill the mice for you – perhaps even a student at the university. Train them to do it humanely. Explain the advances your research is expected to accomplish. Be more understanding than your advisor was with you. You might even consult with your university's psychology department, asking them for advice in training someone for such a grotesque undertaking.
If this course of action fails, then I'd be inclined to follow some of the other suggestions listed here: change advisors, find a new topic. But I wouldn't follow those routes until you at least tried to fix the problem in more constructive ways first. Otherwise, some unfortunate student is likely to follow in your footsteps and end up asking this same question two years from now, and then be even more shocked to find the question being closed as a duplicate of this one.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: This isn't an answer for everyone in this situation, but it seems very much an answer for you.
As you present it, you have skills in bioinformatics and don't like wetlab work (my wife is a vegetarian who had to do lots of work with mice during her PhD, so I very much understand the view). These two facts alone seem to present a reasonable solution. Having spent time in the bio-science world, my understanding is that bioinformatics is in **much** higher demand than wetlab experience. It is hard for me to imagine that there is not another PI at the university that would be extremely happy to have a full time bioinformaticist, who never even entered the wetlab, in their group.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: My sympathies as I cannot imagine doing what you had to. If you are open to starting mostly from scratch as you'd still like a similar academic career, on top of bioinformatics that was recommended elsewhere, consider looking into computational neuroscience.
Your wetlab experience would ease your work with the experimentalists greatly, and should count in your favor when applying elsewhere. Commonly, all you do is take experimental data, and try to explain it (typically, from a stochastic or machine learning angle). In particular on the ML side, you'll code and run your suggested models to produce a fit. You never touch a mouse, and this doesn't change in the different stages of your career: as a Ph.D. student, you work with your primary (theory) adviser and experimentalist faculty who provides your data; as a Postdoc, you typically are the theoretician attached to an experimental lab (or join a theory lab); and as faculty, you are the theory adviser of the Ph.D. student stage.
If you followed the deep learning success this year of a computer beating go, say, the firm who did this is rather keen on those students who drop out of their academic career in computational neuroscience (be it as a Ph.D., or a Postdoc). Facebook is another example of a place to target neuroscientists; and within Google, there are other groups too, not only DeepMind. So there are also exciting outside options should you eventually decide against being an academic for life.
Best of luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: tonysdg [asked in a comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/67897/i-dont-want-to-kill-any-more-mice/67911#comment164807_67897)
>
> Can you talk to the department head? Or even better, a university ombudsperson (aka a neutral 3rd party who can discuss your options with you)?
>
>
>
and [you replied](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/67897/i-dont-want-to-kill-any-more-mice/67911#comment164809_67897)
>
> I don't know - I'm studying in Germany and I can't speak German.
>
>
>
While it might be a good idea to learn German, you most probably **don't have to know German to contact your university's ombudsperson**.
Universities tend to be very international environments, and English being the predominant language in middle and western European international research, the ombudsperson is likely to know English and maybe even some other foreign languages. If they don't (or if they don't know English *well* enough), they can probably get hold of a trustworthy interpreter/translator.
>
> More importantly, I absolutely cannot do anything that results in my PhD coming to an end. If my supervisor gets in trouble, it hurts both of us.
>
>
>
Similar to medical practitioners, priests and attorneys an organization's official ombudspersons are usually required to grant confidentiality to all who come to them for seeking advice or for filing complaints. They might be trained in de-escalating hairy situations of power abuse by superiors in scenarios of dependency like yours. Usually, they will not take any action that you didn't agree to, unless they are required by law to do so (which isn't the case often) or when the situation requires escalation to stop severe harm (e.g., if others are in danger by someone's action).
The exact rules might differ from organization to organization, but it is neither rude nor is there any shame in asking the ombudsperson what rules apply to their role before even deciding whether to confide in them. So if you don't make public that you're going to see the ombudsperson, doing so should pose near-zero threat to you and your PhD project.
>
> Having said that, I will definitely look into it
>
>
>
**Please do.** Even if your university does not have an official ombudsman or ombudswoman, there might be unofficially assigned persons of trust in the institutes fulfilling a similar role and playing by similar rules. (If there are, again, ask what the rules are before proceeding.)
Your university's website probably has more information on this. If it's a larger university (and by the type of research you do, it probably is) the website and that information is likely available in both, German and English.
You can also ask your head of department, head of institute, the university's headmaster or any other of your boss's bosses, who the ombudsperson responsible for you is. If you ask them, you can (and probably should) do so **without** mentioning that (and why) you want to see the ombudsperson.
If you have problems finding an ombudsperson
============================================
I did a web search myself and found there is an official German organization called "Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft" (ombudsman for science), appointed by the renowned association DFG ([Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft e.V.](http://www.dfg.de)). The organization's [website](http://www.ombudsman-fuer-die-wissenschaft.de/) seems to be entirely in German, but they do have an [English inquiry form](http://www.ombudsman-fuer-die-wissenschaft.de/fileadmin/Ombudsman/Dokumente/Downloads/Kontaktformular_EN_1.docx) for reporting conflicts and suspected violations of "good science" rules / suspected scientific misconduct.
They seem to be more focused on "good science" rules and scientific misconduct investigations than on conflicts, but according to their own examples in [these presentation slides](http://www.ombudsman-fuer-die-wissenschaft.de/fileadmin/Ombudsman/Dokumente/Downloads/PPP.pptx), they do consider "Inadäquate Doktorandenbetreuung" (inadequate / unsatisfactory support / supervision of PhD students) a violation of those "good science" rules, not just plagiarism, made up data, skewed results etc.
They also publish a ["Liste der Ombudspersonen an deutschen Hochschulen und Forschungseinrichtungen"](http://www.ombudsman-fuer-die-wissenschaft.de/liste-der-ombudspersonen-an-deutschen-hochschulen-und-forschungseinrichtungen/) (list of ombudspersons at German universities and research facilities). I'm not sure how up-to-date that list is, but the people on it are probably still around. If they aren't active ombudspersons any more, they can probably tell you who's in charge of their chair nowadays.
Whether you confide in a local ombudsperson at your university or send an inquiry to the "Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft" organization is up to you. [The DFS's white paper](http://www.ombudsman-fuer-die-wissenschaft.de/fileadmin/Ombudsman/Dokumente/Downloads/empfehlung_wiss_praxis_1310.pdf) that lead to founding "Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft" is explicit about this:
>
> Hochschul- oder Institutsangehörige werden ihre Probleme in der Regel bevorzugt einer örtlich erreichbaren Instanz mit Kenntnis der lokalen Verhältnisse vortragen wollen. Sie sollen dazu aber selbstverständlich nicht verpflichtet sein, wenn sie es vorziehen, sich unmittelbar an den [...] überregionalen „Ombudsman“ zu wenden.
>
>
>
(My translation: University and institute members will usually prefer to bring their issues forward to a locally available entity with knowledge about the local circumstances. Of course, they shall not be required to do so if they prefer to address the [...] supraregional ombudsman directly.)
Upvotes: 9 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_8: If the project is important for the professor, one may ask a labor technician just to kill these mice, you taking over the remaining procedures. Of course, this is a high luxury to have a labor technician as an assistant for a PhD student, but should be possible if they do understand the need.
You can also ask to make this a shared project with some other PhD student. While it is not possible to get PhD degree just for killing mice, maybe that partner could also take over few other tasks and you would have the shared publication later.
Finally, as the competence of the professor is not questioned by this problem, it should be relatively easy to change the project, even by moving the to adjacent laboratory.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: The past experience has left you traumatized. Yes, you learned to cope somewhat, but you really haven't gotten over the experience either (it is apparent from your speech and actions). It is probably not a big deal, but having to keep at the same work is wearing on you.
In Biology, lots of above board but could-be unsettling things are done in the pursuit of knowledge. Biology researchers and professors have to deal with the outrage against these unsettling things till they get jaded. Since you self-selected this field initially, odds are there is a bit less sympathy (right or wrong).
I suggest you leverage your school counseling system. A licensed therapist can help you with coping strategies, and if that is not enough, can help you sort out the core issues which might permit you to have clarity and certainty before continuing or changing your current academic path.
Once you can decide if you can cope through your PhD (which might be a possibility with better coping tools), it is easier to leverage that degree in areas that don't require the data collection techniques you are performing now.
From your statements, it seems that the professor has indicated that getting off this path at this time jeopardizes your PhD. Odds are that professor is right, and despite how the professor delivered the message, the fastest path to your degree is likely to continue what you are doing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: First of all, let me tell you that I'm sorry this happened to you. Animal experiments are a necessary evil, but this is not the way to go about them. And when you are so desperate as it comes across from your question, remember: your first duty is to yourself. Not to your PI, and not even to your PhD project.
Before you look for any other solution, take a step back and look at the big picture. Is this line of work (still) good for you?
Do this when you have a bit of time for yourself, in a calm environment (go to the forest for a walk, do some sport first or mediate. Don't do it while stressed in the lab and thinking "I can't take one more minute of this"). Imagine yourself in 5 years. You have finished your PhD, you are a successful bioinformatitian, and you picked a position where you never have to touch a mouse again. You sit in a clean office doing gene pathways analysis on a computer, say. And every time somebody brings you an Excel sheet with data from n=20 mice, you know that for each of these quadruple mutants, they had to kill 200 littermates because they did not have the right genes. Will you be able to distance yourself sufficiently from this information that you can still do your job without it flashing traumatic images back with you and eating away at your happiness day after day?
If your head wants to go on, but your gut is churning every time you see preclinical data, you can try to solve this conflict by exposing yourself to the other end of the matter. Your university probably has a clinic attached - try to find out if there is any way to meet patients (maybe volunteer to help with some tasks in a clinical trial under the guise of acquiring more understanding about translational research) or look up stories and videos on the Internet about people healed by novel medicine. It was palpable contact with mouse suffering which traumatized you, and palpable contact with the positive outcome, seeing gleaming patients who would have died if not for animal research, has the best chance of calming your revulsion.
Assuming you want to stay in the area, your best option is probably to change advisors. It would be administratively easiest to see if you can change to another PI within the same group (assuming he's not the prof himself), but might still bring some friction on the people level - it is up to you to know if there is a suitable other PI, how are his connections with your current PI, is your current PI a resentful person, etc. Else you may look into other groups at the same university, or even move to another institution - may be very well worth the hassle, and as a bioinformatitian, you are in demand, you should be able to find a position easily.
Why change advisors? You accepted an answer suggesting an ombudsman, and this may be a good route short-term so you don't leave in bad blood. But 1) if somebody outside your group forces your advisor to concede something he doesn't want to (e.g. allowing you to stop the experiments, or to write the PhD based on your current work only), he will be angry and resent you, making your work with him extremely difficult. And 2) He has clearly shown that he cares more about his experiments than about the wellbeing of his coworkers, even when the situation gets as extreme as yours. This is the epitome of bad management - really, you deserve a better boss than he is.
If you conclude that you will always have trouble if you continue in the job, do not despair. I know, at first it feels like a failure, having to let go of your dreams is very painful. But the sunk "costs" of 1-2 years of working on something you don't finish as planned are not worth suffering for the next 35 years of your worklife. And they are not that much of a cost, if you factor in the experience you gathered even without getting this PhD as planned. Also, if 10 years later you realize you need to change careers, you will be biting yourself in the ass for not having changed now.
Stop focusing on this one path (staying in this PhD as it is) and trying to endure the raging inner conflict. The immense stress in situations like yours frequently leads to tunnel vision. Look at all the other options and allow yourself to accept them as *viable* options. Don't fall into the trap of "I have to finish this PhD, but I can't continue as now, so how do I change this project to fit my desires" and your boss resisting each of your tries to change it. If you find a way to change it - and it needs to be a good way, not out of the frying pan into the fire - great for you. If you don't, get out of the project and do something which brings you forward, even if not in the direction you imagined until now.
I wish you best of luck!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_11: I am sorry I didn't see this question before; the accepted answer is excellent, and hopefully you've gotten everything straightened out by now. I do want to add two additional ideas, for you, if things are still up in the air, and for others who may come across your question.
1. There are telephone translation services. So, if you're ever in a situation where you need to talk to someone in a language you're not fully comfortable with, and you can't find a friend or colleague to interpret for you, don't hesitate to use a translation service. In the U.S., hospitals, banks, courts, etc., have a contract with companies that handle a wide variety of languages. Your university may be able to supply an interpreter at no cost to you (either in-person or by phone).
2. It sounds like you've had a traumatizing experience. If you were in the U.S., it might make sense for you to see a doctor for an evaluation; if a problem, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, is found, it might make sense for you to get this documented with the university's office for students with disabilities; at the end of this big chain of IFs might be some accommodations, and some assistance with working out those accommodations with your advisor.
I don't know what the analogous procedures and structures are in the EU. But I bet there's something analogous.
I once asked about this on SE and never got an answer. Maybe it's time for a bounty....
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: All of these answers are well thought, cogent remarks. But what remains missing is a very straightforward question that you and your advisor should discuss:
Data collection aside, is this activity (sacrificing mice) critical to meet your academic and career goals? I had a similar, (yet decidedly more revolting) requirement, but argued successfully that my career goals did not necessitate that I personally do the job. There were others that could, and were happy to, assist.
If your advisor is difficult, he/she very well may remain adamant that you do the sacrificing. But, if you sit down and calmly state your moral/ethical objections, *alongside* an argument that it is not integral to your academic development, you might be able to turn the tables.
Remember that most PIs seem to think that their students will become some kind of clone of themselves, and they want to prepare you to operate a lab just like their own. From that perspective, of course you need to be able to sacrifice mice - that's part of the daily routine. His/Her statement that "this is what you are required to do as part of your PhD" perhaps anticipates this bias.
If you are unable to come to an agreement with that argument, I'd assume the only argument would be 'shortage of labor'. But if there are others willing to complete this necessary evil in your behalf, I can't see a compelling reason why it must fall on you.
As for: OK, but "you won't have enough data for your PhD defense." -- at the end of the day, if its between quitting or lobbying for a reprieve -- double down. Your PI has a vested interest in you completing the work, as you are most closely connected with it, and may bend upon ultimatum. He or she may elect to take a deal rather than lose you once all cards are on the table.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/04/29
| 620
| 2,476
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been reading a sample PDF of a book by a professor at a research university published in 2007 on the publisher’s website. For some reason the book’s title was not included in the PDF’s footer (as it should be) so I had to google a passage from the book with the hope that Google Books would provide me with the title. I was quite surprised when it provided me with two titles.
There was a second book by a completely different author (an engineer with a PhD who works in the industry) published in 2015. Not only was the passage there but the whole paragraph (possibly more) verbatim. And even though the second book had tons of references, the first book wasn’t among them.
Should I let someone know about it? If yes, whom?<issue_comment>username_1: Not to copy and paste my answer from another question, but...
You should contact the editor/publisher of the book which plagiarized (book 2), present your claims, and be prepared to submit evidence. If there's no response, contact the editor/publisher of the original book (book 1) - they may be able to use legal means to force the matter.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to informing the editor/publisher of the book which was plagiarised, I might also be better to bring this to notify this to the original author of the plagiarised book too (if possible).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Be aware that it's possible that the second author (A2) didn't plagiarize the first author (A1). Both authors could have copied from an earlier source.
You mention that A2 has tons of references, perhaps the original source is listed among them.
Be careful not to slander anyone with your inquiries.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I would suggest contacting the original author (A1) to let them know about the (probable) plagiarism, rather than directly contacting the second author/publisher (A2/P2). This way:
* At the point where you get in touch with a stranger, you are not accusing them of anything, so communication is much less loaded/constrained.
* If A1 tells you they have authorised the re-use, then you know it’s OK; whereas if you contact A2/P2 and they say it was authorised, it’s hard to be sure you can trust them (since their ethics are already in question).
* If the re-use is indeed not authorised, then A1 is the person with the best legal and moral authority to contact the publishers P2 and make this allegation.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/29
| 1,754
| 7,568
|
<issue_start>username_0: I asked a professor from my online graduate degree to write a letter of recommendation. It was when I first started looking at graduate school, so was not prepared with what you would usually want to give a professor, especially one you had never met in person. The exchange went like this
Me: "Dr. XXXXX,
I was a student of yours at XXXX from 2011-2014. I will be separating from the military in the fall and am looking to pursue another Master's degree in Food Science. I hope to fuse this with my work at XXXX and my previous biochemical engineering degree in order to work as an R&D chef focused on Nutrition. I was wondering if you wouldn't mind endorsing a letter of recommendation for me. It would be a great help in my application process. Thanks so much for your time."
Professor:
"Yes, I will be happy to provide a letter of recommendation to you. Please, let me know specific details and whom it should be sent to."
Me:
"Thanks so much for the quick response. I'm actually looking at colleges right now, but as soon as I get them narrowed down I will send you the contact information. As far as specific details, is there anything you are particularly looking for? Or should I just include the classes I attended that you taught? GPA? The focus of my studies? Once again, thanks so much for your help. I really appreciate it."
Professor:
"I do not need any additional information. Let me know when you need letter to be sent."
Is this basically, you didn't come to me prepared. Now you're getting a bad letter? Or maybe my record was looked up and showed something bad? I got all A's in the classes and was the supervisor of my capstone project which was also an A. Since then I've sent my resume and some facts to work off of as well. Communication had been normal since then, usually a quick response with short replies. I feel like I may just be being paranoid, but I figured I'd get some unsolicited opinions on whether it's worth the risk (if there is a risk) to use his letters.
The professor is a Dean at the college and has been exposed to my work the most. I've contemplated possibly asking politely what happened during that exchange, but I can't for the life of me figure out how I would even approach that. One letter has already been written and submitted to a school.<issue_comment>username_1: I would read these responses as: "I am happy to write you a letter of recommendation, I am busy, and just want know where to send my letter".
As a professor, I get literally hundreds of emails everyday, many of which, like yours, I want to reply to, but I don't have time to write elaborate or detailed responses. I read the responses you got as terse but professional.
If I am approached by a student I don't feel I can write a good recommendation letter for, I usually tell them this, and suggest they ask someone else. I think this is common practice.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is the correct reply and just the way the exchange would have gone for one of my students. You should be pleased.
The professor will not need any information because the academic records and personal recollection provide everything that is necessary to put in the reference letter. If you had to provide information then the reference provided would be **less** worthy. Anyone can write from information provided, but to do it from personal experience will be so much more valuable.
The fact that reference will be sent direct to the colleges will give it so much more weight. A confidential reference from a professor that remembers teaching you is the best you could ever get.
Be more grateful and less paranoid.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It does not sound like he is going to intentionally write you a bad letter of recommendation. Presumably, he has access to the classes you have taken and the grades you have gotten (potentially you entire transcript). That said, not wanting to know more about what you have been up to is not a great sign. It is much easier to write a good letter of reference that is tailored to a application, if you have seen the application.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Just to reiterate a point that is often misunderstood: a letter of recommendation that mostly refers to second-hand information is not positive. The best LORs refer to first-hand experience of the letter-writer with the student. What's the point of having the letter refer to things that are documented in transcripts and such? It adds nothing. Nothing. (Unless there's either positive or negative trouble/action that can be explained by *adding* information...)
So, when I write letters, the main point is to speak of my first-hand knowledge of the student's past accomplishments, my perception of their interest, motivation, and potential, based on my direct contact with them... and "looking them in the eye".
Email contact is more tenuous, sure, but, still, it has been known to be an adequate mode of communication "first-hand", not just a notifier of events elsewhere.
So, if your former teacher has a similar attitude as mine, then (s)he'd have no need at all for any further information... because his/her letter would, and should, be based on first-hand knowledge of you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: A professor will not likely tell you that he would be "happy to provide a letter of recommendation" and then proceed to write you a terrible letter of recommendation. Much likelier, if the professor felt they could not in full honesty write you a compelling letter of recommendation, they would let you know that you would probably be better off finding someone who could write you a stronger letter of recommendation (i.e. someone who recognizes some other qualities in you that would let them write a stronger letter of recommendation). The fact that the professor has indicated he is happy to write you a letter of recommendation means that he is happy to write you a letter of recommendation. To say anything to that effect and then proceed to write a poor letter of recommendation would just be mean-spirited and dishonest.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Be very pleased this instructor is willing to give you a recommendation letter. If you are super curious what he will say, ask him for a CC sent to you, to put in your resume file. Just in case you change your mind and chose another school. You won't have to bother him again since you have a copy of the letter and can just forward it. It may work different for school ref. Letters but every Supervisor etc. I have every asked for a reference sent me a copy anyway.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: The answer to the question *title*, as opposed to the specifics of your case, is "Yes, it can happen".
A bad letter of recommendation may be unintentional - either because the recommender does not actually know you, and this shows by him not discussing first-hand experience, or because the letter may be short and generic etc. But if you're not sure someone has a high opinion of you, it is not impossible he recalls something negative and will let that mix in with what he might write. Finally, in some cases, recommenders get contacted by future employers/academic institutions, and if they don't follow up with some positive banter, that might be work in your disfavor.
So, bottom line: If at all possible, get a letter of recommendation by meeting with the recommender in person, telling him what you plan on doing, etc. Otherwise it might be a bit of a risk.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/29
| 1,711
| 7,561
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a problem...Once folks learn my academic specialty within the medical sciences and of my strong background in statistics, they often want to form a collaborating - mostly they want me to conduct analyses, develop the study methods, write methods, results and discussion sections of their manuscripts. All this in exchange authorship credits and no actual pay. More often than not, these offers come from clinicians with little experience in human subject research and statistics, who specialize in research topics vastly different than my area of focus.
These days I am weary of getting involved in these projects because when I did do so a few years ago, I became very worried about the integrity of the data and the scientist with whom I worked with. More importantly, I worried the work would at some point be retracted and consequently tarnish my reputation in the future. These concerns arose due to the fact that I had many questions about the data the study was based on and had limited access to the raw data.
The above-mentioned predicament worries me as I am at the beginning of my scientific career and I suspect that many of these clinicians are only temporarily vested in research to amp their publication records for the purpose of promotion. For them, these publications are one-offs and would have less devastating consequences on their careers if retracted. For me, its very different as I am strictly a researcher. It worries me that working on projects where I do not have full control/access to the raw data, and by working with clinicians with little scientific training in human subject research will result in catastrophic outcomes for me.
My questions to the forum are:
1) am I being too picky about who I collaborate with at this stage of my career?
2) should I relax my standards?
3) what are the consequences of being included as an author in poorly conducted research early on in one's research career for an aspiring academic?<issue_comment>username_1: Our institution, and many others Faculties of Medicine, have statisticians fully employed. Please make sure if your institution has one. These professionals are never coauthored since it is their job to analyze data. Same as most of the time you don't coauthor technician (for ex. TEM, AFM and other machine operators ).
However, all of them need to follow work ethics, if there is a huge error in data it is their duty to report. We had a problem when one professor pressured this stuff to process data according to his view ( confirmational bias ). I assume if your institution has one and teams you collaborate don't use it, either something fishy is going on, or the person responsible for the statistic is too busy. Which can happen depending on the size of the institution.
**If you are the coauthor, then you are one among equal. That being said, one who submits manuscript sometime need to prove and confirm that all authors agreed upon this version. So you should not be picky, but rather "pushy" of your concerns.**
>
> 2) should I relax my standards?
>
>
>
It is up to your academic and personal integrity. I know some authors that don't want even considering submission into low impact factors. Be aware if you are marked as the hard cooperating person, later on, you may find difficulties to establish colaboration, but that shouldn't matter to you if you have integrity and credibility!
>
> what are the consequences of being included as an author in poorly conducted research early on in one's research career for an aspiring academic?
>
>
>
There are services ( similar to proofreading and editing of the manuscript ) that are offered in order to fit the data of your research in a way that will confirm your theory. I saw an article on Elsevier or Springlink, that was retracted because using this services. In my opinion, consequences are only if you submitted published and later retracted journal for academic promotion.
Consequences in sense of publishers, you might get blacklisted.
There is a website that tracks all retracted articles and exposed professors.
As I read, there is some Japanese author, cancer research, that got 8 times retracted. Nothing really significant happened at his home institution.
Link to that website is on this site, and it was reference in question about postdoc.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think that you're too picky or that you should relax your standards.
If you are responsible for creating a statistical model to test the data, then you should know everything there is to know about the process that generated the data that you are modeling. If you do not know everything and if you don't have access to all the data and any material relevant to how the data was generated (e.g. protocols), then you cannot in good conscience model the data. The reason for this is that you don't know where to look for problems that might invalidate your model. You might, therefore, overlook something. And if the wrong statistical model is used, then the sampling distribution of the parameters and your test statistics will be wrong. They will be wrong because the premises of your argument will be false.
Ideally, as the person conducting the statistical analysis, you will be involved in collecting the data. This means that you should be involved in designing the experiment. [Fisher](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ronald_Fisher) once said the following about involving a statistician after the fact:
>
> "To consult the statistician after an experiment is finished is often merely to ask him to conduct a post mortem examination. He can perhaps say what the experiment died of."
>
>
>
In the case of an observational study this might not be as bad as you could collect other data after you're involved. But it is not ideal.
What I would recommend you to do is to use the argument that you cannot possibly model the data if you don't have access to all the materials and know how the data were generated. You can use this argument to justify yourself to your co-workers. And you can use this argument to justify yourself towards yourself for not working on certain projects. You're the expert here and you need to tell yourself and others what you need to be able to do your work. And if what you need isn't there, then you can't do your work. Period. This way you avoid re-thinking, worrying, and arguing about what you should work on and what not.
In addition, I would recommend you to document everything for each paper to make it clear what your responsibilities were and what the responsibilities of other people were. In particular, in those cases where you did not have access to the raw data.
As for the consequences of being part of a poorly conducted research. It will tarnish your reputation. By how much depends on what the norm is in your field and in your peer group. Your reputation is how you are judged by the standards of other people. As I am not in your field or know you (or what research you were involved in or would be), I cannot say how much of an impact this will have. But it will definitely be bad for your reputation. It might be worth it though. Although this depends on what your goals in life are.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition, I would recommend to document everything you did for each paper to make clear what your responsibilities were and what the responsibilities of other people were. In particular, in those cases where you did not have access to the raw data.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/04/30
| 813
| 3,335
|
<issue_start>username_0: ### I've heard that you should wait 15 minutes for a professor who is late to a class, before leaving.
Some of my classmates have said that the 15 minute rule is only for professors without PhD's, and that you must wait at least 20 (and up to 30) minutes for professors that do have PhD's.
The PhD part seems silly, but after hearing some version of this "rule", or "myth", so many times, I wonder if it has some backing.
Is there any evidence that this was once an actual rule put in place by a university, or academic governing body? Was this ever anything more than a "rule" put it in place by impatient students?
---
### Why wait?
Some classes will fail you after a certain number of absences and others will calculate 5% of your final grade from the percentage of lectures you attended. And it can be a good idea to attend as many classes as possible to show that you are putting forth effort. Professors are much more likely to bump a high D grade to a low C if they see that you have been to every lecture (at least in my experience).
**So how long do you wait before the professor should no longer be able to show up and not give the daily "attendance credit" for absent students?**
If a class was an hour long, and the professor didn't show up for 55 minutes, it would be common sense to leave by that point. But, at what point do you leave? An evil professor could always wait for 59 minutes before poking his head into the empty classroom and counting everyone as absent.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no such rule. The professor is paid, in part, based on a certain number of classroom hours. If they arrive late they are violating the terms of their employment, so it's hard to imagine them taking a punitive roll call after people had already given up. If this actually happened to you, ask the professor in question what they consider the right amount of time to wait.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd suggest the following: wait 5 or 10 minutes, or whatever length of time seems to you to exceed an ordinary minor delay. Then call the department office and tell them that the professor has not arrived, and ask what they suggest you should do.
First of all, they may have some information about the professor's whereabouts or his/her likelihood of getting there, or they may be able to try to contact the professor. Otherwise, if they say you should leave, you have a pretty good defense if the professor should object. And if they say you should stay, you know that the department will not be on your side if you leave.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The reason for the 15 minutes you have heard might be that in the past 15 minutes were allowed for both students and professors due to the imprecission of public time sources and the time to reach the lecture place. The term is still well known in some countries as an "academic quarter" ("Akademische Viertelstunde"). Sometimes it is still honored, but more in less official meetings. See <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_quarter_(class_timing)> The German version of the article says more about the history.
Todays there is no reason for this in regular classes and professors are expected to be on time. See other answers for recommendation what to do when they are late.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/30
| 974
| 4,088
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a high school sophomore student who is very passionate about the subject of number theory and college level calculus. However, I am currently only in the high school class of precalculus/trig. The paper contains material beyond high school calculus, but am afraid that it would not be good enough for an actual arXiv paper. Here are a few important facts to consider about my particular situation.
* (The math side) The proof is basically a non-summation proof of an inequality between an integral and a constant. By "non-summation" I mean like, if you have a sum of infinite terms, you are not allowed to approximate using 1000000 terms or whatever. This implies more strategic methods, no use of any obvious approximation methods like trap rule, **and most importantly, in my opinion, why I feel it good enough.**
* I feel that this is not necessarily good enough for arXiv because I am not proving some general result, have 0 co-authors, and very limited assistance on the subject.
* I currently have no people to endorse, but quite confident I can achieve one (connections).
* If this is too low level, I am afraid that this might mar writing papers in the future, my credibility, etc.
* I have an unused arXiv account, which I doubt will be harmful (side question: will it?)
But, Ok, let's assume that I manage to pull this off during the summer. Assuming the paper is written fair enough, but about the content I am talking about, would writing the paper hurt my academic life down the road?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest looking into publications that specifically target high school or undergraduate students. An example, but one that unfortunately no longer exists, is *The Mathematics Student Journal* ([sample issue from 1971](http://www.mrbottles.com/files/koutsoures-bakerTheorem.pdf)). A current one is [*Pi Mu Epsilon Journal*](http://www.pme-math.org/journal/submissions.html). An organization that I've been involved with both as a student (mid 1970s) and as a teacher (late 1990s) is [Mu Alpha Theta](http://www.mualphatheta.org/). These are USA based, but your teacher should know some appropriate for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest finding some friendly mathematician in the relevant field at a local college and ask them for their opinion on your work. Introduce yourself briefly in a mail, with an outline of the issue you would like to discuss and see whether you can arrange a meeting.
I do not second the suggestions to postpone publications because of youth. Not everybody is a Galois, but I know several students which at high-school age had publication-worthy results which they never published.
Rather, I suggest to subject OP's result to a reality check, to see whether it holds water and is new and sufficiently non-trivial/interesting. If it is, go ahead and publish.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It is very difficult for a high school student to determine whether a result is original and interesting enough to experts to be publishable. To make the point even clearer, when I was a highschool student I had a paper that I published (under the advice of a mathematician who suggested the problem to me) but I wasn't yet able to tell the difference between publishable and non-publishable results on my own! Furthermore, the math that I did on my own (which I really enjoyed and was valuable for my mathematical development, and which even did ok in highschool science fairs) was not something publishable.
I haven't seen what you've written, but the odds are very low that it's publishable in a math journal. But that's ok! You can talk about it with your teacher and learn more stuff. You could submit it to a highschool science fair. You could talk about it with other highschoolers interested in math at a summer program or a forum like AoPS. Smart highschool students thinking about math just aren't the main audience of research math journals or the arxiv, but that doesn't mean that the math that smart highschool students come up with doesn't have its own places.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/30
| 946
| 4,105
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have heard from three professors internally at my school that my master's thesis will likely not be looked at by Phd admissions committees - these professors are frequently on the admissions committee at our Department, too - and that at most my abstract or graphs / pictures might be looked at very quickly or not at all.
Of course, writing a thesis still has great value for the student - we get some research experience that could perhaps help us develop more clearly defined goals for pursuing a PhD, and we earn a letter of recommendation out of the thesis.
But, I would like some broader information, so I want to ask the question here.
Has any of you who has served on admissions committees *actually* read a master's thesis before? Why or why not? Is it just a waste of your time and doesn't really give any indication regarding the strength of the applicant?
My main motivation for asking this question is to decide whether I should delay my graduation date and ask for an extension on my thesis, since I feel I am just starting to do something decent and want to continue it and not give up on it too early.<issue_comment>username_1: While I am not on an US-style admission committee, which I suspect this question implies, I assume that the answer is quite simply that the **committee does not have enough time**. Or, in other words, the information tensity of taking half a day off to read a single thesis with any thoroughness to better evaluate a single candidate is not high enough.
For better or for worse, any evaluation on any level (PhD admission, faculty applications, paper reviews, grant reviews, tenure, ...) needs to balance *thoroughness* with *time effectiveness*. Pragmatically speaking, this is also why we have (for better or for worse) grades, bibliometrics, awards, honours, conference rankings, or journal impact factors - not that the information captured by these metrics is great, but because they give away *some* information in no time at all.
To what extent time becomes a factor obviously also depends on how many candidates there are to be evaluated. A tenure committee can and should afford great thoroughness because it is evaluating only one (or a few) candidates. PhD admission, on the other hand, usually needs to compare hundreds of candidates. Note that, annoyingly, the importance of the decision to the candidate is usually not a substantial factor in the decision how much time to spend.
---
That being said, I personally *still* often use the master's thesis as an important piece in my decision for or against a PhD candidate (I work in Europe, and we hire students directly). However, I am not reading the thesis end-to-end, but I glance over it to find out:
* How well the candidate writes, especially how well the candidate writes *in English*.
* Whether the thesis would in terms of contribution hold up in my own university - if this is not the case and I do not know the university that the student graduated from, I will assume that the level is weak. If the contribution is small but I know the university to be good, I will often assume that either the student or the advisor is weak.
* Whether the student knows good scientific practice, in terms of plagiarism, overselling of results, truthful reporting of threats, ...
* If the thesis is in my field, I will also check if the student has a reasonable grasp of the state of the art by looking at the background and related work section.
All of this can be done in very short time - it is not necessary to read more than two or three paragraphs to figure out if the student is able to write English documents, for instance.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes. I head a PhD program, and I look at the Master's thesis or other writing samples. I might not need to read every single word, but they are the single most important piece of information in the application: we need to know whether applicants are ready to do doctoral-level scholarship. Can they write? Can they cite? Do they even understand what scholarship is?
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/30
| 2,328
| 10,010
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am taking a graduate class requiring that I submit a paper to a journal at the end of the semester. The professor sent out an email informing us that we can either hand off a copy of the paper in an addressed envelope to her, which she will then mail, or email her a copy of the submission receipt if we submit the paper electronically.
I feel uncomfortable submitting my paper at this time, and I intended to work on this paper with my advisor over the summer before submitting it to a journal.
My advisor told me that I should report this situation to the Chair and I did, but my complaint was passed off to the Director of Grad Student Services within my department. The Director informed me that she had talked with the professor, that the professor would not change the requirement, and proposed that I submit it to a journal and then just immediately withdraw the submission. That has been the plan, but I feel like my right to determine what happens to something that I wrote, my intellectual property, is being infringed upon by this professor.
Can my professor force me to submit my paper to a journal anyway?<issue_comment>username_1: If that is the stipulation of the class, then the best thing to do is to comply with the stipulation whether you feel like the paper is ready for submission or not. Treat this as an academic exercise. Should you refuse (which you have a right to do), but that will probably earn you an failing grade on that assignment. This request for submitting a paper to a journal appears to be common as it teaches students the process preparing a document and submitting to a journal. Another thing this type activity does is encourages students to write at a higher level. During my first graduate class, I had to do a book review and submit it to a journal.
Administratively, professors have deadlines of their own and have a timetable as when to submit grades. In this case, what does the professor do with your grade? Is your grade for the class marked as an incomplete? Can a grade be changed in the system after a certain date? The professor’s decision likely goes beyond that of wanting to see you have a published paper.
If your paper fails to meet the quality criteria of the journal or loses to the competition, it is likely that the journal will not accept it. Given this scenario, you can still work on the paper and bring it to a publishable state. One condition is that most journals will not accept a submission if the article is being considered for another journal. This can take anywhere to several weeks to several months.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I find this highly annoying that a professor would assign something like this. Submissions take time, time the editors invest, time the reviewers invest. To have student papers submitted that are perhaps not exactly the highest quality is a waste of resources. Journals should record only the best science, not be considered a machine. Did the professor stipulate the journal? There are many journals out there that offer pay-to-publish, and then there is another potentially sub-standard non-peer-reviewed paper out there for search machines to find. I would submit a written complaint about this to the dean.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: The professor's requirement that you submit for publication a paper you do not want to submit, and the advice from the Grad Studies director to submit and then immediately withdraw your paper, are both unethical, harmful, and -- for lack of a better word -- idiotic. They are asking you to:
1. Use false pretexts to waste the time of busy professionals who have no connection to your course or to your university; and
2. Risk seriously damaging your own scientific credibility by submitting for publication a work that does not live up to what you consider appropriate standards, and (if you follow the suggestion to immediately withdraw the submission) professing to do so out of a dishonest motivation.
I see this as analogous to a criminology professor making it a grade requirement for their students to call 911 and report a fictitious serious crime as a way of learning about how the criminal justice system works. This is obviously wrong, and arguably asking you to be complicit in outright fraud. In academia, your reputation and credibility as a researcher are among your most prized possessions, and I would strongly advise you to not take any action that you perceive as risking those assets, whether it's by publishing a paper you are not satisfied with, or annoying a journal editor who is a fellow member of your scientific community with spurious article submissions and withdrawals.
My recommendation is to ask for a meeting with your department chair and go carefully over the situation and the implications of what you are being asked to do, and ask them to intervene. Another option is to enlist the help of your advisor who could help you argue your case. Much would depend on whether your advisor feels comfortable intervening, on local power politics within the department, the precise level of seniority and personalities of the people involved, etc.
Another insight I can offer is a guess about the human dynamics at play here. My experience is that when the system fails to correct bad decisions of this type, the way it happens is often something along the following lines:
1. Your professor is a (probably senior) person with a somewhat stern personality and rigid views about education of graduate students. She is well-intentioned, but on this issue she is simply wrong.
2. Your department chair is extremely busy and doesn't always have the time to deal in detail with any complaint from a student, so passed the problem on to the grad studies director. However, if you insist on escalating the issue the chair may have to (perhaps reluctantly) take the time to look more into this issue and possibly intervene.
3. Your director of graduate studies may be a sensible person, but like many academics may be a non-confrontational person who doesn't like getting in nasty arguments with colleagues, and was reluctant to force the issue even if she disagreed with the other professor, and came up with the "submit-and-then-withdraw" proposal as a kind of cop-out solution.
I'm assuming that the people involved are mostly reasonable people who have good intentions but need a bit of help reaching the right decision. I can't guarantee that this advice will work, and it's possible that you are in a dysfunctional department where unreasonable decisions of this sort cannot be corrected very easily, but I think it's worth a try.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: There are two parts to consider:
1. Your professor can very well make "have a submission ready paper" a criterion for passing a class. She can not force you to submit it, since you could just accept not passing the class. It has nothing to do with "but I feel like my right to determine what happens to something that I wrote, my intellectual property, is being infringed upon by this professor.". I am pretty sure if you tell her that you don't do it, she will say "ok, you dont pass the class" and you can just repeat it.
but
2. >
> The Director informed me that she had talked with the professor, that the
> professor would not change the requirement, and proposed that I submit it to
> a journal and then just immediately withdraw the submission.
>
>
>
Frustrating that this should be the solution. I think that one should inform the journals in question so that they should just ban all submissions in this context. Institutions which, despite obvious and known severe problems with a paper encourage theirs students to send these papers are behaving unethical.
What your professor should do is check the quality, and judge the quality of your work, and if it's appropriate, give you more time, or fail you if your work (or project duration) is sub-standard in comparison to your peers. Pressing submit buttons is not an academic achievement.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> My advisor told me that I should report this situation to the Chair
> and I did, but my complaint was passed off to the Director of Grad
> Student Services within my department.
>
>
>
Try it again. But this time, if they recall your first attempt, tell them that you made a mistake, and that you shouldn't have asked for a special dispensation.
By asking for special treatment for yourself, you may have indirectly implied that you were ok with the other students still making bogus submissions.
The fact is, this assignment not only has the potential to tarnish your own reputation, the reputation of those other students taking the class, but also the reputation of any student from the same school (not taking the class) that may submit legitimate papers to those same journals.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: A little math-guy-in-a-math-ed-setting moment...file this as a "WLOG" confirmation for the OP, perhaps: not only was I made to do this same thing, but (to raise the pot) it was 1) meant as merely an exercise in the preparatory work needed to prepare a manuscript for publication, most specifically transforming the dissertation into a journal-ready edition (but *not at all* worth hitting the brakes at the last second, oh no); and 2) it was required of the *entire class* in question, the penultimate course prior to the actual dissertation itself. Thus (3. corollary) it was true for *every* student in this penultimate course taught by this veteran professor, and since she was the only person who ever taught it (4. extension) it was required of *every student who pursued a Ph.D. in this field* at this particular school. Talk about a shotgun blast of uninteresting, unpolished, nowhere-near-finished (hardly *begun*, to be precise) theses for those poor, hapless saps at the journals in question to have to field (slash, redirect to the circular file). Oy vey!
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/04/30
| 687
| 2,974
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm teaching a course that has two exams which together form a large part of the students' grades.
On the first exam, the mean score was very high (~90%) with the majority of students scoring over 80%.
On the second exam, the mean score was much lower (~70%), with many students scoring below 50%. The distribution was also much "flatter". (This is not too surprising, since the second exam covered more material and more difficult material.)
On both exams, there were some students who scored ~100%. There were even some students (that I feel should be rewarded) who scored much better on the harder second exam than on the first easier exam.
When computing final grades, is it fair to simply average (with equal weight) the scores on these two exams?
Other possible options, none of which feel completely satisfactory to me:
1. Scale the second exam up in some way so that it has a higher average, then combine the scores. This seems unsatisfactory to me, since it will actually hurt students (relative to their classmates) who did better on the second exam than the first.
2. Weight each students' higher exam score more heavily. This seems problematic for the same reason as before.
3. Simply weight more heavily the more difficult second exam. This is nice in that it helps students who did well on a more difficult exam and rewards improvement over time. But is it fair to do without telling the students in advance?
What do you usually do in these situations? Am I overthinking it?<issue_comment>username_1: The policy for exam weights varies at each school. Where I work, the weight of assignments/exam is listed in the syllabus that is given to the students. This normally cannot be changed without consulting the students. Arbitrary changes in the weighting is at the prerogative of the lecturer but the students will make their disgust apparent through negative course evaluations or speaking to the Dean.
There are too many unknown factors for why some students did better on the second exam compare to the first. Perhaps they studied harder, or they learned how you assess and had success due to that. As such, I would recommend either equal weights or consulting the students for a more radical approach.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Follow what you defined previously. The 'average policy' needs to be done beforehand, so nobody can argue that you defined/changed it to specifically screw/help someone. If you didn't define it previously, the safer route is the arithmetic average, which is kinda standard (or something equivalent for your institution, if different).
More than that, IMHO, you are overthinking. Grades aren't a reward that you give, they are a measure of how much the student learnt the content. A professor of mine says that he doesn't give grades, the students earn it. If they performed badly, they performed badly. You have a duty to fail under performing students.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/04/30
| 2,086
| 9,016
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know somebody who works in a department that discourages giving students A's. Basically, a few years ago, there was a professor giving everybody A's. The department was labeled as a "vacation spot" at the university. This led to a hardline stand on giving A's that is in effect to this day. If a teacher gives too many A's they have to first explain themselves to the Dean. If this continues next they talk to the VP of Academics
The problem is that there are students doing excellent work. However, my friend is worried that if too many students earn an A he will not be able to convince the department of the students' merit. Yet there is an ethical concern of artificially forcing down the grades and giving some poor chap a B+ due to political pressure.
Any suggestions?<issue_comment>username_1: Take special care defining the rules, previously, and stick to them. You should have a specific list of objectives and the associated grades. This is implicit on tests, more explicit on projects. For instance, when elaborating written exams, I usually try to cover the whole syllabus (for that part), with questions of different difficulties, for instance, 4 questions, one easy, two moderate, one harder. That way I can easily see who really knows the content and who is just coasting by...
If a student reaches all predefined objectives, that person earned an A. And you can easily prove it by showing that he indeed reached the objectives. It would be highly unethical not to give a deserving student an A for political concerns of some suit....
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There's no way to answer this based on the information given in the question.
Suppose, for example, that the course we're talking about is French 100. Students are learning how to conjugate être and so on. In this course, there is effectively a ceiling on what the students can do: they can succeed on 100% of the test questions.
But let's say instead that it's a creative writing course. A student's grade is based on short stories they wrote, and these stories are expected to show creativity, originality, and style. There is no ceiling here. It would be perfectly reasonable for the department to say that their threshold for an A in this course is very high.
There is a continuum of possibilities between these two extremes.
>
> The problem is that there are students doing excellent work.
>
>
>
Doing "excellent" work doesn't necessarily make someone entitled to an A.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Retain copies of student work. Use it as a basis for a discussion about department standards versus your standards. If your expectations align with those of your department, and if you have students earning A's, then you can use the student work to defend your grades to the dean. If expectations don't align, then you can make an effort to bring them into alignment. This includes both the criteria for earning the grades (which should be clearly explained in the syllabus) and the level of difficulty of the work required (which can be somewhat subjective). It may be too late this semester, but going forward you can do change. Of course, you can in principle exercise your rights of academic freedom, which includes setting standards in your course. This may not be without consequence for yourself or the department.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The factors that determine a grade delivered from a test in a course is a combination of several factors. The teaching, the course content, the nature of the assessment, the quality of the grading as well as the work performed by the student all are factors that influence the result.
A course can contain, for example, too little material or material at too low a level for the students abilities. Then many students could find it easy to get higher grades. If the material was too complex or not communicated well the the grades might be depressed. Equally the test could contain question that are too simple and not reflective of the level of the taught material; again a higher result profile might be witnessed.
If a high proportion of students are getting **A** grades it may be that the students are all excellent, but it may equally mean that they have not been set material of sufficient depth or examined deeply enough to resolve their differing abilities.
If the students concerned are only getting a high proportion of **A**'s on one course and not on others it might indicate that the course was not constructed well enough to be able to distinguish the differing abilities of the students. If the students got **A**'s on all the courses then it might indicate that a particularly good cohort was admitted that year. If a high proportion of grade **A**'s were delivered for many courses every year then it might indicate that the whole programme had endemic quality issues and affect their reputation as a whole. This is why the mark profile of courses and programs are monitored as part of a quality process in academia. It attempts to diagnose any drop in standards and rectify them.
Your friend should not be artificially altering grades but should be truly reflecting on the assignments and tests given to the students to see if they were able to truly discriminate between students of differing abilities. It is something that can be experienced by those less experienced setting assessments. Sometimes such assessment depend too much on rote learning and recall and less on application of knowledge. Having the correct balance of knowledge recall and application of knowledge is what makes a good assessment. The students don't just have to know something, they have to demonstrate how they can use that knowledge in unseen situations.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I recall hearing of the chair of a department giving every student an A. For multiple quarters, every student or nearly every student got an A. (I was fortunate to be one of those students.) We were a small class, just 8 students. Many of us has significant background experience, some professionally. (One common trait, though, was that we lacked educational degrees in the field.) She spoke to the dean.
She said, "these students do deserve it."
She fared well. The next year, she got more students, and those students got different grades.
I'm glad she defended what we rightfully earned.
Later, I became a college instructor. The college was giving As to nearly every student. Yet, they were not being masters of their work. I started creating my own quizzes/tests/exams. This resulted in lowering some GPAs. I didn't feel one bit guilty about that impact, because the GPAs were previously higher than what was rightfully deserved. (That was still an issue after I started making the gradual change, but at least it was better. Since there was some grumbling/minor uproar from the shock of what was being implemented, I didn't feel like I was moving too terribly slowly at addressing the issue.)
The only good way to lower grades is to let students be aware of what standards are, and adjust standards. Anyone who successfully meets standards ought to get an A. Anything else is not right/honest. If too many students are meeting standards, then adjust standards early enough that the students have time to adjust, or just give them the grade that they earned and make adjustments to try to do better for the next round of students. Don't deprive anyone from what they deserve.
Don't wimp out due to fear of meeting a dean. Someone (possibly the dean) will respect your willingness to meet a challenge in order to do the right thing. Cowering behind the apparent safety of avoiding the meeting is more likely to haunt your conscience years later, after the situation is clearly unfixable. Always do your best to do the morally right thing.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: What you describe has be conceptualized under the name [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macabre_constant) by the french educational researcher <NAME>. And indeed, he describes teachers peer pressure as a major cause for rating students lower than they should be objectively.
As a commenter said, <NAME> proposed to just communicate the elements of knowledge that need to be assimilated before an exam to get the maximum grade, and just rate with the same scale you provide then. /EDIT: this is also known as [criterion-referenced grading](http://ii.library.jhu.edu/tag/norm-referenced-grading/).
This solves the "fairness" of evaluation for students, but not the peer pressure for teachers. Unluckily, I am not aware of any way to avoid that. Up to you to see if you prefer to be just and eventually pay the price (at the very least you will have to explain yourself to the Dean, at worst it can become ugly...), or be unfair and raise the chances that your course gets rated as "hard". It's a hard choice, even more so because it may put you at risk of losing your job...
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/04/30
| 333
| 1,510
|
<issue_start>username_0: Yesterday I received an email that I have to give a two minute scientific presentation as part of an interview for a masters program on this coming Monday. Now I am really struggling whether I have to include scientific data in my presentation or that I can explain a concept. My time is very limited. The email just states: "You are requested to give a 2 minutes (max. 7 slides) scientific presentation about a topic of your own choice". What do you advise me to do?<issue_comment>username_1: First of all congratulations on receiving an interview for a master's program. As part of your application, "you are requested to give a 2 minute presentation about a topic of your own choice." Since your question is quite broad "What do you guys advice me to do?", the best answer possible is to stick to the fundamentals of a good speech and be sure to give a relevant presentation in a clear and concise manner. This is only one step in the application process, so do not overthink it too much.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: There is not much that you can explain in two minutes; therefore, the key is to choose a topic that you can do justice to in such a short time. Choose a topic that you are interested in and confident about. Additionally, make sure that the topic is relevant to the course you are applying for. Create an interesting PowerPoint presentation of 4-5 slides. Check out some short scientific presentations online to get some ideas.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2016/05/01
| 1,865
| 7,777
|
<issue_start>username_0: My wife is defending her thesis soon, and in her department, defenses are open to the public. I will be there along with several of her friends/colleagues. Her mom also wants to come to the defense. In terms of her committee's perception, I could see this being viewed as weird or maybe unprofessional. Then again, it could be harmless, and her mom really wants to come. I also happen to be in the business of trying to keep my mother-in-law happy :)
**How would this look from the perspective of her committee?** Do parents ever come to defenses? I haven't really heard of this before. I want my wife to have the best chance at passing her defense, but I also don't want to come across as a grouchy husband that appears to be saying, "Your mom can't be here."
This is a Nutritional Sciences department in the United States. It is a somewhat unique situation in that students typically start a dietetic internship a week or so after defending the thesis. The internship takes months to plan for the student since it involves organization with preceptors at multiple locations.
At our university, there are three possible results from a defense: passing, passing with modifications, or failing. Passing with heavy modifications could result in a delay (of a month or more) in starting the internship. This recently happened to another student.
My wife asked me to ask this question here as she wants to focus on getting prepared for the defense. She initially asked for my gut feeling on her mother attending, and I had never heard of this before, nor had she. The defense is coming up *very* soon ;) and she did not feel comfortable asking her advisor a question like this so late. Also her advisor is not the most responsive to email so she might not even hear in time (I know that this will probably invoke statements that she should get over it or that she should not have picked this advisor, but this is not the point of the question). For the record, I would **never** tell my wife who she could or could not have at her defense. I'm just trying to be helpful :) It's encouraging to hear from the comments that parent attendance at a defense is fairly common place, so it will probably be no big deal.<issue_comment>username_1: Open to the public means ... open to the public (presuming they can sit quietly in a room for 2 hours or however long your wife's defense is).
Moreover, (edit though I thought I was clear), it's *very* common in the US for family including parents and spouses to attend PhD defenses.
My wife and parents came to my defense (philosophy PhD USA). As did a friend of ours who was a foreigner living in America with no connection to philosophy. A philosophy PhD defense at least at my institution is them drilling you with every objection and reason that they think you're wrong for two solid hours.
While I assume a nutrition science PhD has a different format, I hope that neither the committee nor the person defending the dissertation has much time to look around and see who came and to think odd thoughts about the professionalism of the candidate based on who came to their defense.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I have witnessed parents (up to cousins) attending masters of science, PhD defences and even habilitation theses. I think my mother is still a little angry I did not formally invite her to mine, while my brother did.
What is nice though, is to warn attendees about the protocol, the duration and the formal aspects (avoid pictures and loud jokes).
So if the PhD does not contains confidential parts, I see no issue. A PhD can be full of emotion, it is quite an achievement, and I have never seen jury members complain against a family audience. Moreover, it is sometimes an occasion for them to talk with people of the same age at the celebration:)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: **Your wife should ask this question to people in her department.**
The style and expectations of defenses vary hugely from one place to another. As other answerers mention, it’s pretty normal in the US to have family and friends at the defense. But it’s not absolutely ubiquitous, and I’ve known the expectations to vary even between different departments at a single university. So the best way to be sure is to ask around in the department — ideally, ask some faculty members who’ve been around long enough to see a few defenses — and confirm with them whether it’s usual to have family members there.
(In any case, it certainly shouldn’t affect the committee’s academic assessment of her; at worst, it would be seen as a bit of a social faux pas. But nobody wants to be worrying about social issues during their defense, and it can’t hurt to ask.)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: In many parts of Europe and in Turkey (where I'm from), it is very common and normal - expected, even - for one's parents to attend their thesis defense.
The thesis defense is an important life event akin to one's graduation, marriage, etc. Especially when the event is designated as "open the to public," I think it would be weird if the parents did not attend.
My own parents attended my master's thesis defense (in Turkey), and they will surely attend my PhD defense as well. Practically all of my friends with PhDs have had their parents attend their defenses (in Turkey, Europe, and the US). The ones that defended without their parents being present did so because they were studying overseas, and their families could not make the trip.
In many cases the families not only attended, but brough cookies, pastries, etc. as well; as treats for the other guests and the committee. This in particular could be a bit unusual in the US, but it is common in Turkey and (I'm told) in Europe as well.
So, there are cultural differences in how this is handled, but there is definitely no universal norm that says to keep the family out of the thesis defense completely. In some cultures, the norm is for parents to attend.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Edit: The question has now been edited to clarify that your wife did specifically ask you for advice on this, so the concerns I expressed in this answer aren't operative in your case. I'm glad to hear it!
I'll leave the answer up since the underlying issues will apply to other situations.
---
**This is none of your business.**
----------------------------------
Your wife is a **professional** and she is **responsible for her own career**. There is no reason that you should try to interpose yourself, even to encourage her towards a path that you feel will help her chances.
One of you has spent many years in this department and seen other students graduate, and one of you has not; your question makes clear that you do *not* have personal knowledge about this situation. She is an expert in this situation compared to you. So you are proposing to interfere with a situation that you do not understand from a position of ignorance, just because you have an uninformed feeling that this "could be viewed as weird". (At least you had the sense to ask here first, I suppose.)
Even if you *did* have extensive experience with the conventions of her specific field and *knew that this could be an issue*, it's not your place to butt in unasked and try to control her professional life. (Your comment that you *don't want to be the grouchy husband that appears to be saying 'Your mom can't be here'* makes clear that your involvement was not asked for.)
It's admirable that you want to support your wife. You should do so by providing in her *private* life the support she needs to excel in her *professional* life; not by inviting yourself to concern yourself with the details of her career development.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/05/01
| 2,260
| 9,478
|
<issue_start>username_0: Once you have tenure, presumably you're never going to have to search for a job again. However almost all professors have a CV on their website, and fairly recent ones. Why? They already made it.<issue_comment>username_1: **Everybody needs a CV to help others better know them.**
I am not a professor, but I think even tenured professors may maintain their CVs so as;
1. As an advising professor, they need to hire or accept research (PhD or masters) students,
2. As a university professor, they may hire PhD graduates in form of postdoc positions,
3. As a person working in university or industry, they need collaboration;
*and for many other reasons*.
They need an updated and maintained CV so as people who want to collaborate with them in a research project get know them, their research interests and their previous works or at least their educational background.
Research students need to read their CV to get familiar with their research interests and know their past PhD or masters students' projects. This helps them to better choose an adviser whose education and research background is so near to their academic interests.
These professors may also want to apply to get a project, they need a complete CV to introduce themselves to the project owners or investors.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Upon joining the club of those who've "made it," you find that there are further gradations. A tenured professor can safely breathe a sigh of relief for at least a year or two, but eventually she will notice (i) that her salary is lower than most of her tenured colleagues and (ii) that she is still being asked to document and defend her productivity across several axes: research, teaching and service. (Also, in many cases, (iii) She is increasingly pressured to apply for and get major grants. In many cases, her future salary and promotions depend on this to a large degree.)
The main tool to exhibit your recent accomplishments in research, teaching and service is...your CV, usually. In fact, "whether they want a good raise or not," most faculty are **required** to submit annual "activity reports" in which a CV is often a required component. (When it isn't, it usually means that we manually copy information from our CV into some form or type it into some internal webpage. So having an updated CV is more or less necessary for
many faculty members.) Certainly having a carefully groomed CV is necessary when you go up for "promotion to full", apply for an endowed chair or distinguished research position, and so forth.
The bottom line: academia has bureaucratic, competitive and hierarchical aspects all the way through. Most people who have made it tenure in recent years have learned how to keep reasonably up-to-date CVs without too much trouble or heroic effort -- the CVs *do not* need to be rewritten from scratch to showcase their skills for some new job, usually, so it is mostly a matter of regular updating -- so honestly, this is not the worst part of the bureaucratic minutiae.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Some reasons that I've needed to have an up-to-date CV:
1. Applying for promotion to full professor.
2. Applying for a funding for a sabbatical leave visit to a research center.
3. Applying for grants. (Most funding agencies have very specialized formatting requirements for shortened CV's. For example, you're only allowed 2 pages for the one you submit with an NSF proposal.)
4. An external review of our department and its programs.
It's such a common need that I just make a point of keeping my CV up to date as new publications and other events happen.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm not sure if this is already covered by the existing answers, but one use for an up-to-date CV is: you may be asked to write reference letters for junior researchers seeking tenure or promotion or a higher-ranking job elsewhere, or act as a referee on someone's grant application. It is then part of the bureaucracy, and also informative, for those who wish to solicit letters from you to be able to see what you have been doing.
Note that this is not just a matter of looking up publications: a CV might include various service roles such as administration within a scholarly society, plenary talks and invited courses, and so on.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Great question! In addition to the formal, bureaucratic reasons (evaluations for grants, promotions, jobs etc.) mentioned by the other answers for why it's good to maintain a CV, and preferably a public one, let me add another, informal, reason.
In academia as in many other areas of professional endeavor, there is a kind of "the rich get richer" effect (a.k.a. a virtuous cycle, or positive feedback loop): once you are successful enough, you can leverage your successes to get more success, and the CV (and other similar forms of seemingly gratuitous self-promotion, like maintaining a web page) can play a role in reinforcing this virtuous cycle.
Here's a simple example (one among many - one can easily think of several similar situations that illustrate the same principle): I am occasionally invited to speak at conferences. The conference organizers don't have to invite me, and when they are considering whom to invite, doubtlessly they have various other ideas about possible speakers. Now, imagine that they consider either inviting me or another researcher who does work which is about as good as mine, but does not maintain a web page with easily accessible information about their research, or a CV. It is easy to imagine that all other things being equal, I will appear as a more attractive potential speaker and end up being invited, and the other researcher will not be. Then, when I eventually travel to the conference, all sorts of additional good things can happen - I may impress people by giving a good talk, and make it more likely that I can get more speaking invitations in the future; I may form new collaborations, or see an interesting talk that gives me a good research idea, etc. -- all of which are things that are likely to breed even more successes for me in the future. The virtuous cycle is reinforced, and all (hypothetically speaking) thanks to a humble PDF document of several pages that I posted online, that I can easily maintain with a minimal investment of a few minutes per quarter. Of course, we shouldn't forget that the work one does the rest of the time -- all the stuff that ends up being *mentioned* in one's CV -- is a lot more important and essential, but in a simple cost-benefit analysis, it's easy to see that maintaining a CV is a no-brainer.
Finally, let me also mention an unrelated psychological observation, which also answers your question but in a kind of indirect way: because the competition to get tenured professorships at good universities is so tough, this causes a selective pressure that ensures that many tenured professors are highly ambitious, competitive people. That means that they are not the sort of people to think "I've made it, now I can relax and play golf for the rest of my career"; instead, after getting tenure, many of them look ahead to see what more they can accomplish. I can assure you there is *a lot more* one can achieve in life than being a tenured professor. So, as others have pointed out, your basic premise that a tenured professor represents someone who has "made it" simply does not fit the psychological profile and mindset of a lot of tenured professors.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: This question reminds me of the parolee who resumes his life of crime as soon as he steps out the prison door. Tenure should be seen not as the end of something but the beginning of something. Everything before tenure was an effort to demonstrate how one would be once tenure is achieved, and to quit just because one has finally been admitted irreversibly to the team, betrays the team: your colleagues, the school that hired you in good faith, and more vaguely but more importantly, the field that you've committed yourself to studying. OK, I realize you're tired, you've made a superhuman effort, but that's why you've been granted such an extraordinary position. Take a sabbatical, get over it, and get to work.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: There are two wildly unrelated questions here: why keep an updated CV, and why put it on one's webpage (if one has such a thing). As in other answers, there are many reasons to have an updated CV, if only the immediate one that most (e.g., math) depts require an annual report, which is a sort of edited-down version of one's CV to include only recent things.
The question of why put it on-line is very different. Much of the information in the type of CV demanded by department heads or deans is surely of little interest to people interested in the subject, as opposed to the sociology of the milieu, or gossip. One can imagine that people are proud of prizes or invitations and such, and, indeed, this does impart a certain sort of information about the esteem in which their work is held.
But, equally surely, the essential information on a web page is the papers themselves, not the life story or prizes of the person. That assumes that the goal is making information available, as opposed to self-promotion.
So, for example, of course I have an updated CV that I prune to make my annual report, but I don't put this on-line.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/01
| 1,790
| 7,342
|
<issue_start>username_0: This semester I participated in an independent study with a professor and one of his/her PhD students. In this independent study, I spent a very substantial amount of time building (coding) things to facilitate the research being performed by the professor and his/her PhD student. However, I did *not* perform any actual research (though without my work, their research likely would not have been possible).
A few weeks ago, I asked this question: [If I work on a project but don't do research, should I be included as an author on a paper?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/67006/if-i-work-on-a-project-but-dont-do-research-should-i-be-included-as-an-author)
It seems that the general consensus was, "it depends, but probably yes". Unfortunately, though the professor has told me that I did excellent work and that s/he is very pleased, s/he did not offer to include me as a co-author on the paper (the topic never came up).
My question now is, is it within the bounds of etiquette to *ask* this professor if I can be included on the paper? If so, what is a respectful and reasonable way to frame the question? I don't want to be imposing or assuming (especially because I did not actually conduct any research myself), but realistically I put in a very significant amount of work this semester (far more than the professor was expecting) and I think it's reasonable to at least be considered for co-authorship given that my work greatly aided in their research process.
For what it's worth, the professor is a reasonable person, i.e. this is not a case of "I'm being excluded unfairly!". Rather, the possibility of my being included as an author on the paper has not been brought up by the professor, so I'm wondering whether is it acceptable for a *student* to ask a professor to be included on his/her research paper?<issue_comment>username_1: It's fine to just ask.
But if *you* feel uncomfortable asking straight out "Can I be considered for authorship on this paper?" an alternative approach is to have a conversation about authorship that (1) makes it clear to the professor that you're interested in authoring a research paper, and (2) helps you understand the shades of "it depends" for your specific kind of research.
For example, you might bring up in conversation:
>
> In our field, what kind of contribution are students expected to make in order to merit authorship on the paper that comes out of their work?
>
>
>
Then you can ask,
>
> On this project, what additional work could I have done in order to have sufficient contribution to be considered an author?
>
>
>
and then, if you want very much to co-author a research paper and plan to continue working with this professor,
>
> I'm interesting in being a co-author on a research paper. On the next project we work on, can I have a role that (if I do it well) merits co-authorship?
>
>
>
Ideally, if you had just asked straight out "Can I be considered for authorship on this paper?", the ensuing discussion would also cover the points above.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you don't ask you don't get. I think you could ask for co-authorship but it seems to me that your work on the project, albeit necessary, is not authorship. Rather I would expect, in this instance, to be specifically thanked for my contribution. Something in the foreword perhaps.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **Is it acceptable for a student to ask a professor to be included as a co-author on the professor's paper?**
The literal answer to this is *sure*, it's acceptable. Though I think that typically if you have to ask, you probably shouldn't... This isn't a universal rule; just a generalization. In my experience, professors really do want the best for their students and so if a student genuinely assisted with the research, professors will rightfully include them as a coauthor. In other words, the likelihood of a professor just "forgetting" to recognize you as a coauthor or being ignorant to your research on the project is slim to none.
>
> However, I did not perform any actual research
>
>
>
If this is the case, I find it quite difficult to justify why your name should be on the *research* paper. **But**, if the following is true
>
> though without my work, their research likely would not have been possible
>
>
>
then I don't see it as unreasonable to be asked to be mentioned in the paper itself when they described the unique software that they used to get the research done. I highly doubt that they wouldn't mention you in the body of the document if your software is as pivotal to their research as you say- but to credit you on their research as a coauthor is a bit too generous (as well as nonacademic) if you genuinely didn't assist with the research process.
Did you push the boundaries of modern computer science in the pursuit of writing the program that they used? Did you yourself perform ground breaking research to make the program function? If so, then you deserve to take the time to draft *your own* research paper. (I'm being serious. Contact a CS adviser immediately.)
If not, then the idea of crediting you on their research is analogous to the programmers of LaTeX requiring *their authorship* by anyone who uses their software to draft research papers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Your question is a fantastic example of why the best time to have these discussions is BEFORE you start to work on a project with a professor or a grad student (I'm assuming you are an undergrad). Now, you are in an awkward situation where you did a ton of work and you feel as though you should be rewarded for it, but you don't want to jeopardize the relationship with the professor. Chances are, if you ask for authorship, the professor will say no, and you may feel slighted, and they may feel put upon by the question (although probably not). The point is, it's just discomfort all around on what should be a high note for what sounds like a successful project.
I am not saying this to scold you in any way. You really could not have been expected to think of this beforehand. But in the future, you'll know to have the talk before doing any work, so that expectations are clear. I think that people who mentor undergraduates that participate in research should do better in preparing them for these situations so that they are neither exploited nor put in a position of feeling exploited when they were not.
As to your particular situation, I don't know what the authorship norms are in your field, but in my field (natural/behavioral sciences), your work does not constitute authorship. You did not design the project, get funding for it, conduct analysis, etc. You were a tech. That doesn't mean what you did wasn't important or valuable. Techs are often indispensable, but they don't get authorship for that. I know that may seem unfair when sometimes people are given authorship simply for allowing the use of their lab without being involved, but...them's the perks of being the PI, kid.
Now, you should absolutely be included in the acknowledgements section of the paper. If you're not, that's really an oversight. If you want to give your professor a nudge to make sure you're included there, that would be perfectly fine.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/01
| 919
| 4,220
|
<issue_start>username_0: Writing letters of recommendation must be a fine art. Culture across fields and countries vary wildly in almost any respect, and this is likely to the case for LoR.
How/when do professors learn how to appropriately convey the value of the person they recommend?
* As they write them, by trial and error seeing which students land the position. But this would require a large number of trials, given so many factors come into play (including circumstances that have nothing to do with letter writing)
* As they read them, while sitting on admission committee. I am then almost completely oblivious to the procedures, but as above, many observation might be required before one can be confident on its ability to write a proper letter.<issue_comment>username_1: I've seen a few good ones that were written about me. I use similar thoughts and structures without copying and by supplying my own knowledge about the subject of the letter. In time as a professor, you will see letters written about others during your service on hiring, student selection, and tenure committees. You can borrow (without plagiarising) ideas and structures from the ones that make strong impressions on you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As with most professorial duties, it's a sink-or-swim process. There is no formal or official training they receive for this task. They're just thrown into the situation with no experience and are expected to perform well at it immediately. If they've seen other recommendations during their other duties (that they likely also weren't trained for) they can use that, otherwise they can try asking colleagues or do google searches. So for the most part it's a bunch of untrained people relying on other untrained people and crossing their fingers that the other guys were able to figure out a good approach.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Ideally, you'll discuss the first few letters you write with a mentor, who can offer feedback and keep you from writing an ineffective letter (getting advice certainly helped me tremendously). The same situation can come up again later in your career, for example the first time you write a letter for a liberal arts college if you are used to recommending people for jobs at research universities. If you aren't confident that you can write an effective letter in certain circumstances, then you should seek advice from someone with more experience, even if you are used to writing other sorts of letters.
Serving on hiring and admissions committees is extremely valuable, both in figuring out what people reading letters want to know, and in calibrating how strong the competition is and how much enthusiasm one should express in any given case.
Trial and error does not seem useful, at least in my experience. There's just too much randomness in the decision-making progress and too many unknown factors that differ between students.
Writing good letters also gets easier with age, as you develop more experience and have a broader basis for comparison. As an incoming faculty member, you haven't seen how careers progress over time, and you've never had the experience of finding out which of the smart young people you know will live up to or exceed their early promise and which will not. Of course you'll never be able to predict this with certainty, but over time you'll start to see patterns, and you'll be able to make more nuanced and illuminating comparisons in letters.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Before I entered academia, I had the benefit of having served on the review board for a major graduate fellowship program. The result of this was that I had the ability to review a number of applications, and the attached letters of recommendation. Mostly they were reasonably strong, but some were definitely better than others. Reviewing what these reference letters (some 250 over 3 years) gave me a lot of insight into how to write good letters of recommendation, and I've been putting that into practice ever since.
(It has also taught me that good letter of recommendation writing is not a skill commonly encountered in most countries other than the US and Canada.)
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/02
| 499
| 2,218
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a longer paper for a course as part of a final project. The paper is on a topic we didn't cover in class and is obviously intended as a way to let me teach myself something we didn't have time for. As such, I'm using other people's ideas for my paper nearly every single sentence. I'm unsure of the convention for determining exactly what bits I need to cite and how often I should cite it, but I'm pretty sure it's not that I need to cite something every sentence. Is there some sort of convention for this sort of thing?<issue_comment>username_1: Generally, you cite a paper in the first occurrence of its matter and in occurrences where the matter is significant.
For instance, suppose you are explaining about a method that is proposed in a paper. You cite it when you first state the method. After which it is understood that whenever you use the term, it refers to the one cited initially. If you are discussing two are more methods, explain each one separately by citing them and you also ought to cite at a tabulation during result comparison. Same goes for citing concepts; cite only when the concept is first introduced.
Other than that, citing for every sentence would be only be redundant and doesn't make the manuscript look neat either. If you *do* feel that you are in a position to have to cite nearly every sentence, then your content is probably largely of matter covered in your reference and not of your own. You ought to make appropriate edits in that case.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In every sentence where you present other people's ideas, you must cite those people. If several sentences stem from the same source, then begin with 'According to Jones(1992)..' or similar.
In an Introduction you cite a lot. Use your own words to structure the Introduction, e.g. to motivate and frame the topic. In a Discussion, citations will also be prevalent where you reflect upon existing ideas.
How you stand out as a person in the text, is in your disposition of the topic. You must learn how to use references dynamically. You must convey ideas of the past as an interesting story while adding your own little share of original thoughts.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/02
| 621
| 2,734
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have the privilege of teaching composition. This requires me to read several dozen papers in a given class. I have rubrics but no matter what I have to sit down and read the papers word for word in order to assess them. They're not long papers (about 10 pages), but I still have to read them.
Naturally, this takes a great deal of time in comparison to grading other forms of assignments. Checking main ideas, grammar, cohesiveness, APA formatting, etc.is slowly becoming a nightmare.
**I want to know ways that others use to decrease the amount of time it takes to mark term papers.**<issue_comment>username_1: Sadly, you would have to read every single paper. In your particular case (language composition), you ought not to take shortcuts. Sparse reading of the composition would not provide proper evaluation. Hence you may not be able to decrease the time you spend for correction.
But, there are ways you can reduce the *stress* you get during correction. Segregate your task and process them at regular work-rest intervals instead of taking them all on at once. Also as you progress, your speed at evaluation will increase, but it will require experience.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I find it efficient to make several passes through the all papers. Although it would involve reading each paper more than once, I find I am able to give them better focus and achieve better results, which I will explain.
In the first pass I check for very basic things, such a rubric, have they been labelled correctly in the correct basic format; I check for typos, spelling, citations, bibliography and note anything messy and distracting. Having got those out of the way I find I can now focus on content without being constantly distracted by flagging the visual aspects. I read (scan) through all the papers only handling the trivial aspects. Once done I start again on the next pass.
In the next pass I focus on the reading and ensure the sentences and paragraphs make sense. I can pick up missed words, malapropisms, homophones, punctuation and such like this way. Once I am happy that the words make sense on a micro scale (in all the papers), I can start to look at the bigger picture.
On the third pass I can look at overall structure; is the material introduced in a sensible order, is the focus on the right area and finally did I enjoy reading it and did overall make sense.
It might seem long winded, but I find that my performance (scripts per hour) can be faster and more detailed than myself or compared to colleagues that note everything in one script before moving to another.
This may not work for others, but I offer it as an example methodology.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/05/02
| 2,231
| 8,594
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm working on a formal paper about programming languages. I am going to talk about two intentionally difficult languages, brainfuck and JSFuck. Should I leave the names as they are, or censor the names? (e.g. brainf\*\*k, JSF\*\*k)<issue_comment>username_1: Depends on your audience. If you're publishing at U. C. Berkeley they may hang you out for giving in to censorship. If you're at BYU they might expel you for an [honor code violation](https://policy.byu.edu/view/index.php?p=26) if you don't censor. On the other hand someone at Berkeley may decide that sexualizing a programming language is [offensive](http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/22/the-university-of-california-s-insane-speech-police.html) and demeaning to women.
The very nature of a controversy is that there is no clear answer that is guaranteed to make everyone happy. However, discretion can diffuse a lot of tension. If you want to avoid f\*\*k censorship you could simply leave the names of the languages out of the papers title so they don't appear in large print.
That said, I'm proud that even growing up in a small conservative town I could still find these words defined in the school library's dictionary.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: These are the Registered names of sanctioned programs in your industry. Their developers chose those names not for their prurient value but for their impact value. "Brainfuck" sends an INSTANT message that something like "Cerebral Challenge" could never pull off. You show your professionalism when you structure the "Brainfuck" section of your paper with the same care you show in other sections, mentioning the singularity of its name only if it's relevant to the paper. Let 'them' come to you, if they feel they must (and I doubt it). Your responsibility is to the quality--which includes the Integrity-- of your paper.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: A (sic) after the names on first mention might suffice.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I would suggest leaving the names as they are and letting the editor(s) deal with it. If the editor (or journal policy) has an issue, they will tell you what to do. If you have a personal issue with the names, then you probably would have been better served by not using the languages.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_5: Name the programming languages in the abstract, and use initialisms† like BF and JSF thereafter:
>
> **Abstract**: The two languages under consideration are Brainfuck (BF) and JSFuck (JSF), both of which are yadda yadda yadda... The results show that some tasks are performed faster using BF than JSF, while other tasks are handled equally well.
>
>
> ...
>
>
> **Introduction**: We set up two computer clusters, executing the latest version of BF on one and JSF on the other. We compiled JSF from source code hosted on the developer's website using an Intel 4004...
>
>
>
In this way, you are referring to the language names professionally and consistently, but have no need to plaster your paper with instances of *\*fuck* or *BrainF#@%*.
† You have precedence since other terms in programming are commonly referred to by initialisms in this way, e.g., RoR and JS, for readability.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: Swearing in the paper is improper, citing swearwords is not. How would ethymologists write their papers if they weren't allowed to use all the words they talk about?
[Here](https://is.muni.cz/th/54012/pedf_m/DiplomaThesis.pdf) is a thesis with *fuck* in it, and its use is totally legitimate.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: As a linguist, I'd like to point out that using the word *fuck* is very different from using the name *Brainfuck*.
The name *Brainfuck* has a unique referent: it refers only to the programming language of that name. The word *fuck* does not have such a unique reference – it can be used to refer to all sorts of things, and while the associated concept may be considered to be a rather integral part of human existence, the connotations of that word make it inappropriate for formal discourse for many, if not most speakers.
The crucial point is, however, that there is no conceptual overlap between the two. *Brainfuck*, when used as the name of a programming language, means something totally different from *fuck*, and there is no overlap whatsoever in the potential sets of referents of the two words. At the same time, it is of course possible to use the word *brainfuck* with a meaning that is related more to *fuck* than to *Brainfuck*, as in *Stop trying to brainfuck me*. Here, the speaker is clearly evoking the meaning of *fucking*, and not
the meaning of "a programming language that is intentionally so strange that it brainfucks its users".
So, as an answer to your question: use by all means exactly those linguistic expressions that their inventors chose as names for their programming languages. The *-fuck* in *Brainfuck* does not mean *fuck*. Therefore, there is no need to censor it.
This is, unless the editor of the journal you're submitting your paper to explicitly refuses to publish it while the letter sequences *fuck* occur in the names.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: Consider avoiding the problem entirely, by not providing these languages with the honor of being on your paper. The namers of these languages chose something that they realized would cause problems. Don't glorify such a mis-decision by unnecessarily polluting your good research work.
You will likely elicit scorn, and compulsions to roll eyes, even if many people have sufficient restraint to communicate their disapproval. Some people are likely to see this as a clear mark of unprofessionalism. Even if you don't get formal feedback, this may impact people's appreciation, and may affect subjective scoring. All in alll, why unnecessary embrace such negativity that will provide you with no benefit?
Seek out alternative solutions, and use them. Those who are aware of the entire scenario may have a high appreciation of your successful endeavor.
The most common abbreviation I have found for the first language is "bf". e.g., searching for "bf language" on Google will show foul language in the results. [Esolangs.org page on this language](https://esolangs.org/wiki/Brainfuck) provides some other abbreviations, noting, "This can make it a bit difficult to search for information regarding brainfuck on the web, as the proper name might not be used at all in some articles." That's a downside of this language's name.
Or, instead, consider avoiding the problem entirely by using an alternative. I propose that you consider using [Ook! Ook!](http://esolangs.org/wiki/ook!), which is directly convertible to the bf language that you mention. If you're interested in language features, this ought to be a direct substitute that will serve you well. (The only really significant downside I am aware of is just that it is less well-known, so if you're wishing to discuss a community, then it may not have the same effect. Oh, and I do know of one other technical disadvantage: the source code may be a bit larger, even though the interpreted meaning ends up being the exact same.)
Regarding the other language you mention, I notice that for the JS one, many of the top sites use its full (spelled-out) name and also use the term `JSF*ck`. Searching for `JSF*ck` on Google does manage to pull up the sites. So, that does appear to be a name that is heavily accepted by the community surrounding that language.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: [Lawrence put it best in their comment:](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/68059/in-a-formal-paper-should-i-censor-brainfk-the-name-of-a-programming-langua#comment165316_68059)
>
> Unless this is the first paper on that programming language in that publication, you should have precedence to draw on. Failing that, ask the editor.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: There are numerous acceptable ways to refer to the language. [The page about it at esolangs.org](http://esolangs.org/wiki/Brainfuck) says this:
>
> Due to the fact that the last half of its name is often considered one
> of the most offensive words in the English language, it is sometimes
> referred to as brainf\*\*\*, brainf\*ck, brainfsck, b\*\*\*\*fuck, brainf\*\*k
> or BF. This can make it a bit difficult to search for information
> regarding brainfuck on the web, as the proper name might not be used
> at all in some articles.
>
>
>
It seems that would be an important consideration when you decide.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/02
| 315
| 1,368
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper where I am talking about the [SSE](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_SIMD_Extensions) and [AVX](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Vector_Extensions) instruction sets. For a hardware feature like an instruction set, I am wondering how to figure out what is an appropriate citation to use, or if it should be cited at all?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Cite their manual
>
>
>
The links to the manuals seem to appear at the reference sections of the respective Wikipedia pages.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It depends what you have to say about them.
If you are going to discuss what individual commands do, presumably you can find a specification or standard describing such from one of the companies or standards bodies involved. You should cite that.
If you want to speak more broadly, such as their performance implications, then you should cite the sources for those statements.
Merely mentioning them, giving a brief overview of what they are (assuming it is original), or providing assembly using them likely does not necessitate citations, as it would be common knowledge given those individual contexts.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The appropriate reference is the Intel Processor Manual for the first processor that introduced the instruction set.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/02
| 479
| 2,024
|
<issue_start>username_0: There is a well known result from 60 years ago that only ever has its result quoted these days. I found a 20+ year old MS thesis that had a very clear mathematical derivation of the result from first principles, although it doesn't have any (meaningful) citations.
The derivation is so clear I would like to include a detailed outline of it in my dissertation because I think it really illuminates why we do what we do in our lab, which is what the dissertation is centered around.
It it ok to put something like "Following the derivation of [MS source], first performed by [original source], we start with..." and walking through the 4-5 page derivation to get to the result? It's obviously not plagiarism, since it's well known and I am citing the source, but it isn't original work. On the other hand, something that was done decades ago would never be mistaken for original work in 2016, and I think it would really add to my motivation/background chapter.<issue_comment>username_1: The short answer is that you can indeed put properly cited, sourced, attributed background material in a background section. Because what is the background section for other than for you to present what people have done before you?
You obviously need to include enough of your own work in this document. However if a relevant derivation has been done before you cite it, possibly review it for the ease of the reader or completeness of your own expository structure and get on to the stuff you have done.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The appropriate wording for something like what you envision -- making clear that you are closely paraphrasing another publication -- would look like this:
>
> Since the derivation of the result by [ABC, 1956] is not widely available in common textbooks, the remainder of this section closely follows the excellent outline provided previously in the MSc thesis by DEF, see [DEF, 1987]. In this thesis, the author shows that ...
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/05/02
| 324
| 1,400
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was guided by a Post-Doc for my undergraduate thesis, but the one responsible for all and offering the thesis was a Professor, who I only talked to when discussing the thesis, agreeing to it, and the explanation of the grade in the end. Who of both would be the one to ask for a letter of recommendation?
More general, should you always ask the person with who one was mostly in contact during work, or the person responsible for it all, if they are not the same person?<issue_comment>username_1: You should ask the professor for the letter. It is likely the professor will get help from the postdoc in writing the letter. There is a traditional belief that the professor's opinion is worth more, so whoever is reading the letter will expect to get a letter signed by the professor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It might be worthwhile to remember what a letter of recommendation is for. If you have to choose between the two, I would recommend asking the postdoc, as I presume from your description that he knows you better.
The professor might be well-known, but if he doesn't know you enough, he may not be able to write a strong letter and he might end up asking you to draft the letter. This is quite a common practice, but I believe should be avoided if there is already someone who can write you a recommendation without asking you to draft it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/02
| 448
| 2,004
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm not sure if there's a word or phrase for a "reverse bibliography", but that's what I'm looking to put on my website - a list of other papers that have cited my own work. The goal is to show that my work has had influence and has spread beyond just the paper itself. Is this common in academia, or is it only common to list one's own papers?<issue_comment>username_1: For any well established research, they will usually have quite a large number of citations, which would make a "cited by" section would be exhausting to maintain and large beyond meaningful readability. A better route is to link to an database that actually engages in curating ones citations, such as Google Scholar.
I do, however, sometimes see people maintaining a collection of notable articles in non-scientific media. These are not normally picked up by citation databases and are valuable for showing that work is having impact *outside of* the scientific community, as well as (sometimes) providing a nice introduction to the work.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To expand on @username_1's answer: If you can still list all citations you have ever received, then the number of citations you have received is so small that the attempt reflects negatively. Most reasonably well established scientists have thousands of citations to their credit. It becomes impossible to list them all. The list also often grows by a dozen a week, more than you probably want to keep up.
As already noted, the solution lies in linking to a referencing service such as google scholar or MathSciNet.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: *Let turn this round....*
People reading your website may be doing so because they are interested in your research topics. Therefore assuming you list your papers by topic, it could be very helpful for you to also list papers that expand on your papers in interesting ways, including explaining how they expand on your work in a few sentences.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/02
| 575
| 2,322
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose that I am reading a marketing book and, while reading a specific chapter, I find like there are 10 footnotes with most of them related to specific examples or specific numbers; in other words, most of the information presented in the chapter are not cited and, judging by the context and contents, such information do not appear to be 'invented' by the author(s) of the book (not primary data). In that case, they could just be common knowledge information related to the field of marketing and business (example: purpose of marketing, strategic analysis, financial measures, etc...)
Since 'when in doubt, always cite', if I want to write about information taken from such book, is it bad if I just cite the author(s) of the book since I am taken the information from their book? To clarify, **I am worried that I could be 'giving credit' to people who did NOT come up with such information** presented in their book and therefore, I should not cite since it's common knowledge or whatever.<issue_comment>username_1: The proper way is to give an indirect or secondary citation: "Smith (as cited by Jones, 2010) is said to have found the meaning of life (2002)." See one of the APA reference pages <http://alliant.libguides.com/content.php?pid=268617&sid=2956256>. APA suggests using these sparingly. I concur.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: First, the definition of "common knowledge" and I think this answer by <NAME> from the post that <NAME> posted elucidated that pretty well (<https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/2196>):
>
> If the statement/concept/idea that you think you want to cite is covered (without citation) in the introductory undergraduate textbook(s) on the subject, then it is likely common knowledge in the field.
>
>
>
So next step is to search more than one sources about that specific examples or specific numbers. If that book is the only source that came up with that example/number then you can cite from that author(s). You give credit from where you found the information. It is better to cite than not and might trouble you later on since it will give an impression that those numbers/examples are from your own findings (and which someone might cite that example from you). Because again, 'when in doubt, always cite'.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/03
| 474
| 1,883
|
<issue_start>username_0: Tomorrow I have my master's project defense. So, I will be presenting and defending on my project "Course Advising System".
I just noticed that tomorrow is a National Teacher Appreciation Day. Is it a good idea to put one slide after "Questions and Comments" section in the presentation?
I want to put this slide but I don't want to ruin anything either.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uCBJZ.png)<issue_comment>username_1: Depending on your locale
>
> It is fine
>
>
>
Although I doubt it will make any impact on your defence *per se*, it might give a positive outlook. There doesn't seem to be anything negative about it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I doubt that you showing or not showing the slide will make much of a difference one way or the other, but as a general rule, if I were one of the professors at your defense, I would not expect or want you to say or display anything that makes it seem like you are trying to ingratiate yourself with me in any way other than by performing well and conducting yourself professionally. I don't need to be thanked profusely, and don't need to be "appreciated" in any special way for doing my job.
Moreover, if you think about it, the reason something like National Teacher Appreciation Day was conceived is probably because in many countries being a schoolteacher is a very ungrateful, poorly appreciated job. For example in the U.S., teachers get paid very little, are commensurately not respected by much of society, and sometimes are outright hated by certain people for purely political reasons. All of this does not apply to university professors, who are generally treated quite well and held in pretty high regard by most people, and consequently aren't in great need for a "professor appreciation day".
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/03
| 1,182
| 5,233
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate about to finish my first year of undergraduate research in CS. This past year has been mostly engineering-based as I learned how things worked in terms of implementation.
I expressed a desire to my advisor about (for next year) moving from engineering / implementation of others' ideas into creating my own novel ideas and research, and how to appropriately bridge this gap. He suggested that I attend a conference in my field to learn more and get a better idea of the sort of problems out there.
My question is -- how should I go about preparing for attending a conference? Should I read all the accepted papers, and read the papers that have background information that they use that I'm not familiar with? Or is there some other better method?
I know that [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16689/attending-conferences-as-a-first-year-undergrad) is similar, but I'm more interested in finding out how can I learn the most from this experience as an attendee vs a presenter.<issue_comment>username_1: Start by checking the program. Conferences in computer science are often organized into sessions, with all papers presented in a session having a common theme. Find the sessions that cover topics of interest to you. If the conference has multiple parallel sessions (tracks), make a plan of which sessions you'll attend.
For sessions you plan to attend,
* Read up on the general topic of the session, to get a sense of what the important problems are in that area.
* Skim the papers that will be presented in the session, with the goal of understanding what kind of work is being presented in the session. Try to extract the main idea from each paper, and understand why it is an interesting and worthwhile contribution to the literature. (Don't worry about not understanding a lot of it.)
Does the conference have any panels scheduled? These are a good way to find out about interesting topics in a more informal and interactive way.
Plan to be an active participant, not just a passive listener. Is there a poster session? Poster sessions are great because they're designed for attendees to talk to participants about their research. Go to coffee breaks and lunches, and find some nice grad students (or other researchers) to chat with about their work. If you are having an interesting conversation and the coffee break ends, don't worry about missing a talk you were planning on attending - the ideas shared in hallway conversations are much more useful than the actual talks at the conference.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I wish I had the benefit of this hindsight when I was an undergrad or even a master's student. It took a while for me to understand how conferences (at least in theoretical computer science) work. I speak from my experiences in attending top-tier theoretical conferences. It may vary in your case. But in short: most of what you'll learn will be outside of the talks.
To set your expectations right:
1. Don't expect to understand a lot from the talks. Reading those papers in advance might be even more boring unless you are already familiar with the background, or at least the starting assumptions, of the presented works. Seasoned researchers have a good idea of results being presented, i.e. the exact formal claim, and they attend the talks just to get a rough picture of the proof and techniques involved. It's like intellectual networking. Get an idea of who has done what and how. Maybe it's useful later.
2. Asking questions during the talks will be intimidating. As a rule, I always hold my questions for until a couple of slides later. It is always good keep abstracting the ideas presented, and not worry about the details. Details often don't get in the way of getting a rough picture, which is essentially what the talks are for.
Now, ideas for making the most from your attendance. In short: you are charting the territory of your future research, and getting to know the leaders and active researchers in that field.
1. There are always researchers who have a reputation for nice talks. Make sure you attend their talks. Sometimes, all you learn is *how* to give a good talk. Which is not to be underestimated.
2. Go with at least some interest area in mind. Make a rough plan of talks you'll go to. Reach out to presenters during coffee and lunch breaks. Just chat them up. Really. Everyone is waiting to distribute pearls of their wisdom and are happy for dedicated audience. Even better if your professor can help you identify his peers or their students in advance. Go up to them and convey your prof's greetings. Ask how they got to doing what they're doing.
3. Make friends among other research groups. Hang out with other (also senior) students. Learn about their work. Grab a few drinks together. It's quite likely you'll see them again and even collaborate.
I don't think you first conference would be about gaining deep technical understanding about anything. You would have succeeded if you could remember at least as much as you do after a visit to a museum. This visit will be about learning how the community works, who's who, and what beer tastes like in that city.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/03
| 2,857
| 12,080
|
<issue_start>username_0: There is a student at a university of a friend of mine who has Asperger's Syndrome, which is a milder form of Autism. My friend, who is a teacher there, has told me that the student mostly does OK work but he is not always aware of socially acceptable behavior.
The major problem, and I mean major, is that he has literally shouted racial slurs at the teacher in the middle of class (over 5 times) as a way of expressing "friendship" with the teacher (not out of malice). Normally, this is grounds for having to be dropped from the course and even be removed from the campus even if the purpose is to try and be "friends". However, because the student is a special needs student with distinct problems and does not truly understand the impact of such behavior, my friend wants to seek alternatives. This is a challenging situation as it is still mostly uncommon for students of this nature to enrolled at university.
What disciplinary/counselling measures are appropriate for a teacher to take, in the case of a special-needs student whose actions are detrimental to the learning environment?<issue_comment>username_1: A professor in this situation should consult with the university office that is responsible for students with disabilities, let them handle the situation, and follow their recommendations regarding what to do if it happens again. Anything else is beyond the scope of the professor's role.
Professors are not qualified to "counsel" students with disabilities, and shouldn't try to (amateur psychology can be very harmful to the "patient.")
In some parts of the world, there are legal issues related to disciplining students with disabilities.1 Again, the office that deals with students with disabilities should be aware of these legal issues and are best placed to advise the professor.
---
1 For example, in the US:
>
> IDEA requires that a student’s disability be taken into account when considering disciplinary action resulting from a violation of the school code of conduct [in high school]. This is not the case in higher education
>
>
>
([Source](http://www.rit.edu/~w-ssp/documents/ASDinHigherEdGuide.pdf)). Other jurisdictions will have varying legal protections for students with disabilities.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: The short version
-----------------
1. **Talk to the kid** - help him understand that what he is doing is not only inappropriate, but also wrong. He truly may not understand that as autism makes a kid incapable of picking up the subtle clues that are intuitive to those without this disability. Sometimes things in writing help kids with autism spectrum disorders (something about seeing things in black and white and the authority of the written word helps them cement the knowledge), so having something like that might help. Be encouraging and positive; expect full understanding (Asperger kids are fully verbal) but check on it by having the kid explain it back, and listen to their replay very carefully and literally - "do not **shout** racial slurs" does not mean "never use racial slurs, at any volume." A kid with an Autism spectrum disorder is forced to be that literal by the make up of their brain, so go there with them.
2. Once the expectation is communicated clearly, expect compliance and apply the same discipline you would if the child did not have Asperger's. If there are further violations, you will need to check to make sure there was not something missed in the understanding of the expectation, but if there is not, if the kid understood fully and still chose to do wrong, as we all sometimes do, you are not doing them any favors by giving them any lesser consequences because of their disability. The allowance is made with the extra communication and teaching, not with lower expectations or discipline measures.
The background
--------------
My son has a form of Autism which is worse than Asperger's. At four years old he was diagnosed as severely impaired in speech comprehension and production. He almost did not learn to speak. I still remember the sad look on the psychologist's face when, after several sessions and an examination by a neurologist, she had to inform us of the diagnosis.
Over the following years, we took it upon ourselves to help our son. The books said to let psychologists do the therapy so we could concentrate on being mom and dad. We said NO, no doctor is going to put the love, effort, tears and sweat into helping him that we could put into it. My wife and I did extensive research. She put together a regimen of speech therapy, six sessions a day, half hour each session, every weekday. It took us three weeks to teach him the meaning of "yesterday", "today", and "tomorrow". My wife taught him to read (phonics) before he could even understand what he was reading.
One of the things about Autism spectrum disorders is that the person sees other individuals as things. Because you are out there, you are more like the other things in the room (chair, table, person), than like themselves. You are a thing that produces sound and moves around, so they look at your mouth, not your eyes. In this, Autism resembles (but IS NOT) psychopathic disorders. So we took it as our duty to teach our son to "love others as you love yourself".
As we have worked with him, the doctors and his teachers and others around him have been amazed at the transformation. Today, he is a junior in high-school, being recruited by top universities like MIT, Caltech, Harvard, West-Point. He placed in the top 1% in his PSAT test not only in math, but also in the language parts (reading and writing) and is a straight A student, taking regular classes - well, actually honors and AP classes. He is awkward socially, and gets along better with much older adults or much younger kids. He is respected by his teachers, and he volunteers, tutoring and overseeing activities at a center for disadvantaged youth. The adults who have known him since childhood can hardly believe the progress he has made.
But here is the thing that answers your question. There is behavior that can be labeled a mistake - spilling milk, inadvertently slamming a door on someone's hand. Then there is behavior which is sin like hitting someone on purpose or, most definitely, calling someone a racial slur. A kid like this may need to be taught that this is not funny or friendly and needs to stop. But after being told this ONCE, they totally have the capacity to remember it. And we have the obligation not to tolerate it. For their own good, so they may develop into the men and women that they CAN develop into, into the persons that God means for them to develop into, we must not tolerate such behavior.
I assume your friend has told this young man that this is not acceptable behavior. I would say that is step one. (if the young man was not disabled, I would skip this step and go straight to reporting him to the authorities in the University). I can totally see a kid like this doing something like this as a way to relate, not realizing what they are doing is totally wrong, so do take the trouble to teach them, but once they have been told, expect 100% compliance to what is right. Step two, if the behavior continues, even once more, is to go to the authorities in the University and report it. At the very least, an authority figure (advisor? dean?) besides your friend needs to sit with your friend and the student and make clear that if this happens even one more time, the student will be removed from the class with a failing grade, and that if this happens in any other class, ever again, the student could be suspended for the rest of the semester or even expelled from the university.
As a person like this is confronted hard with negative consequences to their wrong behavior, they learn to treat others as they would want to be treated. You actually are able to rewire their brain to see other people as they see themselves. This will lead to a happier, fuller life for them. Do not fall into the trap of thinking that you are doing them a favor by tolerating their behavior - that is the worst thing you could do for them, leaving them locked in their disconnected world. When we learn to love others as we love ourselves, it is actually we who benefit the most, and kids like this need that lesson as much as any of us.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> What disciplinary/counseling measures are appropriate in the case of a special needs student who actions are detrimental to the learning environment
>
>
>
1) Follow @username_1 advice
2) What your friend can directly do?
First, have a private talk with the student. Calmly tell to student **which behavior** is inappropriate and **why** his behavior isn't appropriate, e.g "*I know you have a good intentions (or something similar) but you shouldn't do xy because it is ... and people perceive it as...*".
With people with Autism Spectrum Disorders you should be direct and specific otherwise they probably won't know what is the issue. Of course, you should tell them in an assertive way. You may feel strange because you need to tell someone obvious thing but that is okay because they have challenges with [Theory of Mind](http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v69/n5-2/full/pr92011100a.html) and this is kind of the only way. If you don't tell them than 1) everyone around them will have a hard time; 2) they will have a hard time as well.
You will find similar advise on [this website](http://www.autism.org.uk/professionals/employers/support/managing.aspx):
>
> **Provide sensitive but direct feedback**. People with autism often find it difficult to pick up on social cues, so make sure your feedback is honest, constructive and consistent. If the person completes a task incorrectly, don't allude to, or imply, any problems – instead, explain tactfully but clearly why it is wrong, check that they have understood, and set out exactly what they should do instead. Be aware that the person may have low self-esteem or experience of being bullied, so ensure that any criticism is sensitive, and give positive feedback wherever appropriate.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't have special insight into how specifically to deal with the student (other answers already have a good discussion of this aspect of the question). However, I wanted to stress the importance of the point (mentioned briefly in some of the comments) that the other students in the class have a right to learn in a calm, safe environment.
I would therefore argue that, as much as I would want to see this special needs student successfully integrating into the school environment in order to get an education and fully realize his potential, it should be made as clear as possible to the student (by the professor directly, or through appropriately qualified intermediaries such as the disabilities office) that he is forbidden from engaging in this sort of offensive speech in class (or outside class for that matter). If he truly cannot restrain himself and repeats the behavior, then regardless of whether he is well-intentioned and whether he understands that his behavior is wrong, I would sadly conclude that he must be removed from the class to protect the rights of the other students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I think a few commenters need to read The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 with Amendments in it entirety.
There is no disciplinary action to be taken against a student Asperger's. It is the University role to provide for the disabled student as per the Law.
The professor may ask for help from the University Administration or the Department with the situation but if they "kick out" the student or even remove him from class it could be costly for the University. And No, I am not a lawyer but I was right in the middle of a similar lawsuit.
Counseling for the professor and or the other students in the class on handling/dealing with behavior that a person with Asperger's can't control, would be my first priority.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/03
| 1,637
| 7,093
|
<issue_start>username_0: A year ago a professor at my department and her grad student had plagiarized a journal paper and published it. The paper was retracted, and the journal published a clear notice that it was due to serious fraud, as several paragraphs and the results were stolen (verbatim) from a previously published paper.
However, it seems that I am still the only one at my department who knows about this misconduct, probably because people do not follow that journal.
The retracted paper is still listed in the publications of both researchers in the university database and in their CVs, and what is most appalling, the grad student looks like he will get his PhD degree in a few months, based on the work of someone else. In short, it looks like no one will have any consequences, and moreover that they ignore the retraction.
As an academic I find it as a duty to expose this case, but I don’t know how to proceed, and if it's worth pursuing this. The thing is that I am not in a developed country in which universities have a firm attitude about plagiarism, and also people here at universities are politically connected and protect each other.
If notified, the head of the department (and anyone else high in the organization) probably wouldn’t like to mess with it in order to avoid conflicts and degrading the image of the institution, and since I am low in the hierarchy I cannot do much myself, and moreover I am risking my own career. But this is not something that can be swept under the carpet...
What should I do?
---
Update
Thank you for the response, I did not expect this question to be so popular. While I was thinking what to do, the grad student suddenly quit. The professor did not know about the plagiarism and did not try to cover up the retraction. I don't know the details because there are only rumors, but I suspect the student was forced to quit after the professor (and co-author) became aware of this.
I am surprised with the positive outcome. I would like to underline vsz's comment: "Many people in the West underestimate how much corruption there can be at universities in less developed countries."
Such turn of events is not typical for my country, so questions like mine should not be surprising...<issue_comment>username_1: If you were in a position of more influence (e.g. a faculty member) or if you were a student at a university where you could be confident that the general attitude coincides with your own (such as most universities in the USA or Europe, at the very least), then I wouldn't hesitate a moment to notify the dean, and escalate the case further as necessary. No respectable institution would turn a blind eye to this, not least because of the eventual embarrassment when it comes out in the press that they graduated a student whose thesis was known to be plagiarized.
It's hard for me to say what you should do in your situation, because I've never been affiliated with a place that didn't "have a firm attitude about plagiarism". But given that the indictment of plagiarism is already public, you might approach this from the angle of protecting the institution. That is, you could cautiously approach the department chair and explain that you're worried about the negative publicity the department (and the university) may be subject to based on what is happening. You don't need or want to suggest that you're going to approach the press and create that publicity -- everything is already out in the open, anyway! You also shouldn't suggest what the consequences for the plagiarists should be. You're only working to protect the good name of your institution. In this way perhaps you can address the problem with someone in authority such that you are both on the same side.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is a difficult situation, because if your suspicions are correct, then there is remarkably unethical behavior going on. On the other hand, I wonder whether it's not quite as bad as it sounds. Submitting a dissertation containing a paper that has already been investigated and publicly retracted for plagiarism would require incredible chutzpah, and it would put the student in great danger of having the degree revoked after the fact if anyone noticed the retracted paper (for example, whoever originally brought it to the publisher's attention). It's possible that the student has removed this paper from the dissertation, while still listing it in his CV with no indication of the retraction. The CV would still be unethical, but not as dramatically unethical as including the paper in the dissertation. So the first issue is to try to figure out whether it's really the case that the student "will get his PhD degree in a few months, based on the work of someone else", or whether this is primarily about the CVs and university database.
Once you have pinned down exactly what you see as the problem, I'd recommend raising the issue anonymously. That might be a little less effective, but it's not worth even a modest risk to your career. I see three options:
1. The nice approach is to write first to the student and/or advisor, to give them a chance to repent and correct the situation (and to alert them that their behavior has not gone unnoticed). They could always try a face-saving excuse, for example that they simply forgot to update their CVs and the database. If they then do so, the problem may be solved. On the other hand, alerting them might give them more time to try to line up administrative support, if the situation is truly dysfunctional. I don't think you have any obligation to write to them, so it's up to you, based on what you foresee as plausible outcomes.
2. Assuming you don't write to the student and advisor directly, or if they do not fix the problem, I'd recommend writing to several key administrators to raise the issue (department chair, dean, provost, whoever is appropriate at your university). It will be most effective if you describe the situation in a way that doesn't put them on the defensive or involve systemic criticism of the institution. Instead, the purpose is just to alert them to the facts. I'd recommend writing to several administrators in the same e-mail, so they can each see who has been notified. (The point is to remove the excuse of "I never did anything about this because nobody ever told me", since the dean knows the department chair knows and vice versa.) At this stage you could also alert the authors of the plagiarized paper to the situation.
3. If you are convinced there's a major ethical problem that the administration is deliberately covering up, then you could take a more dramatic approach. There are any number of groups you could publicize this to anonymously: journalists, other faculty at your university, the ministry of education or the equivalent in your country, any relevant professional societies, etc. At this point you'll really upset people and make the university look bad, so I'd recommend holding off on this unless you reach the point where you see no better option.
Upvotes: 5
|
2016/05/03
| 1,418
| 6,470
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I have read new papers and seen new different approaches and the very interesting physical effects in alternatives to general relativity, and I think I see a bit of ideas for future papers, but I don't have any expertise in these approaches, I have published papers only in general relativity(from physics point of view). At my university, no one is interested in these topics(general relativity or alternatives, only on numerical simulations of hot plasma in accretion disks around black holes). I have proposed some ideas to some friends and peers and although at first sight they seem to be very interested, after I send them the differential equations and papers to be studied everyone lost interest. The question would be how to find a collaborator interested in such a new approach that would lead to papers in good journals where I have published before?<issue_comment>username_1: The best place to begin to look for collaborators are researchers who are currently publishing in your topic/field of interest. I would recommend contacting the authors of journal articles you read and can contribute to the topic in a significant manner (enough to be published). Contact the researcher and suggest a collaboration, with what skills and expertise you bring to the table and your intended result of collaboration.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can probably *find* colleagues easily. The challenge is interesting them in a collaboration with you.
The basic rule is that collaborations are successful when everyone benefits. In order to get collaborators, **you need to make it clear that they will benefit by working with you on your idea.** Benefit in academia usually takes the form of:
* Funding
* Publication authorship
* Advancing the collaborator's pre-existing research interest
You have already mentioned one potential benefit of your work: high-impact publications. The key is communicating (and convincing) colleagues that they will benefit.
Here are some things that might help:
* **Have a concrete proposal.** While some open-ended early discussions might be useful, once you are ready to invite people to collaborate, invite them to something specific. *Do you want to write a paper together that demonstrates XYZ?* is a clear idea that colleagues can quickly evaluate to decide whether they are interested. On the other hand, *Should we work together in area X?* is far too open-ended. It is not clear whether it will lead to anything useful, and busy academics will be reluctant to invest a lot of time in discussions that might not lead anywhere.\*
* **Demonstrate credibility.** A colleague might be interested in your idea, but still reluctant to get involved if they don't know whether you are able to accomplish what you propose. The bigger and bolder your idea, the more skepticism you are likely to face from others. Some ways to demonstrate credibility:
+ Existing track record (publications, etc.)
+ An introduction from someone known who can vouch for you.
+ Networking and conversations that give people an insight into your knowledge.
* **Offer to collaborate with others on *their* ideas.** You ought to be the kind of colleague that you hope others will be for you. This means being willing to contribute to other projects. Offering to help others, besides being nice, also gives you a network and credibility for advancing your own ideas later. And in practice, *advancing your own ideas* often means compromising with someone else on a project that does some of what you both want.
\**When I was trying to get collaborators on a grant application, I made the mistake of being too open-ended. It seemed like appropriate deference to others who were more experienced to approach them without a well-formed idea. However, these discussions didn't go anywhere. Eventually I realized that making a clear, concrete proposal was a service to everyone, as it gave them a much better idea of what I was talking about and whether it was worthwhile. "Let's apply for funding from this specific grant call, based on this short summary idea" got an immediate response from others. In the end, more experienced colleagues did shape the proposal quite a lot, but the specific proposal was a much better starting point for successful collaboration.*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: As a rule of thumb, if your approach even scared away internal ("friendly") collaborators, trying the same with external researchers that you do not have existing connections to seems like an exercise in futility.
This means that you first need to figure out what went wrong the first time you reached out to people at your university. Of course it is entirely impossible to debug your approach to find collaborators over the Internet and based on 5 lines of text, but I have a few educated guesses:
* Maybe you can work on your clarity of expression. Based on this and other questions you have put to Stack Exchange you seem to compress quite a lot of information and assumptions into a few meagre lines of very tense text. Without having actually seen a research proposal by you, I assume that it may come across rather convoluted.
* You seem inexperienced as a researcher. I say this because the only people I have ever heard talking about a string of papers in leading journals (with a specific IF, no less) even before any actual work has been conducted to be researchers with little experience in publishing at high-impact venues. While being inexperienced is no problem *per se*, people obviously tend to regard the research proposals of juniors with a little more scepticism.
* Have you considered what is "in it" for your collaborators? What qualities do you have that they don't (note that "a lot of time" can be a solid answer)? How will this project fit in with their current work and interests? How and what can they contribute? Always keep in mind that "I need skill A and you are an expert in A" is a *terrible* reasoning from the other side of the table.
* Are the roles in the collaboration clearly defined, and have you made those roles explicit? Are you looking for a mentor? People that help you with specific scientific / methodological aspects? Programmers or wet lab staff? Again, consider what is in it for them - if you are looking, for instance, for a mentor, why would this person supervise you, and not spend the same time on her or his own students?
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/03
| 401
| 1,640
|
<issue_start>username_0: First of all sorry if I commit any mistake in this question, I read all the instructions but it´s my first one on this useful site:
I am finishing some diapositives for a PhD current status conference, and I thought about these image as the last one:
---
```
**Thank you and...**
```
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wK4XB.jpg)
---
I know it is a good technique to end a conference by saying something intelligent, funny or nice in order to give the audience one last "good feeling" so a good impression is left, but I don´t want it to be seen as immature.
Thanks in advance to everyone.<issue_comment>username_1: A problem with that kind of ending is that the last slide tends to be shown the longest, because of the upcoming questions section, and it's somewhat distracting to ask with a funny picture behind. Something an instructor told me long time ago, for any slightly formal presentation, is to just show the first slide again (the title slide), so that you can answer questions with just the title of the talk behind you, avoiding distraction.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: first of: I would be very suprised if that image (maybe even phrase) hasn't got copyright/tradmark connected to it and I would think more than twice before using it.
Secondly: I second the suggestion given above to just repeat the first slide. It will also help people remember what you're actually talking about if for instance your presentation has a very long/boring/complex name.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/03
| 688
| 3,180
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate about to finish my first year of undergraduate research in CS. This past year has been mostly engineering-based as I learned how things worked in terms of implementation.
I'm looking to move from engineering / implementation of others' ideas into creating my own novel ideas and research, but I'm not sure how to best bridge this gap. I'm going to be attending a conference in my field soon, but I'm sure there are other things that I can do to help me along this transition.
I'd imagine its beneficial to read papers, but one of the issues that I am facing is that I'm not really sure what problems I want to work on, and thus don't know what area of research publications to focus on. Additionally, I'm finding it difficult to find the "core papers" of a problem, e.g. papers that present significant advances and are quite important. How would you make the transition between a more research engineer role to that of a research scientist?<issue_comment>username_1: I think the most important thing is to ask for help.
Which, I guess by asking this question, you did.
However, ask people for help that know about your field and know about YOU. They will be the the most helpful.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: You make it sound like engineering and research are two contradicting things, but I think this view is falling short. Of course there are shallow implementation and verification jobs, but there are also plenty of engineering jobs about R&D fiddling and finding clever designs and solutions, and then there are also (purely) academic jobs in engineering fields. Note that the boundaries between all of these are very much blurred and there is a variety of people in engineering ranging from hands-on tinkerers to purist mathematicians with completely different mindsets. Therefore, people in engineering hardly ever agree on whether some job or result is just derivative craft lacking conceptual contribution, useful high-level research, or disconnected theoretical work with pretentious notation but possibly useless and not much behind it. Also, implementation jobs can require a lot of clever thinking too, e.g. in analog electronics or large system integration.
Since you're at the undergraduate level still, I'd say it's totally normal to learn and follow preexisting ideas before engaging in great abstraction and developing your own branches. It's hard to make strong and novel conceptual contributions to your field if you don't know its basics. Do not underestimate the work put in by many, many very intelligent people before you (one tends to forget about this at times, e.g. when reading a bad introductory book) and rather try to gather their insights and grow from them.
About your problem at hand: I guess the best thing you could do, as far as that is possible in your environment, is trying to steer your next career choices in the direction of institutions and companies that value conceptual thinking and smart solutions and not only dull implementation workforce. Aim for courses, texts, project topics, internships, and contacts that push you more and more in this direction.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/03
| 1,394
| 5,279
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper that relies heavily upon some important work done some 10 years ago. The paper was well received gathering well over a 100 citations and is a must mention within my niche field. I would like to reference the paper as seminal as in "so and so, et. al., in a seminal paper..." but am not sure that would be appropriate. I recognize 100 citations isn't a lot in the scheme of things but at the same time this paper was *very* important within my niche field.
Under what circumstances can one decide a paper is seminal? Must the person citing it be well renowned? Must the author of the considered paper be well renowned? Is there a citation # that should be exceeded (I really don't like that one, it seems too inflexible)?
Neither I nor my professor are especially well established in the field we are publishing in (this will be my first publication and my professor mainly publishes in another field). Are we qualified to refer to a publication in this field as "seminal"?<issue_comment>username_1: I would understand "seminal" to indicate that (a) the paper was the the first in some sense, and (b) that it led to a lot of subsequent research. For example, a paper proposes and tests a theoretical idea, and then lots of other people come along and test that idea building on the original study.
It doesn't matter that you are not established in a field. Anyone can use the word "seminal". It's just that using it correctly requires a good understanding of your field and the interconnections of research papers.
Having a lot of citations is necessary but not sufficient to show that a paper has led to subsequent research. Some citations don't mean much on its own.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From [the Merriam Webster dictionary](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/seminal):
>
> [2] containing or contributing the seeds of later development : creative, original
>
>
>
More specifically, I would call an article *seminal* if it was the start of a new field/trend/idea, the work that inspired everything that came after, a starting point.
Therefore, if that article fulfills this criterion, you can say that, regardless of how many citations it has, or who are the authors. For instance, recent seminal work will not have a lot of citations :)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The question is: why should you mention seminal paper altogether?
I would refrain from giving an adjective to the paper.
Firstly, because "seminal" is subjective. Secondly, because it does really add anything relevant. Thirdly, because it may piss off other people that don't find the paper seminal.
There are better ways of recognising the paper's "seminality", e.g. publishing in the field and giving the due credit to the paper.
In any case, the only occasion I would write "seminal" is if I am pretty sure the work is seminal, which does not seem the case here.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Never, because it will make many of your readers think about semen and wonder whether you're sexist. Pick a word that doesn't have as much baggage and which also more specific to whatever you mean. For example you could say it was influential, foundational, or fundamental.
Note that all the above is true even if seminal doesn't have that connotation to you, and even if you think that it's not sexist language. These are points where reasonable people can and do disagree. But either way you're going to distract some nontrivial number of your readers from the actual point you're trying to make, and that's not effective writing.
**Update:** I just want to point out that this is not a new issue that I made up. Here's the [British Sociological Association](http://www.britsoc.co.uk/equality/) including it among a dozen or so words it recommends sociologists avoid (most of the others are chairman and the like). [Here](https://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2014/04/21/dont-say-seminal-its-sexist/) [are](https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201005/letters.cfm) [some](https://twitter.com/ctitusbrown/status/647440548660252673) [other](http://bitchphd.blogspot.com/2009/08/sexist-language.html) people complaining about this usage of seminal. I've certainly heard people at the Joint Meetings grumble about the unfortunately named "Steele prize for seminal contributions to research." Anyway, as I said I don't think this is as clear a case of sexist language as say chairman, but it is a usage that many people don't like and which has few advantages. It's easier just not to use it.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I have learned one thing how to identify a seminal work is using Google Scholar search engine result showing that the article is cited by another author(s) to support the insights or theories of study. For example, Halperin (2017) uses the social theory within the study employing the structuration theory of Giddens (1984).
References:
<NAME>. (2017). Learning practice and technology: Extending the structurational practice lens to educational technology research. Learning, Media and Technology, 42(3), 279-294. doi:10.1080/17439884.2016.1182925
<NAME>. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/03
| 1,141
| 5,225
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working on a manuscript of a project that I am first author on, and am wondering whether it is proper to include person X. X has been gone from the lab for 3 years, and none of her data is in the manuscript or really informed the conclusions. However, my experimental design (for one figure out of 8) is very similar to her original plan, although the analysis is different. It's not clear if the original idea was X's, or my PIs (it was a pretty natural extension from a paper we read in journal club). Any advice about whether X should be a coauthor? Does anyone have any examples of this happening, and what was the outcome from each perspective?
Update: thank you for all the input! To clarify:
1. My PI was actually the one who asked ME for my opinion in this situation - I think she was on the fence. But you're right that it is her job to make the final call, she was there when the original pilot experiments were performed.
2. The experimental tools were not new, they are common/published already. The details of the design (I.e. vary x in increments of 5) were the former student's
3. Looks like we are planning (at least at the conference stage, could always change when paper is closer to submission) towards not including X<issue_comment>username_1: From what I read, you seem to describe a case about the limits of intellectual property, with particular emphasis to ownership of ideas from a previous student/researcher. I will tell you how a similar situation was handled by my former PI:
a) I designed (calculations, CAD, materials and equipment selection, etc) an experimental device needed to collect specialized measurements. I also chose and installed all the equipment (electronics/software) used during the measuring process as well as the analysis of the data. This was part of my work as a research assistant.
b) This equipment was used to collect data for my thesis, papers and publications.
c) Once I graduated, the equipment was given to a different student which used it to collect more data. This student has access to all the documents associated to the equipment. He has collected data and produced papers from this setup. However, he did not put my name in the documents. Although the design was my idea, it does not belong to me. The regulations of my University are clear about this.
Now to your case: Person X has not had direct contribution to your results other than similar ideas about how to proceed on certain topics or design a particular process. My suggestion is that you put his/her thesis as a reference, indicating clearly where the similarities occur. The name of person X should not appear as a co-author unless you are using data/results directly from his/her thesis. If this is your PIs idea, his/her name will be (most likely) on the manuscript as a co-author no matter what.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two key questions, as I see it. The first is whether the experimental design you used was originated by the former student. If it was the PI's idea (or somebody else's), and the student merely implemented it, that the former student does not need to be an author. If, on the other hand, the apparatus and techniques were truly originated by the former student, there may be a strong case for making them an author. You should ask the PI specifically about who designed the experiment (as well as consulting them about the whether the previous student should be a coauthor; the PI is likely the best person to evaluate whether the student made a meaningful contribution to the current paper).
If it is established that the old student did originate the experimental arrangement, there is then a second question: Was this experimental design already used as the basis for a published paper with that student as an author? If there was already a paper on the older results, then the student has already received credit for designing the experimental setup. In that case, you can cite the older paper as originating the methodology, and the former student does not need to be an author on papers describing further developments made after they left.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You should ask your PI. Authorship conventions vary drastically between fields and the PI will know information about the following
(1) whether the experimental design was novel, and whether she designed the experiment or just performed it.
(2) whether her data informed anything in your project (you said it didn't inform your results or analysis, but it could have informed other aspects [like what question to ask next], and it could have informed the PI in ways they have not told you)
(3) Whether any of the above means authorship is conventionally expected in your field
A key point though, is whether her experimental design is published in a thesis, report, conference or separate paper. If it is, you quite likely could cite it and potentially not include her as an author (although you should still ask your PI about this). However, if it is not, then authorship could be warranted because you benefited from her experimental design which could be interpreted as a substantial intellectual contribution.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/04
| 1,358
| 5,144
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a new PhD student, wrapping up my first year of coursework. To date, I haven't published any papers, and my body of work is essentially null. For this semester's class project in one of my courses, my professor has tasked me with using the IEEE format for papers and using the following sections to describe my project:
1. Introduction
2. Related work
3. Proposed method
4. Experiment result
5. Conclusion
6. References
He seems very enthusiastic about the project that I coded, and the notion seems to be that he wants to send the paper off to a summer conference. I know this must be a growing pain as a young academic, resulting from lack of experience. How do I go about composing a Related Work section? Is it as simple as rummaging through conference papers published in my field on related topics? Do I need to look through the ACM and IEEE databases for articles that relate to my work? I certainly don't have anything that I've previously written/published to put in this section; any advice from someone with more experience would be immensely appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: The problem here is likely deeper than just how to write a related work section. In order to publish a (good) scientific paper, you need to be able to compare your results to prior results---often directly and quantitatively in your experimental section.
If you already have prior methods that you are comparing to in your experimental section, then that's a good seed for your related work. Look at the papers describing those methods; look at papers that they cite and papers that cite them. By spending a few days wandering around in this web of literature, you are likely to be able to get a good sense of what else is out there and which of those pieces of work are most significant overall or most closely related to your own.
If you *don't* have prior methods that you are comparing to, then you need to sit down with your professor and get some help. If you aren't comparing in some way, how can you establish that your work is a significant improvement worth publication?
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In the Related Works section, you should discuss briefly about published matter that technically *relates* to your proposed work.
A short summary of what you can include (but not limited to) in the *Related Works* section:
* Work that proposes a different method to solve the same problem.
* Work that uses the same proposed method to solve a different problem.
* A method that is similar to your method that solves a relatively similar problem.
* A discussion of a set of related problems that covers your problem domain.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Here is a link which might be useful
Also in general the related work would be reviewing previous work here is a general link on Literature Review. If you already have one ready you just need to put out those which are more specific to your problem.
Also see <https://researchguides.njit.edu/c.php?g=671658&p=4727571>
[https://beehive.cs.princeton.edu/wiki/writing/how-to-write-a-related-work-section/#:~:text=Goals%20of%20a%20related%20work%20section&text=The%20section%20should%20include%20methods,was%20inspired%20by%20their%20work](https://beehive.cs.princeton.edu/wiki/writing/how-to-write-a-related-work-section/#:%7E:text=Goals%20of%20a%20related%20work%20section&text=The%20section%20should%20include%20methods,was%20inspired%20by%20their%20work).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: This is what I usually suggest to my students. [This link to my website](https://francescolelli.info/tutorial/related-work-literature-review-survey-paper-a-collection-of-resources/) contains a selection of videos that can help you depending on where you are in your journey.
You also may want to consider the following tips on my website for reading, selecting and categorizing the works that you want to include:
* Not all papers are made equal: [heuristics for understanding if a
paper is worth reading](https://francescolelli.info/tutorial/related-work-literature-review-survey-paper-a-collection-of-resources/) or you should move forward to the next
one.
* Not all journal and conferences are made equal: understand [how to
select good venues (conference or journal)](https://francescolelli.info/thesis/how-scientific-venues-work-an-heuristic/) where you can search
for good publication.
* Quantity may be important: learn how to [read a scientific paper
faster](https://francescolelli.info/thesis/read-scientific-papers-quickly-and-effectively/) and more effectively.
* Keep your resources in an orderly manner: [master the right features
in MS-Word for handling the related work and managing the growing
complexity of the task](https://francescolelli.info/thesis/how-to-use-references-in-word-a-few-tips-and-suggestions-for-your-thesis/).
* A literature review is about put some order in the chaos: understand
[how to categorize the papers that you are reading](https://francescolelli.info/thesis/how-to-use-the-literature-review-for-your-research/). In this way
it will be beneficial for your readers.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/04
| 1,854
| 7,904
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be teaching a course which is made up of 13 weeks of classes
in the Fall of 2016.
Unfortunately, I will also be travelling in the middle of the semester
to a conference in the US from my home university located in Asia.
This means that for one week, I will not physically be in my home university and I will have to cancel classes.
Unfortunately, we cover quite a lot of material in the course. Therefore, I am afraid that if I cancel one week of classes I will not be able to cover all the material.
What are my options in such a situation?
I was considering recording a video of my lectures just for that week I am away.
Assignments can be submitted electronically so I could assign work for the students which they can complete and submit online.
What have other professors/lecturers done in such a situation?<issue_comment>username_1: I do it like this:
1. Try to let a colleague\* take over. This almost always works with 'standard' classes (intro to statistics, this kind of stuff)
2. Plan the classes in such a way that the students are busy with something else in this week (e.g., data collection), so that a plenary meeting is not necessary.
3. Cancel - but if I would cancel more than one meeting of a course, I would probably get problems with my department.
\* we don't really have the concept of a TA here, you are either teaching (then, you are a colleague) or not - so 'colleague' also can include graduate students that might be referred to as TA in other systems
(context: Europe/Netherlands; social sciences)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The first step should be to ask what is usually done at your institution.
Currently I can reschedule lectures when it's really necessary.
At a previous I have written slides for my TA to give. I also covered a lecture for a colleague, from their notes. In this case there was a minimum number of hours of instruction for the course, so missing any would have been a problem (I did cancel one, but in unexpected circumstances).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Besides to all other solutions presented in other answers, I can add these options too.
1. If your university/ department regulations allow you, cancel your class at that day, so your students will be able to schedule their day studying or reviewing their courses; or simply enjoy going out and not having to study at that day. (Joking but your students may be so happy with this option!)
2. Reschedule your course for another day. Of course, this option needs to be checked whether regulations of your university/ department allows you or not. Also, you have to see whether your students can attend at an alternative date or not.
3. Distribute the time of your class between other sessions. For instance, if your class is 45 minutes, you may add 15 minutes to other three sessions to cover time of that class completely. Some students may not be happy with this option because they may have scheduled class after your class and this extended time may waste their coffee breaks.
4. Use distance learning methods and if your institute has video conference and high speed internet, teach by video conferencing methods. Some applications such as Skype may allow you to do so. However, you should think about this method and whether your university/ department allows you to do so.
Plan some programs which do not require you to be present with your class at the day you are going to the conference. This may include activities such:
1. Some professors or lecturers have quizzes or midterm exams during the semester.
You may schedule your quizzes or class exams to be taken at the day you are going to travel. Of course this needs previous notification to your class.
2. Some others plan short one day technical visits to projects, laboratories, etc. These types of visits is very often in the courses of Engineering programs such as Civil Engineering in which students visit some construction projects as part of their courses. If your presence is not important in such one day programs, then scheduling your travel during these visits seems to be perfect.
3. Some courses are presented by two lecturers. If your course is the same, you may ask your partner lecturer to go to the class in that specific day.
4. Ask a colleague lecturer to go to the class. However, I do not really recommend this option in a student's perspective. When I was a student, I did not really like the change in the method the course delivered to me by an alternative lecturer. Professors have different ways of lecturing, and just one session will not give enough time to lecturer and students to get to know each other and productivity may probably be affected. Of course some lecturers are so professional and can deliver courses and control the class perfectly. I will recommend to put this option as last choice.
5. Ask your TA to have one of his classes at the time you are not going to your class.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Adding on to @username_1' answer, another suggestion **prepone** your classes of that period by swapping sessions with your colleagues. This would also require cooperation and understanding from your colleagues.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: My first teaching experience was delivering a lecture, from notes prepared by the instructor, for a course I TA'ed in. Decades later, as an adjunct, I was able to give one of my TAs the same opportunity. Other things I used in other years included:
* holding the midterm the week I was to be away, and getting my TAs to supervise it. This works if you only have to move the midterm one week in either direction
* teaching into the "tutorial hour" twice (typically once before and once after the absence) to deliver two extra hours of material, allowing me to skip an entire week (I had a three hour slot once a week, two hours of fast paced lecture followed by an hour of informal chat for those who wanted to stay.)
Checking with your department is key. They will generally approve whatever you suggest if you ask them in advance, but be annoyed if you just do something unusual and then students come and complain. And believe me, students will come and complain. There is always one who would have got 99 on the midterm if it had been held as planned, but because you moved it a week only got 34, and goes to the head to get some justice.
If you don't have a TA, your department may be able to suggest a grad student or fellow prof who likes your topic and can do it. Also, your TA may be terrified and try to decline - be prepared to spend some coaching time. This is part of having a TA, inducting them into academic life. Or they may think it's going to be great, but not actually do very well. Allow some time the week you are back to review what was done with the TA, just in cse.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Create a video of your lecture. This works especially well since you have such advanced warning that you won't be present -- you have plenty of time to plan, record and edit the video.
I've done this a half-dozen times or so and find it works very well. The recording/editing tools have become easy to use in the past 3-4 years. I use ScreenFlow to capture my slides, web cam and audio. Other tools would do as well, I'm sure.
I then upload the video to our LM system and warn students with an email.
For one of my sophomore-level classes, I have a TA show up in the classroom at the assigned time to watch the video with any students who want to attend. The TA can then replay part of the video ("hey, what did he say there?") or pause the video to answer questions.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Don’t go to the conference, the customers (students) have paid to get these classes. Therefore they have a right to be put first.
Without students there would be no money to do research…..
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/05/04
| 1,680
| 6,837
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing an essay and I have previously written and submitted an essay to a different professor about a similar subject. Would it be considered plagiarism if I copied my own exact sentences from my previous essay?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is called self-plagiarism. This happens when you reuse significant portions of an earlier work without acknowledging this. This can be a major concern if the prior work is copyrighted as it infringes on the rights of the publisher.
If the work comes from any other sources, it is wisest to cite where it came from, even if it came from you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> It depends.
>
>
>
If your material is to be published in a scientific conference, journal or as public demonstration of some sort, it would be termed as self-plagiarism. This is when you replicate significant amount of detail from a previously published matter.
I am assuming you are writing an essay to portray your knowledge and understating in the subject. I don't suppose 'self-plagiarism' comes to play here. But it may seem wiser to let the professor know. However, it would best to check the university course guidelines and verify whether you could submit the same essay to a different course as stated.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The more pressing issue is that you have violated a critical course rule: any materials submitted for assessment must not have been submitted for another assessment. Example: you cannot use the same thesis to get multiple PhD degrees.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Terms used are self-plagiarism (see @username_1) or autoplagiarism. One of its issues in scientific publishing is "duplicate" or "multiple publications", that brings very little novelty to the subject. I have witnessed the same paper published in 3 or 4 different conferences.
Such behavior are now ruled by scientific societies. For instance at IEEE (note that I am quoting, the original source is under the link):
>
> IEEE Publications has long maintained the policy that verbatim copying
> of another's work (plagiarism) is unacceptable author conduct. In
> November 2002, the IEEE Board of Directors approved a new policy on
> Duplicate Publication and [Self-Plagiarism](http://www.comsoc.org/sites/default/files/webfm/Publications/Self_Plagiarism.pdf). [...] authors should
> only submit original work that has neither appeared elsewhere for
> publication, nor which is under review for another refereed
> publication. If authors have used their own previously published
> work(s) as a basis for a new submission, they are required to cite
> the previous work(s) and very briefly indicate how the new submission
> offers substantial novel contributions beyond those of the previously
> published work(s).
>
>
>
One legal reason could be that such societies own some rights regarding the copyright. Not a proof, but in the Wikipedia section on [Self-plagiarism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism#Self-plagiarism), you can find:
>
> In addition there can be a copyright issue if copyright of the prior
> work has been transferred to another entity
>
>
>
If your work is not published or evaluated, reuse of sentences you have written sounds like a fair use. If submitting an essay induces a legal framework (grade, assignement), you should take some care. You "own exact sentences" are a matter of quantity. At least, it is important that your fairness can not to discussed. Thus, if you mention that you already have worked on a similar topic (with references), you have less chances to be blamed for hiding important information.
As a side note, apart from the time gain, I strongly suggest you to rewrite, without looking too much at the original source, apart to make sure you have not forgotten ideas.
Your though has evolved by thinking about it once, and writing it, and reformulating is a good way to improve your line of reasoning and the clarity of your written expression.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Plagiarism and self-plagiarism sound similar, but are importantly distinct things.
**Plagiarism** is if you use other people's work as your own. You deprive them of credit and claim credit for yourself which you do not deserve.
**Self-Plagiarism** does not deprive the author (you) from credit, but the offence here is that the the "present-you" claims credit that the "past-you" already collected.
This is an assessment offence because you would get a double mark for a single piece of work. You could, of course, quote yourself (properly cited!), in which case, you would be perfectly fine, but you would only gain marks for *new* work done, which, in case of a full copy, would still be zero. However, in a sensible school policy it should not be punishable for plagiarism in the conventional sense, since it was you in the first place who wrote the text.
As a student, I have reused software libraries I wrote in other coursework, properly cited, of course. It would be a waste of time to redo mechanical work, and permitted me to get much further. With an essay, nothing stops you, of course, to build upon existing writing (properly cited) to develop your argument further.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: It may not be plagiarism, but there may be university policies against it. In fact, there may be university policies against using similar essays for two different subjects ***even if you don't copy phrases exactly***.
From Harvard's [*plagiarism policy*](http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k70847&pageid=icb.page355322):
>
> It is the expectation of every course that all work submitted for a course or for any other academic purpose will have been done solely for that course or for that purpose. If the same or similar work is to be submitted to any other course or used for any other academic purpose within the College, the prior written permission of the instructor must be obtained. If the same or similar work is to be submitted to more than one course or used for more than one academic purpose within the College during the same term, the prior written permission of all instructors involved must be obtained.
>
>
>
Depending on the school's policies, you could get an F in a course for something like this. I doubt the penalties would be as severe as those for plagiarism, but I recommend against doing it without asking permission.
In fact (although this may be due to the fact that I work in science and not the humanities), I would be inclined to be much more forgiving for a student project in the same area as an earlier project of theirs that copied some phrases in the introduction, rather than a project that had essentially the same scientific content as an earlier project, but different wording.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/04
| 7,048
| 28,527
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of the most criticized aspects of the current publishing scheme, is that academics do pretty much all the work for free and publishers get the money.
Why don't people just charge a fee when contacted by a publisher to referee an article?
---
I know [why do academics write peer reviews?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7556/why-do-academics-write-peer-reviews), that's not the question. The issue is why do it requesting no monetary compensation when the publisher is getting (for doing next to nothing) an [extraordinary monetary compensation](http://thecostofknowledge.com/).<issue_comment>username_1: Leaving aside arguments for and against the current system, here's what will happen if you --- as an individual academic --- are contacted by a publisher and attempt to charge a fee:
1. You will most likely be contacted, not by a "publisher" per se, but by an editor, who is another hard-working academic getting little or no monetary compensation for their job.
2. You say something like, "This is my fee for refereeing an article."
3. The editor responds, "Sorry, we have no budget to pay for refereeing," and goes to look for another referee.
4. In the best case scenario, the editor --- who is most likely a well-regarded senior researcher in your field, the sort of person who may make or influence decisions over your hiring, promotion, grants, and the publication of your own papers --- now has the impression that you're deplorably ignorant about how the field operates. In the worst case, the editor thinks you're a jerk who's actively seeking to make life harder for other people working in the field.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Because that's not how it works.
That may seem unsatisfying, but it's the answer. It's part of scientific culture that peer reviewing is done without charging, just as it's part of business culture that you don't wear sagging shorts and torn t-shirts to work.
Is it something that might change? Sure; it's not a formal contract, it's a cultural thing, and cultures change. But most scientists feel that peer review is a good thing, and most scientists feel that it should be free, so it's unlikely that it will change soon.
Keep in mind that, while there's a lively on-line debate about the merits of peer review and open-access publication and so on, this is a debate among tiny and non-representative populations of scientists. Don't confuse the passion and attitudes that you see on-line with how most scientists actually feel.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: If you do this on an individual scale, as username_1 says, it's basically the same as just declining to review the paper. The journal is not going to pay you; they will find someone else.
You could ask "What if everyone started demanding money?" That's essentially a proposal that researchers as a group should strike for higher wages. Like any labor action, it'll only work if a large majority of the labor force participates and is well organized. Anybody who's served as a department chair can tell you that organizing any significant number of academics to agree on anything is, well, challenging. Here you are talking about organizing all the academics in the world.
If somehow a strike were to be effective, large commercial publishers might eventually knuckle under and start paying; small publishers might not have the resources, and might go out of business. At least in the short term, it would be very disruptive to the academic community: initially, publishers would probably just look for referees who weren't on strike ("scabs") and the review process would be greatly delayed. Some journals might suspend publication. Ultimately, the people most harmed would probably be junior researchers who need to publish in a timely manner in order to maintain or advance their careers. So you'd have to have a consensus that the long-term gain outweighs the short-term harm.
To use a physics analogy, we're in a potential well; there might be a lower-energy state (one in which reviewers get paid), but the activation energy to get from here to there is extremely high.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This is the same question that I often think. From your point of view, yes, you are right in your place. Why should not we get money for review? However, main point is who will decide to give money? And how the amount would be fixed? Based on what? Who will judge? Editor-in-chief, or other person? Since we don't have the clear understanding and methodology for these, there is no money for reviewers.
And regarding publishers, apart from reviews, there are Publishing staffs who are responsible for handling the post acceptance process. Thus, money is required for publisher for the salary of these staffs, also for the journal advertising. Conference is another typical issue. Following this way, you can find where money goes.
Another important aspect, sometimes research can't be measured by money, however, research produces a huge amount of money.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: In some fields, for some journals, they *are* paid a fee. [File this as yet another example of "[academia varies more than you think](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1203/welcome-to-academia-se/1212#1212)"...] This approach seems to be most popular with economics journals - as they are heavily into studying the way people can be motivated by money, I suppose this makes sense!
An exceptional example is the *Journal of Financial Economics* - most articles have a single reviewer, who is paid [$275 cash](http://jfe.rochester.edu/time.htm) (and a ~$200 discount off their next submission), contingent on a timely review. Lower down the scale, the *Journal of Banking and Finance* talks about offering "[tokens of appreciation](https://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-banking-and-finance/0378-4266/guide-for-authors#3501)" for reviewers; there's no cash value given but the phrasing suggests it's probably a good bit lower.
Now, why do these journals do it? Probably because they always have done, an explanation which applies to a lot of strange quirks of the academic system. But is it a good idea? The recent proposal by Scientific Reports to have a two-track paid- and unpaid-peer-review system was [incredibly contentious](http://www.nature.com/news/concern-raised-over-payment-for-fast-track-peer-review-1.17204), after all...
The *Journal of Public Economics* [recently tested the system out](http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.28.3.169) - they took 1500 review requests for their papers, and divided them into four groups:
1. a six-week deadline, but no penalty for missing it
2. a four-week deadline, but no penalty for missing it
3. a four-week deadline, and a promise of $100 payment for meeting the deadline
4. a six-week deadline, but reviewers told turnaround times would be made public
All variants worked well. The group with a four-week deadline had an average turnaround time of twelve days less than the six-week deadline group. Payments took another eight days off the turnaround time, and "public credit" another 2.5 days. The money/credit groups wrote slightly shorter reports, presumably as they were more motivated to make a hard deadline, but the editors did not see them as of noticeably lower quality.
So... yes, payment can work. But it relies on the journal having the money (two reviewers is $200/paper), and - intriguingly - it's not quite as effective as the no-money-needed option of just giving a shorter deadline. And even when it does work, it only makes sense *if done systematically by the journal*. Individuals asking to negotiate their own review payments is unlikely to work in the same way.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: Academics aren't upset about not getting paid for refereeing/reviewing - they're upset because journals charge too much.
There's really four points in the statement "academics do pretty much all the work for free and publishers get the money"
* Academics do most of the work
* Publishers do a comparatively small amount of work
* Publishers get the money
* Academics don't get any money
Just because people might object to some of the four points, that doesn't mean they object to all of them.
*Academics do most of the work* - Most academics wouldn't object to this state of the affairs. *Of course* academics do most of the work in publishing (especially reviewing) - they're the ones who are qualified to do it. You can't have some bureaucrat take care of reviewing the work, you need someone who knows the field.
*Publishers do a comparatively small amount of work* - Academics might grumble at this, but there's a comparatively little that the publishers are qualified to do. Typesetting, printing, maintaining the journal website, administration in the reviewing process ... and that's about it. All the actual content decisions have to be done by knowledgeable people (academics). There's certainly some journals which try to offload things like typesetting onto the authors, but in part that's financially driven ...
*Publishers get the money* - This is the main point of upset. Publishers charge what is viewed as an excessive amount. ... but it's not that they're charging money *per se*, it's more that academics lose access to the content due to expense. Most academics were completely satisfied when they had access through (paid) library subscriptions. It's only when budget cuts (and publisher price increases) caused libraries to cut subscriptions that academics got upset. But again, it's less having to pay for things and more not being able to access everything they need.
*Academics don't get any money* - This is the point you're addressing. However, I'd say most academics don't have a problem with it. Refereeing for a journal is considered by most to be community service - it's something that needs to happen, and they're the only ones qualified to do it. It's quid-pro-quo: others review your articles, and you review other people's. Attempting to make it a paid-for enterprise makes the person asking for the money seem greedy.
---
So where does that leave you? Academics (mostly) don't have a problem doing most of the work - and doing it for free. The complaints are on the publisher's side: they're charging too much for what little they do. Demanding that publishers pay academics for reviewing isn't going to change that. If anything, it will make journal access more expensive, as they now need to pay for reviewers.
So charging a fee when reviewing isn't going to fix the problem, and as username_1 mentions in his answer, asking for one is only going to make you look naive and greedy to the (academic) editor who you're in contact with. Note that there's a very big difference between "Decline to review based on principles" and "Decline to review ... unless you pay me".
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_7: [Caveat: I agree that the publishing system is quite flawed. Meanwhile, let us have another look]
While cash has become the most common payment method, it is not the only one. Let us talk about [barter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barter):
>
> [...] a system of exchange where goods or services are directly
> exchanged for other goods or services without using a medium of
> exchange, such as money.
>
>
>
In some countries, academia is not the best paid occupation, for instance young researchers. So the reward of researchers is not only money. Let us call the other reward: "knowledge". Knowledge is not a standard good. You cannot say:
* I'd like to buy 3 pounds of algebraic skills
* Sure! For here or to go?
You can learn by yourself, for yourself, but except for rare beautiful minds, one needs evaluation. As for many creative works, evaluation is difficult without peers, science is a cumulative progress of unassigned tasks. Evaluations are legion: peer-review, seminars, collaborations, teaching.
The first time I submitted a paper, I had almost no idea about peer-review. The first return was an shot in the head. Teached me a lot. I got reward from being peer-reviewed. I learned that the anonymous guys did that for free. So I reviewed. For free.
Wait, no really.
* By reviewing, I almost got access to work in progress, to half-finished works, but anyway current trends, 6 months to 2 years before actual publications, quite sooner than other folks. **Time is money**
* By reviewing, I had to sharpen my reading tool, to discover topics at the borders on my knowledge, to read at least cited works. **Work is money**
* By reviewing, I had only once the opportunity to share reviews of a pool of papers with colleagues ([ICIP 2003](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/mostRecentIssue.jsp?punumber=8824)). We learned that one may be wrong, and two others could correct. **Minority report is money**
* By reviewing, I learned conference and journnal habits, priceless for my publications. **Efficiency is money**
* By reviewing, I compensate for others who review my stuff. **Payback is money**
For these several reasons, and some more, I do reviewing in a barter mind. What is troublesome is that somebody else draws actual money from that. We might be at the verge of a [Ponzi pyramid of scientific publishing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ponzi_schemes).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Because keeping money out of the publisher-reviewer relationship is a very good feature of the current dominant publishing model.
Some of the unwanted things that paying reviewers would result in:
* unqualified or overbooked academics to accept all reviews resulting in a drop in review quality.
* academics accepting to review papers that are not interesting to them, thus probably lowering the scrutiny threshold.
* people maximizing the number of reviews they do in a year thus allocating less time to each. -> drop in quality.
* people refraining from outright rejecting frivolous and junk papers on first screening to try to charge a full review
* etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: My personal view on the matter is that journal / refereed venue publication should be a collaborative non-pecuniary effort of scientific communities in different fields, in which nobody gets paid for doing specific tasks like reviewing a paper but it is acknowledged that as an academic, some of your time is spent doing that, and as a university, research institute or other entity which garners benefit from scientific research - you would be obliged (morally? socially? legally?) to "contribute reasonably" to this effort.
Of course, this leaves the open question of what would be fair for people who are not employed as researchers. It's not about whether they get *compensated*, but rather how they can spend time on non-affiliated research activity and not go bankrupt, or work "two jobs", their "day job" and unpaid research-related work. This problem is especially accute for people employed in precarious teaching-only positions in Academia, and for that I might agree some compensation-per-review might be in order - although it's a matter for the academic labor unions to struggle for.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: Summary:
* most academics I know are paid for reviewing (via their employment contract)
* thus it would be up to the employer (university/research institute) to charge for the service
* I'll outline the burocratic and legal steps needed on the reviewer side (in my country: Germany) to be able to charge personally for a review. For many academics, this burocratic offset compared to what you can earn this way is not attractive.
---
First of all let me say that from my experience
>
> academics do pretty much all the work for free
>
>
>
I think this is true at best for a very small minority of academics. My work contract says that (among other things) I'm paid for "publication activities" and that clearly includes reviews. Clearly as in administration asks me to report for yearly statistics number of reviews done for which journals just like they ask for manuscripts, oral presentations and posters.
So while I'm not paid by the publisher, I am paid by my employer for the reviews. And I know very few academics who go on publishing and reviewing after the academic job ends - few people put that much effort into a hobby.
(I'm thinking here more of graduates/post-docs without job than of retired professors because I think the out-of-job-academics are the better control group for this discussion)
For me this makes the question very similar to why does a car mechanic work who is employed by a workshop not charge the customer directly? Answer: it's the employer who charges the customer (via their administration), the mechanic is paid by their wage.
We now may ask why doesn't the employer (research institute, university) charge the publisher for services received? IMHO this is a sensible question and one that actually should be asked. **Edit:** However, to me this is not the same as the question asked why a single researcher doesn't charge the publisher. The standing and the aims in these negotiations are IMHO totally different of a single researcher compared to a university/research institute.
[slightly off topic: one answer to this may be that for academic institutions of a certain size the number of reviews done by the staff comes close enough to the number of reviews needed for the publications of the same staff - so introducing payment for reviews (including the institution needs to pay for the reviews they receive) just means that more VAT needs to be paid, and thus generates a net loss.]
**Edit:** Why do I think that charging for review will lead to charges for having your paper reviewed? For one thing, of course commercial publishers won't like to diminish their profits if they can avoid it. But even then: assuming an open source source publication fee of, say, 1500 EUR/US$ leads to 500 EUR/US$ profit (that's 33 %) for the publisher means that 500 EUR/US$ could theoretically be spent for the review before the publisher will enter the loss zone. That pays (see below) for maybe 5 - 10 h of professional academic review time. I often spend considerably more on a single review (see e.g. <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/5799/725> where @JeffE cites a rule of thumb of about 1 h/manuscript page - we often have 15 - 25 manuscript pages). I don't know what the average number of reviews is per published paper, but I'd guess that it is somewhere near 10. But even a low guesstimate of 3 for the first round + 2 for the second (that doesn't even include that papers are declined!) means that 5 x 20 h = 100 h of review time per published paper. That's something like 5000 - 10000 EUR/US$, or 10 - 20x the huge profit of the publisher.
So, yes, the reviewing is a huge amount of work and it needs to be compensated, like writing the papers needs to be compensated. And yes, it is the researchers who do this. But even the most evil shark publishers with 40 % profit of a 1500 EUR fee for an open access publication would be able to pay for that.
---
How to charge a publisher for services received (i.e. the review) as the reviewer in person?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(this is for Germany, other legislations will differ)
On the other hand, well, yes: why not charge the publisher?
Scientific reviewieng is a classic professional service of freelancers (German: freiberufliche Tätigkeit). In order to do such freelancing, you first of all need to make sure that there is no conflict with any employment. This is best done by exchanging a couple of letters with your professor/director/administration. Unless they actually have some deal with the publisher, they probably wish you good luck and are happy with that.
You then go to the tax office and ask for a freelancing tax number. If this is just for the few reviews you do, you'd also ask for exemption of VAT, otherwise you'd need to do VAT declarations (if dealing with a publisher in a EU foreign country, things are more complicated). But at the very least, the freelancing tax number means that your income tax declaration becomes mandatory, gets an additional set of forms for the freelancing and you have a shorter deadline to hand it in.
You'll need to put in this effort regardless of whether you are actually able to convince a publisher to pay you or not.
I guess most researchers I know think that compared to doing the review for the academic salary this extra money is not worth the extra burocracy. (I know of one colleague who told of his burocratic experience where an extra payment < 1000 EUR for a seminar was concerned)
Now, I anyways do freelancing, so the marginal effort for me is low (as it is for people who anyways do vocational tax declaration and do it early). However, so far I have to say that the market price of reviewing is rather unattractive. I've been offered 100 US$ to do a quick "review" within a couple of days (no full review was asked but rather something like an opinion on the manuscript and pointing out which points I'd recommend should be addressed before actual submission).
Some comparisons:
I estimate that I cost my employer about 75 - 100 US$ / h (of which 22 US$ / h actually arrive at my bank account after taxes + social insurance for me have been paid). Thus, the offered market price for the review service boils down to the cost of 1 - 1:10 h for my employer. Even though my freelancing doesn't have as much overhead (e.g. because small-scale freelancing on the side is covered by the social insurance of the employment contract), I'd need to finish that review within ca. 2 h to get the same hourly wage I get for my employment contract. Also as it is very much on-demand of the journal, it cannot even be used too well for filling up time when I don't have a customer. So all in all, even though my marginal burocracy for doing this is low, it is not super-attractive. In fact, I'm better off if I can put the time onto my academic time sheet. You may decide differently, particularly if your employer does not accept a time sheet.
Another comparison: for me, the hourly wage for such a review is close to filing [VG Wort claims](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/VG_Wort) - though the hourly wage there would be better if I had more papers to file, as there's quite an offset of remembering how to do things that need to be done just once per year.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I agree that reviewers provide a valuable and uncompensated service.
I believe most academics, however, are sadly misinformed about the work that goes into publishing an article after the reviewers approve it.
I am a former researcher turned manuscript editor. I have published a first author paper and a second author paper in a biological science. I have worked in medical and scientific publishing for 13 years as an editor and now as a consultant.
Top journals likely have no difficulty getting top reviewers. However, the lesser known journals (some of which I happen to consult for) do not have folks beating down their doors to review articles. They must approach those who may or may not be well-qualified to review an article.
I consider myself the last bastion of reason in the publication process. Just yesterday, I spend 9 hours as a paid consultant on an article that was so illogical, so full of errors, and so ill-referenced that I wondered how the reviewers could have possibly thought it was appropriate for publication. This journal hires me because they know I am capable of critically editing research. I have spoken to them on many occasions about the poor quality of the articles that are approved by reviewers.
My goal as an editor is to prevent embarrassment for the journal and to protect the scholarly literature from garbage. I take this responsibility very seriously.
The first editor spent likely 30 hours researching and rewriting to replace the garbage that was submitted and approved by 3 reviewers, conveying these to the author and then receiving and incorporating the comments from the author. Then the article came to me. I spent another 9 hours editing and pointing out serious errors in fact and consistency. The article needs another rewrite, which the editor will ask the author to do. This process is far from over. The designer will need to craft the illustrations and typeset the article. The production editor will need to manage the final proof process. The publishing process is far from the “nothing” that many scholars believe -- only those who have never seen it from the publishing side would say that.
The time pressure is enormous. The reviewers have approved the article and therefore it was placed in the publication queue. The editors MUST get the article into shape, poor as it is, for publication. We are not the experts, of course, so we have no recourse. I have been stuck on more than one occasion with the task of completely rewriting an illogical, inexpert, poorly referenced article because it was in the queue—the reviewers approved.
The journal pays through the nose for my services and the services of their in-house staff. I despair at the naivete of those who believe that the publisher gets paid for doing "next to nothing."
To force the publishers out of the process will dramatically reduce the quality of the medical and scientific literature. This I cannot abide.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: The short answer is that the publisher can't afford it (the Cost of Knowledge boycott notwithstanding). If reviewers demanded payment *en masse* either the system will break down or they'll be paid a pittance per review, and reviewers will complain that they're being made fun of [(see this for what happened when the New England Journal of Medicine paid $5 per review)](http://a-c-elitzur.co.il/uploads/articlesdocs/PeerReview1.pdf).
We can get a sense of how much revenue a journal makes by using OA prices & the number of articles it publishes a year. (This has many potential problems, but I ignore them for simplicity). A moderately large journal might publish 100 articles a year. OA prices vary widely but I'll take $1500 as a baseline. Some publishers can go lower by cutting corners e.g. for copyediting and marketing, but that's clearly less than ideal. So the journal might have a revenue of ~$150,000 per year. Some of the revenue goes towards paying for the editorial management system, marketing, production, possibly the editor-in-chief's honorarium if applicable, and so on. Let's assume a net margin of 10%, i.e. a profit of $15,000 a year.
Next let's assume the journal has a rejection rate of 75% (for comparison the most selective journals have rejection rates of over 90%). Assume the journal requires two reviews per manuscript to make a decision. That means the journal needs a total of ~800 reviews a year. If it paid $10 for each of those reviews, that's over half the net margin gone! Viewed from this perspective, NEJM didn't pay $5 for each review because they were making fun of the reviewers. They did so because it was all they could afford to pay.
Finally let's not forget that this is a reasonably large journal - 100 papers / year. There're many smaller journals around, many of which are not indexed by SCI and therefore don't have an impact factor. These journals are almost always loss-making. They only stay afloat because the publisher subsidizes them using the profit margin from their larger journals. If these journals also had to pay for reviews, they would lose even more money. Publishers would be incentivized to shut them down, which hurts research since the papers published in these journals aren't necessarily bad, they just tend to be boring and low novelty. To top it off even this reasonably large journal is probably facing subscription cuts in the current market (see [my answer to a different question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97068/why-did-journal-subscription-prices-increase-by-25-between-2013-and-2017-vs/101991#101991)).
Having said all this, this applies only to journal articles. The sheer volume of reviews required in journal publishing makes it hard to pay reviewers, but if you're reviewing book proposals, you can expect some compensation. You might not receive cash, but you should be able to e.g. get a free book from the publisher's collection.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/04
| 836
| 3,515
|
<issue_start>username_0: A colleague of mine had an excellent PhD project and she published good papers during her PhD. When I asked her to give me her PhD thesis, she told me she can't because her PhD project was confidential (commercial, military, ...).
I wonder if a PhD thesis can be confidential? Isn't it available in her university library?
Can a funding organization set this limitation for the data included in a PhD thesis?
Anyway, what if her future employer asks for her PhD thesis?<issue_comment>username_1: There are two ways that a PhD can have restricted access.
First, many people will pay to keep access to their thesis restricted so that they can try to publish it. The policies vary depending on the company the university uses to publish the theses. Usually, however, the time is 3 years or less.
Second, the government can classify the thesis in part or in whole. This happens when something discovered or revealed in the thesis is considered to be a matter of national security. Even though the information may not have originally been classified, and your friend may not even have access to classified material, in many countries—and certainly the U.S.—the government retains the right to restrict information through the classification process *ex post* of any information that it deems threatening to national security. The level of classification depends upon the level of threat, and your friend could be subject to legal repercussions from sharing that information with you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This can certainly happen. I sometimes "supervise" M.Sc. theses at my employer. (The "academic" supervision is done by a professor at a university, of course, but I'll do the day-to-day supervision, and the student will usually sit at a desk in a cubicle close to me.)
Usually these theses involve my employer's Intellectual Property. Usually the student uses data from a client (and retailers are *utterly paranoid* about their sales data). Consequently, we need to have both our clients and our own legal department on board with this, and usually this means that all or part of the thesis will not be publicly accessible. Of course, the department and the student in question needs to be OK with this, too, but we haven't had any problems with this so far.
The supervising professors will then need to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA). Again, I have never seen a professor balk at this. They usually leap at the chance of having one of their students do a thesis in industry.
You ask: "what if her future employer asks for her PhD thesis?" Simple. The same thing happens if a prospective employer asks me about samples of my work at a previous employer, which I cannot disclose because of an NDA. I tell them that I have signed an NDA and cannot go into details, then give a rough sketch of what I *can* talk about. This is commonplace in the workplace, and no serious employer should bat an eye. (Even a future *academic* employer should be understanding.)
This might work differently for a Ph.D. thesis, where you actually expect to generate publications, which will usually be the exception for M.Sc. theses. However, I'd expect that it would be possible to have *parts* of a Ph.D. thesis not available to the public, again with NDAs. And if the industry partner pays part of the Ph.D. student's salary, I'd expect most professors to be happy with the arrangement, assuming a good relationship between the professor and the industry partner.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/04
| 393
| 1,716
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be on the job market, again, next year. I am looking for a position that emphasizes teaching. I wrote a new teaching statement each year for the past two years since I just graduated with my Ph.D. last year, and I am relatively new to teaching, my teaching philosphy continually changes.
I am including writing a teaching statement that includes references. My teaching statement usually includes a narration of what I actually do in class, and explanation of assignments I give. Education research also informs how I do things in class, and I would like to justify why I do things with references to education papers.
I am in mathematics, and I notice that a lot of math teaching statements do not include references, which makes me think this is out of the norm.
Will my teaching statement be stronger if I provide references? Or will this be unusual and better be left out of my statement?<issue_comment>username_1: * You should cite your sources.
* It is good you have read the education literature.
* This will not make a big difference.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is unusual for teaching statements in math to have references, but this is *because* it is unusual to refer to the education literature. However, I think doing this can strengthen your statement, provided the references are few. It shows that you care enough to seek out good teaching strategies. But you want to show you have your own thoughts and ideas about teaching, which may have been formed in part by others' work, but are should also come your own experiences and experimenting. You also don't want to make it less friendly to read by getting too "technical."
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/05/05
| 582
| 2,246
|
<issue_start>username_0: Since almost everything I have found is something I pulled from a source, how do I write my essay without citing basically every single line?
Edit: Yes, in my paper I am arguing something which will be said in my own words. I am writing a few paragraphs about the historical background of the situation, and that is where my question comes into play.<issue_comment>username_1: Your question suggests that you think that a "history research paper" is entirely comprised of assertions of historical fact. This is not the case. I strongly recommend that you *read some history research papers* in order to see what they actually involve. Then look back at the directions for the paper you're given: were you not asked to *argue* for something or other? If things are still not clear, you need to talk to your instructor: far better to do this than to try write a paper having no idea what such a paper should be.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to [Pete's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/68231/53), I also want to mention that well-known historical facts generally *do not require a citation*.
For instance:
>
> The American Civil War was fought from 1861 to 1865.
>
>
>
This is well-known enough to be assumed as "general knowledge." On the other hand,
>
> The average Pennsylvania farmer in the 18th century did not leave an estate worth 400 pounds, as de Crèvecoeur reports in his *Letters from an American Farmer* [citation needed].
>
>
>
is sufficiently obscure that it cannot get the same treatment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Generally, in a history paper, you not only state facts, you ought to describe and derive insights from those facts -- that is where the *novelty* part comes in. Hence, you only need to cite first instance of the distinct facts in your content.
You should assess a set of research papers on history (as [Pete suggested](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/68231/53)) to understand the flow of citations the convention follow. Apart from that, look for places that deviate from conventional wisdom (as commented by @guifa), i.e., statements that contradict widely accepted knowledge. Such instances should also be cited.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/05
| 944
| 3,270
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the time when I submitted a paper to a journal " Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology", ISSN: 2040-7459, they indicated in their website that the journal is indexed in scopus but now is not, so i checked scimagojr.com for information and i found that the Coverage is: 2009-2014.
How do you check whether a journal is still listed in scopus?<issue_comment>username_1: The [entry for this journal](https://www.scopus.com/source/sourceInfo.uri?sourceId=19700187706) in Scopus lists "from 2009 to 2015" - it records 307 papers from 2015. The last issue they have indexed is vol. 10 issue 12, and they have not as yet indexed any 2016 papers.
The "to 2015" description seems to be standard for currently indexed journals; for example, [*Nature*](https://www.scopus.com/source/sourceInfo.uri?sourceId=21206) is listed as "1869 to 2015" despite being very much still alive. It doesn't automatically mean the journal has stopped being indexed - but the fact that Scopus does not list any 2016 papers yet does seem to suggest that it has stopped being indexed.
Note that Maxwell appears on Beall's list of [potentially predatory publishers](https://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/); while there are [many caveats](https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/16/parting-company-with-jeffrey-beall/) about Beall's work, it's certainly something to take note of.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Scopus provide a spreadsheet of journals which they index, or have indexed in the past. It is linked from [this page](http://blog.scopus.com/posts/titles-indexed-in-scopus-check-before-you-publish). I have downloaded the spreadsheet, and in your case, the journal is specifically highlighted as no longer being indexed as they "do not meet the Scopus quality criteria anymore and therefore Scopus discontinued the forward capturing". However, if your paper was published in the range of time that the journal was indexed (2009-2015 according to the same spreadsheet), then it will still be in Scopus. You can confirm this by searching for it in the index.
The same Scopus page indicates that if you cannot find a journal in that spreadsheet, you can try searching Scopus for the name of the journal to see if any recent material has been indexed. As a last resort, you can contact Scopus.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **[UPDATE : 2018]**
*Not sure if the solution i am proposing existed when the question was asked, but just for the sake of update :*
I guess the easiest way to check if a journal is indexed in Scopus or not is by using their search engine, you can search by ISSN or name of the journal.
Here is a link where i search for the journal you are looking for :
. [Search request in Scopus of the ISSN : 2040-7459](https://www.scopus.com/sources?sortField=metric&metricName=RP&sortDirection=ASC&offset=1&displayAll=false&sortPerformedState=f&origin=sourceSearch&sortDirectionMOne=DESC&sortDirectionMTwo=DESC&sortDirectionMThree=&metricDisplayIndex=1&scint=1&menu=search&tablin=&searchWithinResultsDefault=t&searchString=&searchOA=&typeFilter=d_j_p_k&subscriptionFilter=s_u&filterActTriggered=f&tabName=searchSources&searchTerms=20407459&searchTermsSubmit=&searchType=issn)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/05/05
| 2,352
| 10,187
|
<issue_start>username_0: I tested a hypothesis using some observational data, but did not find support for the hypothesis (the difference was not significant at the p < 0.05 level). I subsequently realised that the inclusion of a certain subset of individuals was dubious, since there was some doubt over their measurements. I filtered out those individuals (on objective criteria), and lo and behold, I now find evidence to support my original hypothesis.
I am acutely aware that, had the original hypothesis test returned a significant result, I probably would have found justification to support the inclusion of those doubtful measurements (or perhaps never even stopped to think about removing them). Although this wasn't my deliberate intention, what I have done seems a lot like I have employed my “researcher degrees of freedom” to find a version of the analysis that supports my original hypothesis.
I realise that what I *should have* done was to plan out my analysis more carefully in advance, and decide whether or not to include the doubtful measurements before carrying out any analysis. But I can’t change what has already happened, so my question is, what do I do with my data/analysis *now*? I can see a number of options that vary in their sensibleness, but none of which seem ideal:
1. Continue to use my updated analysis and present a clear argument for why those individuals should be excluded (i.e. ignore the RDF issue).
2. Continue to use my updated analysis but, in any write-up/publication be fully open about the less-than-ideal path that I took to reach it.
3. Conduct some kind of multiple-comparisons adjustment to take my multiple different analyses into account (I don’t know if this is even a valid approach in this context).
4. Sigh and throw the analysis in the bin.
**How (if at all) can I make good use of my analysis while still adhering to good research practice?**
My field is Ecology, in case that makes any difference.
**Edit, in response to close vote:** I did consider submitting the question to Stats.SE instead, but I felt that this is more an issue of research philosophy than a detailed statistical question. The answers that I am interested in (and indeed have already received) are connected with a general research strategy, and how to present results, rather than details regarding particular statistical methods, and so I felt that it was appropriate for this site. Having received very useful answers and comments already, it won't make too much difference to me personally if it ends up closed (and I can understand the argument for doing so), but I think the material could be useful to others in a similar situation to my own.<issue_comment>username_1: **Clearly report what you did and both results. Readers will make up their own minds about the strength of the findings.**
The situation that you have encountered is very common. While testing a prior hypothesis with predefined methods is the right thing to do, in practice it is unavoidable that you will sometimes find problems that you need to correct after running an initial analysis.
Also, if your analysis produces an unexpected result, it is quite logical that this will lead to extra checking of what you have done, and further analyses to confirm it.
There's nothing wrong with doing extra things to refine the analysis. **The problem would be refining the analysis and then failing to report on earlier versions.**
**A multiple testing correction would not typically be used for only two analyses.** Furthermore, it is a judgement call whether this counts as two tests or one. If the second analysis was really the "correction" of something flawed, that is not quite the same as repeating two different but valid approaches. And there is not a clear line as to when that becomes true.
In summary, **there is no problem with what you have done, as long as you report it, but your concern with doing this the right way is a very good thing--please keep it up!** Inadequate reporting of this sort of thing is quite common, and it undermines the quality of scientific evidence.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: What does your pre-registered protocol and statistical analysis plan say? You should do that.
If you don't have one, then make sure you do next time.
For the write up here, I think you'll have to present both analyses and explain why you did both.
You should also get away from the belief you seem to have that only results exhibiting a statistically significant result are publishable. That's not the case (see eg <https://mobile.twitter.com/trished/status/723202381622730752> from a journal editor). Reputable journals look at the question addressed and the methods used. If you've asked a good question and done the experiment well, then demonstrating the absence of effect is an exceeding positive and publishable finding.
In medicine, that sort of finding would save the country lots of money and spare patient from undergoing needless treatment. I've no idea what would happen in ecology, but publishing it would at least stop your colleagues going down the same fruitless route.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: @dan1111's answer is excellent if you do not have the resources to repeat your experiment, but under ideal circumstances, no matter how your model was created, **an independent replication** of the experiment would be the best possible evidence of your model's strength.
Much like in experiments involving fitting models to data (such as protein crystallography or data mining), it is perfectly acceptable to refine/train a model after obtaining your initial data, if the model is then fitted with independent results from a different dataset.
For example, you could repeat the data collection (and apply your new filter), and then run your model on the new dataset. If the new dataset confirms the previous one, your model would then be pretty solid.
In any case, no matter which path you take, you should present **all** of your results in your final publication. If you do in fact have the resources to repeat the experiment, the writeup could go as follows:
>
> I collected dataset A, and then performed analysis using filter 1. However, the results were not statistically significant.
>
>
> Upon realising that there were a number of flaws in filter 1, I then modified the filter, removing (anomalous values) and changing the filter to filter 2. Upon repeating the analysis, the results were statistically significant.
>
>
> To reduce the likelihood of "researcher degrees of freedom" affecting the model, I then collected an independent dataset B. Upon repeating the analysis using filter 2, I found that the results replicated the findings of Filter 2 on Dataset A.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: dan1111's answer is quite good, and username_3's answer is also very valuable.
Even though this is a 9-month-old thread, it remains a timeless topic, and so I would like to submit a further thought on the topic for you and/or any other researchers who stumble upon this question.
You asked whether researcher degrees of freedom invalidate your analysis. "Invalidate" might be a bit strong, but it certainly casts serious doubt on the effect you're investigating. Further complicating matters is that, in certain fields (and particularly in certain segments of certain fields), such practices are basically standard operating procedure.
See the story on p. 1 at Nosek, Spies, & Motyl (2012) doi:10.1177/1745691612459058 for a similar kind of scenario. The answer, as I see it, is that you should really treat your results as exploratory, and maintain a healthy skepticism about them. If you want to increase your certainty (and it sounds like you do), then the best answer is to run replications.
Note the plural here. username_3 advocates *an* independent replication--that is, a single replication. While this can be highly useful, as in the example in Nosek, Spies, & Motyl (2012; linked above), it can lead to further ambiguity if the replication yields a similar, but weaker, effect. Therefore, a single replication may backfire by increasing your *un*certainty rather than your *certainty*! The ideal would be to test the effect multiple times, and look at the results in aggregate. Then, you will be much better able to 1) determine the direction of the effect at the population level, and 2) estimate the magnitude of the effect at the population level.
This approach would take a long time, possibly a lot of money (depending on the nature of your research), and it wades into the [murky debate over whether a direct replication or a conceptual replication is more valuable](https://pigee.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/are-conceptual-replications-part-of-the-solution-to-the-crisis-currently-facing-psychological-science/). Despite these limitations, however, the advantage of this method is that you'll end up with a very high degree of certainty about the nature of the effect that you're studying.
If your goal is to increase certainty in your findings, I don't see any viable alternative to conducting multiple replications (both direct *and* conceptual). If your goal is to generate new findings and you're not terribly concerned about the generalizibility of the results, however, then the exploratory method that you described isn't much of a problem.
At least some academic journals seem to prioritize novelty over certainty. But people who care about the integrity of science seem to prioritize certainty over novelty. I think each approach can be valuable, but not at the exclusion of the other.
For maximum transparency while also maintaining publishability, it would probably be best to follow username_3's above answer, which provides a great template to solve the issue if further data collection isn't possible.
This is a particularly thorny question! Research methodology and statistical methodology are inextricably linked. I have written about best statistical practice, on a note that is related to this issue; a preprint of the under-review manuscript is available at <http://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/hp53k/>
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/05
| 676
| 2,707
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student who is looking forward to work in theoretical physics in the future and therefore, I chose a project advisor who is a string theorist. But since, my grades are average and I failed his QFT course (which I am going to repeat anyway), he believes that I may not get a PhD position if I continue to do my undergraduate project with him. And he is trying to push me into fields in which I have no interest whatsoever. And he may be right.
I took his QFT course and I worked hard, despite that I failed, not because I am stupid, it is because I am a bit slow and he went with the course at blazing speeds (but I do not blame him, it is not his fault), but since, I took his course, I got motivated and deeply interested to continue with theoretical physics. In short, I am in this too deep to discontinue. And he keeps asking me this question: “What will I do if I do not get a PhD position in theoretical physics?”. And he wants an answer before he continues.
What should I answer him ?
---
Resolution: I did it guys. The jokes on him. I am a PhD in theoretical physics now.<issue_comment>username_1: Well, he has a point. You are not guaranteed to get a position (no one is), and you should have a backup plan.
Some possible solutions for a physicist are working as a software developer, a quant in finance, or teacher. You may also take a temporary job, hone your skills, and try again the next year. Another pre-emptive option, and what he probably has in mind, is to change to a field you are stronger in, and probably have a better chance of getting a position.
This said, if you really like this field, go for it and give it a shot. Just convince your potential supervisor that you are not delusional, you know the risks, and you are not overcomitting to a wild goose chase.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It may be an implied warning: He thinks you aren't up to snuff to do string theory. Which, since you failed his course, strikes me as reasonable. Many professors are poor teachers: Do blame him, because poor teaching is his fault. However, recognize that the majority of students do not fail his course, which suggests they did something you did not, going above and beyond in some way. (Extra study groups? Tutoring? Visiting him in his office?). How 'deeply motivated and interested' you are is irrelevant, unless it is reflected in your actions.
You are never in 'too deep to discontinue'. Getting a PhD in theoretical physics is hardly your only career option. And it's not a particularly good career option. Getting a PhD is hard. About half of those who start quit. Getting a job with a PhD is no picnic either.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/05
| 558
| 2,459
|
<issue_start>username_0: Does study abroad help enhance a PhD candidate's profile or does it not carry much weight at all? Let's say I took "regular" coursework while on study abroad for a semester, like a core course and not something research-focused.
Would my having lived in Prague or Florence or Shanghai be something that PhD admissions committees consider favorably?
The field is applied mathematics, statistics, or operations research.<issue_comment>username_1: I think this is too broad a question to have a really good answer, but I think the most generic one is: not really. If your study abroad experience could provide some unique opportunity to deepen your knowledge of the field, then that might get some real consideration. Otherwise, it probably won't be seen that differently from other classes, and in some cases viewed more skeptically if they were at a program whose reputation is less established. **EDIT:** In particular, to address the last sentence, *living* abroad will count for extremely little.
As one counterexample, I will mention that when I applied for grad school, one graduate director explicitly mentioned my study abroad experience. However, I think this is the sort of exception that proves the rule: I went to a very [well established program](http://www.budapestsemesters.com/) specific to my field; I was going to a small liberal arts institution, so the study abroad program actually had a stronger reputation, probably; and I took a very ambitious schedule and he mentioned the specific classes I had taken, not the generic fact that I had gone.
My point is, study abroad can mean many things. Use your good sense (or talk to mentors) about how different ones can affect your graduate school applications.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It really depends on the university one is opting or taking admission to and also the country in which the university is present. Sometimes, it gets difficult to get admission into top institutions in one's own country but he/she gets easy admission to foreign university. One such example is India. Mainly in Engineering, you would not get admission to research positions in Top tier institutes in India, rather foreign universities shall give you offers of admissions. However, not all Indians who come back with degree from outside India will get a job or reputation until and unless they have degrees from top institutes of the world.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/05/05
| 226
| 1,048
|
<issue_start>username_0: If having some questionable aspects in the thesis - like not elaborated and rather simple theoretical models -, that did not influence the whole work and results, but might still arise the thought "Why didn't the student know/do better here?", can this have a negative influence when applying to some graduate school?<issue_comment>username_1: It is very unlikely that the graduate admission committee will read your thesis when making admission decisions. The essay, transcripts, test scores, research experience, letters, and publication authorship are far more likely to be used to select the future graduate students.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: My recommendation is for the student to make it clear in the thesis that they *know* these are overly simple theoretical models. If the models don't significantly affect the main results, it is difficult to see how being honest can hurt. And trying to make it appear that the models are more significant than they actually are *could* definitely hurt.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/06
| 1,192
| 4,514
|
<issue_start>username_0: The journals *Science* and *Nature* seem like they are basically the flagship journals for most of the hard sciences, such as biology, physics, or chemistry. Is there an equivalent high-caliber journal for general engineering? For example, if somebody discovers a new algorithm that revolutionizes robotics (and is so profound that it might be of interest to mechanical engineers or computer engineers as well), is there an appropriate outlet for such a thing?<issue_comment>username_1: For your example, perhaps they'd publish through a robotics journal, or an algorithms journal, or a control theory journal. If it is so profound that it could influence various fields, it would trickle from the individual focus of the project towards other fields over time. Individual specific fields do have their own "flagship journals", e.g. "Experiments in Fluids" for fluid mechanics. Perhaps you could use [journal rankings across fields](http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?) but there's no unilateral engineering journals I'm aware of, which I have ever read. I mean, Nature and Science do publish engineering-related research, there isn't a hard dividing line between science and engineering at that level.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US, each branch of engineering has it's respective institute/organization. For instance:
* Electrical: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers - [IEEE](http://www.ieee.org/)
* Mechanical: American Society of Mechanical Engineers - [ASME](https://www.asme.org/)
These are the ones I'm familiar with - there are others for other branches: civil, materials, computer, chemical, biomedical, nuclear, etc. Of course, the lines often get blurred between the branches.
Each of these publish a number of journals. As an electrical engineer, I recognize the clout of IEEE when looking at papers, reviewing someone's publications, etc.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: While *Nature* and *Science* have high impact factors and are widely read, I would not call them "flagship" journals. That said, while your list of "hard sciences" are on topic at *Nature* and *Science*, so are soft sciences, medicine, and engineering. What make journals like *Nature* and *Science* so widely read, is that nearly everything is on topic and within their scope if it is "important" enough.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: [Science](http://www.sciencemag.org/about/mission-and-scope) and [Nature](http://www.nature.com/nature/about/index.html) both claim to be universal in their scope, such that any field, including engineering, can have its top research published in them.
If you do a quick search in their archives, you will in fact find high-profile research from all sorts of engineering fields. I think that Nature does tend to have less breadth and more biology focus. Science, however, is quite broad. For example, here are a few of the top articles that popped up when I searched for "engineering" in Science's archives:
* [Robotics in Remote and Hostile Environments](http://science.sciencemag.org/content/318/5853/1098)
* [Environmental Engineering: Energy Value of Replacing Waste Disposal with Resource Recovery](http://science.sciencemag.org/content/285/5428/706)
* [Searching for a Better Thermal Battery](http://science.sciencemag.org/content/335/6075/1454)
So the equivalent for Science and Nature in engineering is Science (and possibly Nature). Whether that *should* be the case is a different question entirely, upon which [there is ongoing debate](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/09/how-journals-nature-science-cell-damage-science).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I have seen a lot of engineering papers in "Nature Communications". Especially when backed up with heavy experimental results. Here are some examples of Fluid Mechanics and Micro-Robotics:
<http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v2/n4/full/ncomms1289.html>
<http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140128/ncomms4124/full/ncomms4124.html>
Of course, your topic needs to be a real breakthrough.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: The *Science* journal seems to also put out journals for individual disciplines, but only for some fields. For example, Robotics (<http://www.sciencemag.org/journals/robotics>) and Immunology (<http://immunology.sciencemag.org/>), amongst others. I believe that these have similar levels of prestige to the top journals in those fields, although perhaps not as much as *Science* itself.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/06
| 2,031
| 8,487
|
<issue_start>username_0: Does anyone have any good advice for obfuscating one's writing style when reviewing papers? I have a fear that I would inadvertently use the same turn of phrase in a referee report as in some published work, thus revealing my identity, and I'm curious if there is a good general practice to follow to mitigate this as much as possible.<issue_comment>username_1: It's not worth it. Few waste time trying to unblind their reviewers to take retribution for bad reviews. It's just not worth it. The average journal submitter doesn't have enough power to do damage to a random reviewer.
If you need a strategy, trying passing your text through Google Translate to Spanish and back to English. It'll probably be garbage afterwards, but it'll definitely lose any idiomatic turns of phrase that might identify you.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: To add to Bill's answer, most scientists would agree that it is not productive to try figuring out who a reviewer may be, and consciously avoid thinking about it too hard. I make that a point when talking to my students and postdocs. I'm not sure most are that explicit about it, but I've never spoken to anyone who actively tried to find out who a reviewer might be, but I've spoken to many who agree that it's the wrong thing to do.
The whole point being: nothing good can come of it if you know who your reviewers are. But you can violate the spirit of peer review and alienate colleagues if you try too hard. So just let it go.
For you, this means: don't try too hard to obscure your identity.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: As others have said, it really isn't worth trying too hard. But an easy measure to take might be to switch from American -> British English (or vice-versa). Of course, this will only work if your review happens to contain enough words that will indicate your dialect.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Assuming that you really want to do this, here are some strategies that should not strongly diminish the readability of your review:
* If you are from an English-speaking country: Use the spelling conventions of another English-speaking country (e.g., British instead of American English).
* Switch to a strongly different punctuation convention, e.g., [the French one](http://french.about.com/library/writing/bl-punctuation.htm):
>
> On page 2, the authors write : « We could not find any evidence for this. »
>
>
>
* If you typically tend to write long sentences, split sentences up as much as possible. If you tend to write short sentences, make them slightly longer than you’re comfortable with.
* Try to use certain words particularly often, e.g., *particularly.* On the other hand, if you are particularly fond of certain words, avoid them entirely (of course, the main challenge is to become aware of this in the first place).
* If your field has two competing notations for something, use the other one.
* Unless this is a feature of your native language, drop [articles](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_%28grammar%29), in particular if this does not inhibit understanding your review. On the other hand, if your native language is not particularly fond of articles or does not have them at all, use an article wherever possible.
* After you wrote your review, try to replace every rarer, non-technical word by a synonym found in a thesaurus.
* Exclusively use either the [simple past](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_past) or the [present perfect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Present_perfect). Or: Exclusively use either [progressive](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_English_verb_forms#Progressive) forms or non-progressive ones.
* To make you seem German, capitalise some arbitrary nouns, but do not capitalise adjectives derived from proper names:
>
> I disagree with the use of bayesian Statistics.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: I would suggest that you forget your current train of thought. Openly sign your review and write it as if you would tell it to the author's face. If your colleague wrote a bad piece, then help him by pointing out how it could be improved, in a way that does not make him lose his face. If you are working in a falsifiable field and he made an objective error, then explain that error in an objective way (stating facts etc.).
Your new problem is then to figure out how to write your reviews like that, and there are plenty of techniques for that (there should be plenty of resources out there about how to put out criticism without the hurt factor). This is much more healthy and probably also easier than obfuscating your identity.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: To review in a less personal way, I avoid the "I", and use the third person writing. I thus write "the reviewer suggests", "to the reviewer". Accordingly, I write "in the paper", "The authors". This helps me take a more distant look at the work under review.
I learned this from a colleague, received a review in this style. Thus, at least three reviewers use this technique (I won't be detected so easily).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: If you are really serious about maintaining your anonymity, you should keep in mind that not just the style of your writing, but also the content of what you write, contain major clues as to your personality and hence (given how small your field is) to your identity.
I therefore suggest choosing a random subset of your recommendations to the author(s) and flipping them: e.g., if you were going to suggest making the paper longer, tell them to make it shorter instead; if you thought of suggesting to collect more data, tell them they have too much, etc.
Finally, for extra safety, also flip the accept/reject bit. With this technique, your anonymity will be virtually guaranteed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: If you really want to do this, become a better writer. Seriously. Take writer training classes, including the ones aimed at fiction writers. Read books on writing style, non-fiction as well as fiction. Study writing styles. When you read something, take some time to note the phrases, grammar, etc., not just the content. Understand how words and grammar bring meaning across.
Also try some role playing. Go to impro theater classes, or play a RPG. Every now and then, imagine being somebody else, and talking and writing like them.
Once you have developed a sufficient understanding of prose to identify how exactly your style differs from others, you will be able to create one or more personas with a distinct writing style. Write your reviews as this persona.
This requires quite a bit of commitment and you will need to learn considerable skills in that area. On the plus side, you will not only be able to hide your identity, but you will also gain a lot of mastery in writing, which is a very valuable skill for a person judged on the quality of his written publications.
It is up to you to decide if the considerable effort is worth it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Anonymity is ultimately about separating yourself from your speech. Use a standard and concise style that avoids all biases, irrelevance to the purpose of the work under review, and unprofessional language or conduct.
Doing so will additionally elevate any intellectual endeavor and need not be done for privacy purposes alone.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: You could use an automated paraphrasing tool such as [Spinbot](https://spinbot.com/).
The text will need a little bit of editing afterwards... here's what it made of your question:
>
> Benefits anybody have in any way guidance for jumbling one's written work style when assessing papers? I have an apprehension that I would accidentally utilize the same turn of expression in a ref report as in some distributed work, consequently uncovering my character, and I'm interested if there is a decent broad practice to take after to alleviate this however much as could reasonably be expected.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: Many years ago my colleague was asked to review an article written by a well known person in our field of research, who was familiar with the writing style of my colleague.
There were serious issues with the paper and my colleague intended to write a very negative review but wanted to maintain anonymity.
We discussed the issues and I wrote the review. Problem solved.
The article was rejected, but later published in another journal.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/06
| 753
| 3,066
|
<issue_start>username_0: When I give students readings (articles, textbooks, etc), they sometimes literally come to class with entire pages colored yellow with a highlighter. I cannot begin to understand how they discern that everything on a page is of equal value to know.
As such, I would like to know of some suggestions for how to teach my student how to approach highlighting academic texts effectively.<issue_comment>username_1: **Don't.**
<NAME>, et al. "What works, what doesn't." *Scientific American Mind 24.4* (2013): 46-53. -- What Doesn't Work:
>
> HIGHLIGHTING
>
>
> Students commonly report underlining, highlighting or otherwise
> marking material. It is simple and quick — but it does little to
> improve performance. In controlled studies, highlighting has failed to
> help U.S. Air Force basic trainees, children and remedial students, as
> well as typical undergraduates. Underlining was ineffective regardless
> of text length and topic, whether it was aerodynamics, ancient Greek
> schools or Tanzania.
>
>
> In fact, it may actually hurt performance on some higher-level tasks.
> One study of education majors found that underlining reduced their
> ability to draw inferences from a history textbook. It may be that
> underlining draws attention to individual items rather than to
> connections across items.
>
>
> WHAT YOU SHOULD DO INSTEAD: Highlighting or underlining can be useful
> if it is the beginning of a journey — if the marked information is
> then turned into flash cards or self-tests. Given that students are
> very likely to continue to use this popular technique, future research
> should be aimed at teaching students how to highlight more
> effectively—which likely means doing it more judiciously (most
> undergraduates overmark texts) and putting that information to work
> with a more useful learning technique.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **Emphasise that there is no right or wrong method**
I don't think it is worth giving a prescriptive set of rules on what to do and what to avoid. Learning is a very personal process and what works for one person may be useless to another. I think the most useful thing that a teacher can do is to describe as many different techniques or variations as possible, and let the student decide what works for them. It may be that highlighting the whole text just helps them to read by providing something for the hands to do. I believe some dyslexic students find the bright colours more helpful than a black and white page.
**Encourage your students to examine their own learning process.**
Encourage them to think about what it is they are trying to achieve via highlighting - help reading in the short term? Long-term memory retention? Make reviewing the article at a later date easier? But hopefully, if the purpose is to pick out key points, then by making them stop and consider this consciously, they will be able to draw their own conclusion that highlighting an entire page is not helpful.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/05/06
| 742
| 3,133
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are weekly homework assignments based on a textbook. We will finish each problem set and hand that in every two weeks.
Since the assignments are straight out of the textbook, it is very easy to get a copy of the textbook solution manual from online sources.
As an undergraduate student, if I try the problem myself, and then refer to the solution manual only for **comparing the final answers**, am I committed of academic dishonesty?
Since I have referred to the solution manual, it is very likely that I will receive a good score on the assignment. If I also have a very good score on the exam, does my score reflect that my homework wasn't copied from the solution manual?
The homework is only worth 10% of the overall grade.<issue_comment>username_1: I agree (as usual) with @ff524. Consulting an outside source is not academic dishonesty in a **global sense** -- academic culture does not prohibit students and faculty from reading academic sources! -- but it may be academic dishonesty in a **local sense**: i.e., it may be against the rules of your course as set up by your instructor. You can find out whether you are being "locally academically dishonest" in this way by consulting your instructor.
Two further points:
1) Since the homework grade is only 10%, unless the homework is wildly more difficult than the rest of the course, a student who consults answer books to do their homework is unlikely to gain a competitive advantage against other students. In fact, as you hint at, it is more likely that such a student would miss the learning opportunity the homework is designed to provide and this would show up in lower exam scores. The old chestnut "You would only be cheating yourself" seems to apply here.
2) Although consulting an outside source is not academic dishonesty, as ff524 brings up there is still the question of what happens after you consult it. If you do the problem, then look at the textbook, then change the answer if it doesn't match, **and never mention that you consulted the textbook**, then yes, you are at least in danger of having committed plagiarism.
Overall, you should talk to your instructor and find out whether it is permissible to consult the textbook. If it isn't, then obviously you shouldn't do it. If it is, then it really is and you should mention in your homework when you do so. To an undergraduate student this practice may seem strange, but it is really the right thing to do and I would expect your graders and instructors to react well to it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The instructor knows that the solution could be found out from the text book itself. But still he/she gave you the assignment. The expectation is that the student would be honest with self to learn something. At the end what matters is "what you learned in the course" rather than "what score you got in the course". If you solved the problem yourself and then tried to verify and learn something from it, then its good. And, as per me, it is not academic dishonesty. However, if you feel so, you could have a word with your instructor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/06
| 416
| 1,856
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had a paper accepted at a conference in theoretical computer science. However while revising the final version I found an error in the proof of an important lemma. Although I believe the error is fixable, It will require some effort. I will not be able to fix the error before the deadline for the final version.
1) Should I withdraw the paper?
2) Should I leave the lemma without proof, and add the corrected proof at the final version.
What would be the best thing to do? Would I be able to resubmit the paper to some other conference? What would be the damage for my reputation?<issue_comment>username_1: I would contact the programme chair of the conference and ask for advice (perhaps suggest the options you have already given). It could be that by submitting the paper you are under an obligation to attend, in which case you should seek permission from the conference chair to withdraw the paper. To protect your reputation, at the very least explicitly state in the draft that lemma is currently unproven. We ***all*** make mistakes, without exception, so we should all be understanding when they happen to others.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: These type of problems happens in research. If I were in your place, I would have had following choices (first to last):
1. I would mail the conference chair stating the situation and get their suggestion.
2. I would write the final version of the paper along with a letter to conference chair regarding this and would submit both the manuscript and the letter during final camera ready submission.
3. You could request for quick re-review of the new version.
Its not a good idea to withdraw paper like that give the fact that the conference organizing committee spent a lot of time for your work to be reviewed.
PS. I am a CS guy and a researcher.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/06
| 812
| 3,494
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had submitted a manuscript to an Elsevier Journal in February 9, 2016. Usually it takes time of around 1 week to get the manuscript number assigned something like XXXX-D-16-XXX and status changes from "Submitted to Journal" to something else like "With Editor".
However, after waiting for 1.5 months, it didn't change and no number is assigned. Hence, I mailed to the Elsevier support. They replied with as usual "we forwarded your query to journal manager...". I waited for 15 more days. I mailed again. No reply from journal side. The mailing happened 3-4 times with follow-ups and remainders, but, it was only from my side. Still no response from Journal.
I also sent mail to chief editors very politely and waited for status to come from their side. But, after 10 more days of waiting no response came.
I sent final mail stating that "We are withdrawing our manuscript."
Is this type of behavior expected from reputed publisher like Elsevier. One research student can't waste 3 months of time biting nail to get the manuscript number or a response.
Please do help with your suggestions? What should I do? Should I submit to another journal? **Please note that I have not yet obtained the confirmation of my manuscript withdrawn from the journal.**
This is not a duplicate question. I searched thoroughly academia.SE before posting question.<issue_comment>username_1: This situation is indeed not normal, and it sounds like you've hit your tolerance limit with this particular journal. You've done your best to communicate, and now your paper has been withdrawn *even if the journal has not recognized this fact.*
Why do I say this? The fact is, that until you've signed over a transfer of copyright to a journal, the paper is not theirs. In the typical Elsevier publication process, you don't sign that transfer until much later, so your manuscript is entirely yours right now, not the journal's. As such, you've withdrawn it and should do whatever you wish with it at this point (i.e., submit it to a better journal).
Now, it's possible that this problematic journal will do something else strange at this point, like send it out to reviewers despite the fact that you've withdrawn it. If that happens, though *it is not your problem.* If that happens and you find out about it, then hey, they've actually communicated with you, and you have another excellent opportunity to remind them that you have withdrawn your paper.
The only possible ethical problem is if they send it out for review, you get the reviews, and then you reverse your decision to withdraw the paper: then you would be changing your situation to having effectively done a parallel submission (to this journal and wherever you go next), which is almost always considered improper. Stick by your decision to withdraw, and you are fine.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a very surprising situation, and definitely not normal. Withdrawing the manuscript is the appropriate answer here.
I encountered a similar situation recently, and in the end, after 2 months, sent an email to the editor-in-chief to request that our manuscript be withdrawn from consideration. In our case, we got a very quick answer from the editor and a positive decision was made in less than a week. What had happened was that the journal was in the process of being sold to a new publisher, and this had led to problems with follow up and communication between authors and journal staff.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/07
| 411
| 1,801
|
<issue_start>username_0: On StackExchange, some people use their real names, while others hide behind a username.
I was wondering, **do hiring committees look at a candidate's StackExchange account and consider the candidate's activity on these accounts?**
I know committees look at my website, they openly mention this during interviews. They also ask me about things that they would only know about after seeing my website. I have yet to connect my real identity with my StackExchange account, because of my reservations about this.<issue_comment>username_1: As <NAME> said, anyone can look up anything on Google, so a StackExchange account would possibly be looked at. But I would say that this will only occur rarely, if at all. And it certainly would not amount to a formal indication of either acceptance or rejection.
On the other hand, a StackExchange presence is part of one's online presence as a scientist and so may effect your overall scientific presence, prior to ones application for a job. But it will not be a significant part of the hiring process had the hiring committee do not know your stackexchange participation in advance.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it can happen, though I expect it is rare.
I was recently asked in a job interview whether I was the username_2 on math.SE. The interviewer who asked the question is also on math.SE, and we have answered some of the same questions. I have met him in real life and e-mailed him once to ask for a paper, but I had the impression that he primarily remembered me from stackexchange. (I did get the job, but I doubt that my SE participation was a significant factor.)
(Incidentally, this also demonstrates that even if you only use part of your name on SE, your account might still be noticed.)
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/07
| 1,089
| 4,716
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a 4th year Electronics engineering student studying in India. I applied to Master's of Science in computer science programs (I wish to change fields) offered by 11 universities in the US, but my application was rejected by all 11 of them.
One of the important factors (correct me if I am wrong) that I consider is weak in my application is my background. I have no formal background (even though I have lots of informal background) in Computer Science (my university did not encourage Minoring in a second subject).
To address the above stated problem, I am considering enrolling into the "academic graduate pathway program"(by academic I mean that it is not intended to fulfil english language requirements, but to fulfil background requirements for the graduate studies in some field) which is basically an additional year before the Master's program where I will study all the required prerequisites for a Master's program in Computer Science.
The problem is that the cost is an issue. I will have to spend an year's worth of extra money before the Master's.
So, my question :
* Is enrolling into the pathway program necessary (and if yes, how much) for improving my chances of getting into a Master's in Computer science program, or would taking online courses on coursera, edx, udacity ... be equivalent (by equivalent I mean would it benefit equally in the admission procedure)?
* Hypothetically, if I get an offer for a 6 month research internship in a subject of my interest (Machine Learning - which is what I wish to concentrate on during my graduate studies), will the internship, or studying at the pathway program benefit my application more ?
* Are there any other ways, specific to my case, in which I can complete the background requirement, without formally enrolling in such a program ?<issue_comment>username_1: It might be a year, but are there that many pre-reqs *in total*? Isn't it just 3 to 4 courses? Regarding admission, if you want to continue for a master's at that school offering the pathway program, and if that program is really competitive, then the pathway program is crucial for you. The good programs trust their own professors and quality and content of their own courses. They'll be more convinced of your preparation, if you do well. However, if you're not aiming very high for a master's, maybe consider cheaper options to fill in your pre-req background.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: My experience with interviewing/selecting candidates to enter a masters program (in social science, it may be different in computer science) is that the process can be highly variable, and candidates may be rejected for a range of reasons ranging from test scores, to a lack of experience, to not filling out admission paperwork properly, and, unfortunately, discrimination due to ethnicity, gender, age, nationality, etc.
Different programs have different mentalities toward admitting students, some programs might want you to apply two years in a row, because they decided that this is an indication that you are "more serious".
So... It might be safe to assume that your lack of background is the problem (particularly since you were rejected 11 times), however, the only way to know for sure is to ask the admission committees.
In my experience, graduate programs in the U.S. will NEVER tell you why you were rejected, because doing so places them at legal risk. However, they will respond if you ask them "What can I do to strengthen my application between now and the next admission cycle?".
With regard to how you can get experience - many faculty members I talk with don't consider MOOCs legitimate at this time. This may be different, depending on where you are applying. Personally, I would advise you to seek education at a brick and mortar institution, if you can afford to do so.
You mention prerequisites - in my experience this term generally refers to a course that is required to take another course. Thus, prerequisites are typically taken at the same university as a graduate program in which you are enrolled, as credits won't always transfer. What you are describing seems to be taking general coursework.
Unfortunantly, there is a hierarchy in higher education. In my experience it goes:
1. Research 1 Universities (ranked by the Carnage foundation)
2. Other universities
3. Community colleges
4. Online programs
With option one being the most prestigious and most expensive and option four being seen as the least prestigious, and also the least expensive.
In summary:
1. Ask the graduate programs what you can do to strengthen your application.
2. Engage in the behaviors that the programs tell you to.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/07
| 483
| 2,089
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was recently checking one of my paper for similarity. However, TURNITIN checked the similarity against the papers present in student repository in its database. Surprisingly, the paper which matched 72% from the student rep is the same one which I had checked few days back. Now, the similarity comes around 81%.
I wanted to know, whether the journals check plagiarism against such student papers? Because, if they do, it will check against the same paper present in the rep and results will come out to be higher SI.<issue_comment>username_1: If the question is whether academic journals compare submissions to plagiarism databases, I've never heard of that practice. It is not common in psychology.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Why would you care? The real issue is whether your paper contains plagiarism or not. Remember, by the way, that plagiarism is *"presenting the words and/or ideas of other people as if they are your own"*. Turnitin and similar systems are advertised as "plagiarism checkers", but that's marketing. In reality they check for text overlaps, but overlaps do not necessarily constitute plagiarism. Overlaps can appear due to heavy use of cliche phrases or extensive but proper citing of others' works. Yes, universities sometimes take these "plagiarism scores" at face value and can reject your submission without looking further. It makes sense, unfortunately, as high plagiarism scores in case of student essays/term papers/etc. almost always appear due to blatant copying.
Scientific journals and conferences, on the other hand, are supposed to do a more rigorous job. They can (and sometimes they do) check incoming papers with automated systems (since blatant copying happens in this world, too), but they really then must look inside and uncover the real reason of this high score. If you indeed present the ideas of others as your own, that's bad. Otherwise the editors might complain about excessive quotations or lack of original content, but that's another issue, not directly related to your question.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/07
| 522
| 2,164
|
<issue_start>username_0: Other than obvious aspects such as being legible, clear, and understandable (at least in theory) are there any mainstream conventions for flowcharts in research papers? I'm talking about scientific based flowcharts which give an overview of the entire thrust of the paper.
For instance:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bGvQK.jpg)
I have noticed, for instance, that black and white two dimensional layouts are typical, while individual items may have some sort of consistency (e.g. cylinders tend to represent data-storage or datasets in a lot of papers). Is this part of a larger schema that researchers might adhere to?<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to this question is actually not specific to research.
There is an **ISO Norm** on flowcharts that describes the basic elements and what the shapes represent. This is norm ISO 5807:1985.
The bad thing about ISO norms is that you can't simply download them free of charge. But the good news is that in academia, unless you are doing research on flow charts themselves, nobody will care if you do not adhere to the standard in the strictest possible way. The [Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flowchart) on flow-charts is a good starting point, and a search on flowchart elements also seems to lead to some useful sites. Also, looking at the set of predefined shapes in drawing software that is also meant to be used for flow-charting (e.g., Microsoft Visio) gives you a good idea of what elements there are and what they represent.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Apart from the symbol concessions pointed out by @username_1, the uniformity of the flowchart is indeed important.
* Same font size for all labels
* Neat spacing between symbols
* Same set of colours (if any). But sticking to black or light blue might seem more professional.
You may use a set of symbols that best describe your method, but make sure that you mean the same the throughout.
E.g., don't use both rectangles and rounded rectangles to denote processes in the same paper/presentation.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/07
| 1,139
| 5,080
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have two options for my masters thesis (theoretical physics), Professors A and B. A is senior and globally renowned. B is very junior but appears to be making a strong impact in the field.
When it comes to applying for PhD positions, how important is my supervisor? I'm aware that A giving me a strong letter of recommendation will carry much more weight than B, but I think I'm slightly more interested in B's work. Also, B has told me that if the project is successful it will almost definitely result in a publication. A is not so sure.
A and B are actually part of the same group. Best case scenario would be having the two of them as joint supervisors. Let's assume that isn't an option and I must choose.<issue_comment>username_1: Your situation boils into two option: 'Politics' or expertise?
'Politics': Choosing supervisor because of his/her position, name and status like globally renowned and more senior. (I didn't mean 'politics' in a bad way)
Expertise: Choosing your supervisor because of his/her expertise ("I like to be his/her student because I like his/her work"). This may not have only one correct answer because it depends.
p/s: Based from my experience as postgraduate student one of the most important thing is student-supervisor chemistry. For example, you may have easier application, but how about during your journey as a MSc/PhD candidate?
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In an ideal world, publishing great research with a renowned professor who writes you an excellent letter of recommendation is the best outcome. However, if you are more interested in Professor B's work, and are more likely to get published, then working with Professor B is almost certainly the better option.
There are several factors to consider here (and more of course, this is just a quick list):
1. Which professor is doing work I am more interested in?
2. Which professor will have more time to dedicate to helping me with my research?
3. With which professor will I be most likely to be published? (This is likely the most important point if your goal is to get into a good PhD program, and follows directly from the first two points)
4. How well known is the professor?
You should realize that the goal of an admissions committee first and foremost is to determine whether or not you are capable of, and interested in, performing high quality research as a PhD student (and after you graduate). That being said, you want to work with whichever professor will be able to best help them determine that. All that a recommendation from a famous professor really does is add a seal of authenticity to his/her recommendation on your abilities, as they have demonstrated that they are fully aware of the requirements of being a good researcher based on their own body of work. However, that seal of authenticity is typically granted to any professor at a respectable institution. If Professor B is performing well-received, high quality research, then their word will still be trusted by an admissions committee.
With that being said, if you think you'd be able to do great research and get published with Professor A (*and are interested in his/her work*) then that's probably your best bet. If, however, you are more likely to do great research and get published with Professor B, then that is almost certainly the better option. There's really on better indicator to an admissions committee of your abilities as a researcher than being able to point to your own publications. In fact, if you're able to do this, your application would almost certainly dominate other students who had not performed research / been published, but had received letters of recommendation from well known faculty.
Two last points that are worth mentioning:
1. You should assume that letters of recommendation of the form: "This student did well in my class" are essentially useless in a PhD application. These are often called DWIC (Did Well In Class) letters in admissions committee circles, and from my understanding, they are typically completely ignored (the committee already has your transcript, so these letters don't tell them anything they don't already know). On the other hand, a letter of recommendation saying, "This student demonstrated an ability and interest in performing high quality research, and would almost certainly be successful as a PhD student" are very valuable in a PhD application.
2. As user2390246 mentioned, famous professors often don't have time to work directly with master's students. If this is the case, then you're probably better off working with Professor B. Working directly with a professor is very valuable, as they can fill in background knowledge needed during your research, point you in the right direction based on your interests, and perhaps most importantly, *show* you how to perform great research by example. Of course, they'll also be able to write a more detailed letter of recommendation for you, as they'll have witnessed your strengths and talents first hand.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/05/07
| 2,608
| 10,676
|
<issue_start>username_0: Last semester, I took class A and loved the material. It was a subject I excelled in and professor A' was someone I understood well.
I thought it was perfect to take the course 2A and make A' my thesis advisor, but this entire semester, he missed many classes (due to sickness and/or being the Chair of our department), was only available for 'pop in' office visits, rather than scheduled ones or scheduled office hours, and we rarely had homework we could do, because our class was riddled with confusing theory and no examples.
For a grade, he asked us to learn and present material in class. I'm a student who needs to bounce ideas off others in order to really understand material really well.
Since no one (fellow grad student wise) could help and he was always unavailable, I stuck to books and mathstackexchange.
I got turned around many times, and when I had to present, he constantly interrupted me to tell me "what [I] meant to say". After 40 minutes, I got so worked up I started to tear up.
I felt like the time I spent trying to work through material by myself was worthless, and anything else I could say wouldn't be "up to snuff" in his eyes, but I pressed on through hiccups and tears. I know he was trying to make me a better student, but I'm not sure I can take a year of trying to do something right on my own, rarely meeting up with my thesis advisor, and falling flat during my thesis defense.
Questions: do I find another thesis advisor? Is this just a personal problem, and I should consider counselling?<issue_comment>username_1: You've not really commented on your thesis advisor's role as a *research supervisor*, which is quite different from being an instructor. Someone can excel in one role but be [almost] incompetent in the other.
Consequently, it's hard to give you solid advice. The basic question is if your advisor's unavailability is impeding your research progress. If so, then you should definitely explore other options, if possible. For instance, look for a co-advisor for your project with A'. If no options with A' pan out, then you should consider switching advisors.
However, if the teaching style doesn't carry over into research issues, then it may be worth your while to wait and see if things improve.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The choice of thesis advisor is extremely important in an academic career, arguably the most important choice you will make. A good advisor will know your talents and set you a great problem, which you will solve in a timely fashion; a good advisor will also be a tremendous asset to your career in writing letters of recommendation and just plain giving advice. A bad advisor can easily send your career to an early grave. Hence this choice is very important, no pressure. :-)
Given all this, I would urge you to select a different advisor. Although A' taught a class you like, there are plenty of warning signs that this will not be a productive relationship for you. A' is busy, A' taught poorly, you didn't learn much in course 2A, A' disrespected your work during your presentation, etc.
You should find an advisor, perhaps in a different specialty, with whom you have a better connection. This may delay your graduation. That's okay; it's much better to do the right thesis in 7 years than the wrong thesis (or drop out) in 5 years.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I agree with both vadim and username_1: choosing an advisor is important and there's some indication that the chair may not make an ideal advisor for you at present, but there's not enough information to say this person would not be a good advisor for you. Here are some points to keep in mind:
* My personal belief is that how well you can work with someone is just as important as their field of expertise in choosing an advisor. While there are some types of math you may not like, probably there are many fields you would be equally happy working in.
* Both being chair and being seriously ill (I don't know if this is the case for your professor) can significantly cut down on the availability of advisor. On the other hand, some professors not in these situations are rather hands-off, and some chairs can still make a fair amount of time for their students. It sounds like you already know you want a "hands-on" advisor, so that should help you in finding an advisor. (Suggestion: talk to some of a prospective advisor's other grad students to see how and how much they interact.)
* Some students (perhaps you) get more anxious/stressed than others, and some professors are better at putting such students at ease than others. Possibly he was not aware/did not anticipate your reactions to his interruptions and/or maybe he was just cranky because of stress of being the chair and dealing with his own illnesses. It's possible that he can learn to deal with you in a less stressful way (this might involve a conversation, or possibly not).
* I don't have personal experience with this, but I hear counseling can help with stress and anxiety issues. Most universities (at least in the US) have services for such issues, so if this is not an isolated experience for your it may be a good idea to see what is available at your school, independent of who you choose for an advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The clear answer is: **No you should not have this professor as your advisor.** Why? Let's take a look at what you know so far.
>
> Last semester, I took class A and loved the material. It was a subject I excelled in and professor A' was someone I understood well.
>
>
>
You liking and excelling in a subject or a course or the material is totally orthogonal to whether the one teaching it is a good teacher. There were quite a number of courses I took where I got the highest grade but that I felt were terribly taught, because I could see that the teacher was simply unable to teach well. Everyone who was already good enough didn't need the teacher, and everyone else who needed help couldn't follow. In some cases the teacher was trying his/her best, so I'm confident they would eventually become good teachers, but in other cases the teacher had a wrong attitude toward students, sometimes one of utter laziness and sometimes even one of condescension. I don't need to tell you to stay away from the latter sort.
I think it is likely your impression of professor A' was mistaken in some way or another.
>
> I thought it was perfect to take the course 2A and make A' my thesis advisor, but this entire semester, he missed many classes (due to sickness and/or being the Chair of our department), was only available for 'pop in' office visits, rather than scheduled ones or scheduled office hours, and we rarely had homework we could do, because our class was riddled with confusing theory and no examples.
>
>
>
Missing classes due to sickness is not at all his fault, but neglecting his teaching responsibilities due to being department chair is simply being irresponsible, unless you think the department itself has unreasonable demands. However, I would have expected that whenever a professor is sick another professor will temporarily take over the class and continue teaching the material as best as possible.
This judgement is further supported by the fact that he does not put aside office hours for his students, does not give homework for practice (not to say go through the solutions), and gives no examples. It would however be necessary for you to find out whether your classmates in general felt the same way, to ensure that your confusion over the material is not because you lack some prerequisite knowledge.
>
> For a grade, he asked us to learn and present material in class. I'm a student who needs to bounce ideas off others in order to really understand material really well. Since no one (fellow grad student wise) could help and he was always unavailable, I stuck to books and mathstackexchange. I got turned around many times
>
>
>
It is sad that no fellow student was willing to help you. Did you ask him when you could see him (instead of asking whether he is free at certain times)? If so, then he ought to try to help you!
>
> and when I had to present, he constantly interrupted me to tell me "what [I] meant to say". After 40 minutes, I got so worked up I started to tear up.
>
>
>
Whether this was bad teaching depends on exactly how he said it. A teacher who is very meticulous might constantly point out slight inaccuracies, but in a way that does not put down the student. But most teachers do not know how to do this. Even worse, some teachers put down students simply to show off. But the question is about you. We don't need to know or speculate about your professor's motives. **If you cannot take his style of teaching, don't force yourself!**
>
> I felt like the time I spent trying to work through material by myself was worthless, and anything else I could say wouldn't be "up to snuff" in his eyes, but I pressed on through hiccups and tears. I know he was trying to make me a better student, but I'm not sure I can take a year of trying to do something right on my own, rarely meeting up with my thesis advisor, and falling flat during my thesis defense.
>
>
>
Indeed, even if he doesn't mean it, his attitude or style is very likely to be unsuitable for you, in which case it makes no sense to not look for a advisor that is better for you!
>
> Is this just a personal problem, and I should consider counselling?
>
>
>
Of course you should also consider it. As long as your university supports confidential counselling, it may be a good thing for you to go for it, **not because there is any problem with you**, but because they might be able to provide all kinds of help (not just a listening ear) that you surely cannot get from Academia SE or elsewhere on the internet!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't think that your advisor has done anything especially wrong. He was busy as a chair of department, so he cut on the class. This is natural and common. He is a chair, which will be a great asset to you and means probably that he has organizational capabilities, many connections, talents, and good scientific reputation, as well as seniority.
You like the subject of research of your advisor and this is of the up-most importance.
He behaves in an honest scientific manner when you presented your ideas, and this shows seriousness and attentiveness as well as care. Perhaps he is a bit impatient; but nobody is perfect.
Overall, I have not seen anything crucial that would entail you to switch an advisor.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/05/08
| 1,061
| 4,372
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student focusing in psychiatric genetics, hoping to become a professor someday. It is my understanding that a lot of the PhDs in my field end up working in schools of medicine in positions that are 80-100% soft money (even though they are tenure-track).
That sounds... terrifying. You're not a clinician so you can't make up salary with patient care, you're in a school of medicine so there isn't much opportunity to cover part of your salary with teaching... it sounds like you would have to spend your entire career living in fear of a grant dry spell, even once you had tenure (no grants = no salary).
Am I misunderstanding how this works, or is it really that bad? How do people survive in that situation?<issue_comment>username_1: For soft money position, especially NIH funded one, there are a number of things working in your favor. You might be PI on 2 or 3 grants and CI on another 1 or 2 which means that no grant has more than 30 percent of your salary. Since NIH grants are generally 5 years long, it means you write a new grant every year.
The amount of time between getting an NIH grant and starting it can be 12 months. This means you have lead time before you run out of money. The NIH also allows you to get a no cost extension, which allows you to stretch what money you have.
Universities also will often allow you to either front pay or back pay your salary while you wait for a grant that has been awarded to start. This again allows you to cover gaps.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Medical schools have minimum salaries, even for faculty, so even if you have 0% effort on grants, you will still be paid a salary (although a low one--think postdoc salary). Faculty are typically incentivized to meet the % effort goal set by their school through a yearly bonus. The bonus will be the first thing to be cut if you don't meet their goal. If your gap looks like a temporary one, the school will likely cut you some slack for one or two years, especially if this is a tough year for funding (think sequestration), and not reduce your salary. But the pressure will be very high to get a new grant.
There are things you can do to cover a temporary gap. Even in a medical school, you can teach and get a little funding that way. You can also work on the side as a consultant. Finally, you can change your effort allocation on your remaining grants to cover for the budget shortfall. NIH allows you to increase your effort on a grant if the project requires it.
The biggest impact your funding situation will have is on your chances of getting tenure. If you can maintain stable funding during your assistant years, usually it is a good indicator that you will be able to continue to do so once you get tenure.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: As someone who looked at a number of these positions: Basically, the answer to your question is: "Yes, this is just as daunting as you think it is."
There are however some caveats to this, both good and bad:
* Recognizing this, there are many schools that will not put a PhD in that position by not allowing them to apply on tenure track. This was the case with one position I looked at - they were fairly frank that the reason was exactly what you suggested: if my grants all went away, as I couldn't make up it up with clinic hours, they wanted to reserve the right to be able to fire me. Similarly, there are many medical schools where tenure is *extremely* rare.
* While @username_2 is correct that there are minimum salaries, they are low, and there are myriad other ways that the school can penalize someone whose grants have fallen through. For example, cutting down on their lab space is a common one.
* Many institutions do have bridge funding for the unexpected gaps in funding, which can help smooth out minor funding problems.
* As @username_1 noted, *not all the grants have to be yours*. At an old institution of mine, it was fairly common for a considerable %-effort for new faculty to be covered by incorporating them into large, existing, fairly reliable grants.
* Because it's so common, the NIH is organized around the assumption that PIs may be claiming significant %-effort in their grant, unlike some other funding agencies.
But yes, a 100% soft money position does have some very real pressures behind it.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/08
| 1,177
| 5,122
|
<issue_start>username_0: It may sound an insincere question but bear with me, please.
I am just starting to write my thesis. I got some good publications along the way, and I have a couple under review which I hope will get accepted in tier 1 journals. So the question is, does the thesis in itself add a lot of value to my Ph.D.? Or is it necessary just as part of the formalities?
Also, two related questions are
* How do the thesis reviewers' expectation/judgement differ from the journal reviewers' expectation? Obviously, it is the same people usually. But when you (as a faculty) review a thesis, do you look for the same elements as when you review for a Tier I journal?
* If the candidate has good publications, does that make you, in want of a better word, go somewhat easy on the thesis?
My professor is, of course, not letting me take it somewhat lightly. I understand where is he coming from since his colleagues will ultimately examine the thesis. But off the record, how critical is the thesis for my career after the defence is over?<issue_comment>username_1: The importance of a person's Ph.D. thesis per se for their further academic career varies wildly, because the thesis is just one component in a person's portfolio. The significance of that component depends strongly on their intended direction and the contents of the rest of the portfolio.
First and foremost, remember that most people who obtain a Ph.D. do *not* end up becoming faculty at a top-tier research university. If your ambition is to end up in a more teaching-centric position or in industry, then research work is mostly just evidence of one's necessary technical competence. The primary work that such a person is hired for is almost never directly linked to their thesis: in a teaching post you may continue that research, but that is secondary to teaching; in industry you are probably going to end up working on something different, but that will exercise similar technical skills.
Even for those who do aim for a career of self-directed research (e.g., tenure track faculty), however, the thesis is only one part of the more general research portfolio. In some fields or for some particular people, the thesis is the key point of contribution, standing above all of one's other work. For many others, however, either the thesis is a compilation of results that have been achieved and published along the way, or the thesis is only one piece of a greater body of work. It is often the most important because others may have the person as a secondary contributor, but across all fields it is rarely the only significant piece of work.
Moreover, the next step after a Ph.D. is typically not faculty but postdoc, and it is one's ability to "flower" and become well published as a postdoc, with more self-direction and outside of your home laboratory, that is often a much stronger determinant of faculty hiring.
Now, if you write a bad thesis, it will most certainly be a detraction. In general, however, I would say that for most people in many fields, the Ph.D. thesis should be viewed as having an importance only equivalent to 2-4 major papers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> How important is the Ph.D. Thesis?
>
>
>
It depends on what you have in mind for "importance". The intellectual content of the thesis is vitally important, since it stands for what you have accomplished in graduate school. You should make sure it contains your best work, since early in your career you'll be judged partly on this basis.
In the long run, there is little direct value to the dissertation as a document. (Aside from any sentimental value, laying out the historical record, and satisfying bureaucratic requirements.) Any valuable content should be published, and the resulting publications will be the definitive source that the community will rely on in the future. If people are still reading your thesis five years after your graduate, then that's a sign that you have not done an adequate job of publishing your work.
Opinions differ on how seriously to take the dissertation as a specialized form of academic writing. For example, how much additional background, commentary, or literature review should it contain? Should it be written in a different style from published papers? This can vary between countries, fields, universities, departments, and even individual advisors. There's no universal answer, and you'll have to investigate what fits your particular circumstances.
In particular, one fundamental question is whether your dissertation is nothing more than an account of research that has been or will be published, or whether it's an important academic exercise in which you demonstrate your perspective and thoroughness in a way that would not fit in a conventional paper.
I see the former as the default answer for mathematics in the U.S., but the latter is not completely unknown. (There are advisors who insist that their students write far more detailed proofs in the dissertation than one would ever actually publish, to demonstrate that the student can in fact do this.)
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/08
| 309
| 1,361
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a little concerned and need your help. I am applying for a master program abroad. However, I am enrolled in another master program and still have two semesters to finish. I am not sure what to say on my CV: should I mention that I have completed two semesters and want to quit it or should I not say anything about it?<issue_comment>username_1: Wanting to bail from one masters program does not suggest you will successfully complete another. Or that you were thoughtful in choosing the first masters program. Plenty of people out there with two masters degrees.
If you quit, don't say anything about it. If you get asked, say you took some courses but decided it wasn't for you. Unless it's extremely expensive, or you need to quit right now, keep at it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Since your are currently enrolled in a program, you should list it on your CV. At some point you will usually have to provide information on your former education anyway.
In the CV itself you do not have to say anything about wanting to quit, but in the application letter you should explain carefully why you are choosing to apply for another program even though you still did not finish your first master degree. You want to avoid the impression that you are a "quitter" who does not finish things he/she signed up for.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/09
| 773
| 3,299
|
<issue_start>username_0: BACKGROUND
I am an engineering graduate student at a good American university, funded as a Research Assistant (RA). The lab and professor rely heavily on my day-to-day work.
My PhD research is going nowhere and I am far less interested in obtaining a PhD compared to one year ago. Most importantly, my wife wants me to leave and pursue an engineering job with a salary. I have a colleague/friend who has a position lined up for me provided I begin to work ASAP. Ultimately, this would mean quitting my funded research position mid summer (and mid-semester) with little notice. Because of this, I am not expecting a "letter of recommendation" from my advisor/boss/professor, however I don't want to be blacklisted either.
QUESTIONS
How significant of an offense would it be to quit a graduate-level Research Assistantship in the middle of a semester? Would it even be legal to do this at an American university? What would be the consequences for simply turning in my resignation and leaving the program (again, in the middle of the semester with very little notice)?
Opinions from professors, PhD drop-outs, or people familiar with these situations would be great!<issue_comment>username_1: If you are leaving academia permanently, I see few consequences. You should give standard two weeks notice to avoid harming your reputation outside academia. You should also check your contract (if any) and institutional policies.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This will likely vary greatly from one department to another. It will also depend upon your relationship with your advisor, departmental needs, etc. As @tonysdg noted in the comments, it would be a good idea to talk to your advisor about this. Some departments are understanding of these situations.
In my (geography) department, a few years ago we had a student quit his masters degree and his teaching assistantship because he was a single dad and out of money. He dreaded going to his supervisor (who was not his academic advisor) to tell him this. But it ended up being no big deal. Everyone understood, and to my knowledge there were no harsh feelings in the department toward him. Other grad students and professors covered a few classes for him through the rest of the semester, and the department was able to fund a new student the next semester.
Like I said, these things are situational, so your conversation may be different. But I included this answer as a tangible example that it is possible to leave in the middle of the semester without causing bedlam. Also, there may be strict rules against leaving in the middle of the semester, but sometimes these rules can be bent under the right circumstances. Even if you find a rule against what you're thinking about doing, I would still talk to your advisor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I would suggest you have a serious talk with your *wife*, for starters. No matter how empathic your profs and others may want to be, they will certainly be annoyed at having to scramble to fill the gap your 'no notice' departure will create. You will be a central topic over coffee and drinks by those affected. You have not even established a reputation in your field; this no-notice leavetaking will not be a favourable launch for you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/09
| 861
| 3,882
|
<issue_start>username_0: I employ an incremental approach for my PhD research. In other words, at first, I propose a method to solve a problem and publish a paper about it. Then, I update my method by either improving its performance/optimality or adding more features so that it can handle more cases and I keep publishing papers reporting my progress. As a result, I have a pretty good publishing record, more than 5 papers as the first author in less than 3 years. However, between each paper, I sometimes make some major improvement such as completely replacing an old approach by a new (and better) one to solve the same problem.
At the moment, I am about to start writing up and face the problem of how to include all my papers in the thesis. My initial plan is to mainly focus on the last paper that I have published since it contains the best version of my research. However, doing so potentially makes my PhD research look weak since I have published many papers but only use one as the major theme of my thesis.
On the other hand, I am thinking about writing my thesis as a research diary that reports my journey to investigate how to solve one problem, e.g. at first I start with this approach, then after further research, I employ another one which results in better performance... But I am not sure if it is a right way to write my thesis.
My question is how to write a thesis for a incremental research. It would be great to hear from someone who was in the same situation. My field is computer science but answers from other fields are welcome.<issue_comment>username_1: Your research is very interesting (I like your approach lol). It seems like you started with specific algorithm or solution to solve the problem and then you make it more and more general and/or optimize it so it can cover more cases. From one solution you discuss its limitation and problem and then propose a new, modified approach/optimization from the first one. So that will be a fluid story line from one paper to another. If I'm your thesis reader, I would like to see that kind of story telling :)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: From the point of view of the reader, jumping to the most sophisticated version of a method can be difficult. A thesis isn't a textbook, but there are parallels. A textbook often uses an incremental approach starting with almost a toy model to get the basic concepts sorted, before making it more realistic. The assumed background knowledge of someone reading your thesis *might* let you skip the first step but not necessarily (don't write just for the examiners). It also allows you to indicate *why* you made certain decisions in the final version.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: So essentially, you went about your doctorate in the manner a tenured prof goes about a problem: milk it thoroughly in a sequence of incremental results. If your papers are indeed incremental, without trade-offs that call of deep analysis, I don't think this makes for a great doctoral work. And I'm speaking from a CS perspective. And I would like to caution any current/prospective students reading this. *Unless this is a monumental problem*, what do you think is gained out of presenting 5 different ways of solving it (as a doctoral thesis)? You ought to have moved to neighbouring problems, or to a completely different one, rather than climbing up the same hill over and over again. But what is past is past.
I would take the presentation of such a thesis very seriously. Maybe you will need to work a little harder to put all of these solutions in perspective. Maybe this requires more work. But think properly about "what is to be gained out of presenting all of these different ways?" Clearly, you have done the problem to death by now. It seems to me that your best chance is to analyse the various solutions in an intelligent manner.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/09
| 737
| 2,797
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am curious to know why we call a research paper, a "paper" in the singular form...?
People put a huge effort in writing this "paper" ... when you talk to an outsider (non-academic) about a "paper" they think its just a single paper. It is very funny.<issue_comment>username_1: Although I agree with Cape Code that this is not a question related to academia and should be closed, I know this one of the top of my head so i'll save you some Google-ing.
The reason is because the first mass production of "paper"s of a standard size where printed for distributing the news. The word "news" is a very funny English word, for all sorts of reasons. It ends in an "s" but is not plural, eg "what are the scores?" is correct, but "what are the news?" is not. Furthermore, it is uncountable, so although it can be followed by a singular verb, you cannot count it like "Do you have *a* news for me?". People instinctively know "Do you have news for me?" sounds unusual, and so they often pop in an "any" into the middle to make it sound more grammatically compliant.
For this reason, early usage of "news paper" referred to a collection of 1 or more printed news. "news papers" referred to several of these collections. This eventually became 1 word, newspaper, which as a single noun now plays by the rules a bit better, masking the weirdness of "news". However, the concept of a "paper" being one or more sheets of printed information stuck, and is still used in academia and elsewhere where some form of news is being printed, but not as a newspaper.
For the record, I know all this because I got into an argument with a colleague about it, and I insisted it must be because of paper (the material) is what people are referring to. "I brought the paper!", since the common person would have only seen paper in relation to multiple sheets of it. I was wrong.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From [newspaper](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper):
>
> A newspaper is a serial publication containing news, other
> informative articles, and usually advertising.
>
>
>
The first alleged newspaper was printed in 1605, the first scientifique journal in 1665, le [Journal des sçavans](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_des_s%C3%A7avans). It contained obituaries, church history, and legal reports. "Journal" is the French for "newspaper". Many scientific publications are still called "journals". The work "paper" is [indeed more general](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_(disambiguation)#Society.2C_government.2C_and_business), and also denotes identity or legal documents.
All in all, the proximity between the work of a researcher and a journalist, as well as the proximity in time, may explain the use of the same terms.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/09
| 1,297
| 5,332
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently writing my thesis in mathematics and in the introductory part I want to give a brief overview over a field I'm not very familiar with. There are some results in the book I'm reading which are stated as exercises for the reader, which I'd like to include as theorems in my thesis. I don't want to prove them, since this part is only meant to give the reader an overview of some basic concepts and to show him the importance of some constructions which I will generalize later (which is the actual bread and butter of the thesis). So how do I deal with this:
* Don't give any citation at all and assume these concepts are well known to anyone working in the field? - I wouldn't give the definition of a vector space in my thesis, so this might be justifiable. However, I wouldn't consider those theorems as basic as the definition of vector spaces...
* Do a heavy amount of googling to find sone sources which prove those theorems? - This might take a considerable amount of time, so I'd like to avoid it. It might also turn out to be impossible, since the phrasing might be different enough in the original sources so that I just won't find them
* Cite the Problem from the book I'm working with? - I don't think I can do this, since the results aren't proved in the reference I would give
Note that none of my results rely on any of these theorems.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Don't give any citation at all and assume these concepts are well known to anyone working in the field? - I wouldn't give the definition of a vector space in my thesis, so this might be justifiable. However, I wouldn't consider those theorems as basic as the definition of vector spaces...
>
>
>
The general idea for citations is to include a reference is if you would not assume a typical reader of your thesis/paper to know these results. Think: will this reference be useful for someone reading this? For a thesis, one is often a little more liberal with background and references than a paper. Since you yourself don't seem to know (proofs of) these results, I would include a reference, though of course it's your choice.
>
> Do a heavy amount of googling to find sone sources which prove those theorems? - This might take a considerable amount of time, so I'd like to avoid it. It might also turn out to be impossible, since the phrasing might be different enough in the original sources so that I just won't find them
>
>
>
I think this is wrong attitude to take. I understand you may be under time pressure, but you should try to understand everything in your thesis as well as you can, including related work. It's often not feasible to understand proofs of every result you mention (maybe you will many years later), but you should at least know references. Whenever I write a paper (or writing course notes) I spend a long time reviewing literature. In addition to making you feel more comfortable about what you're writing, being familiar with the literature is important for your mathematical education.
What I would do is spend an afternoon skimming through other books/surveys on the field. If it really is something rather basic, there should be another book that goes through this. If that doesn't work, you can try to prove the exercises on your own as well as ask your advisor if s/he knows a reference where these things are proved.
>
> Cite the Problem from the book I'm working with? - I don't think I can do this, since the results aren't proved in the reference I would give
>
>
>
You can, but I agree it's generally nicer to the reader to provide a reference that has an explicit proof.
All of these questions you asked are things that you should be able to ask your advisor, though it's good if you can show some independence by being able to survey the literature on your own.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In mathematics, if you cite a result, you should really be able provide the proof if somebody asks for it. So I would strongly recommend against option 3.
One thing you might consider is writing the author of the textbook, explaining your situation, and asking if he's willing to send you a proof. Then you can cite it as
>
> problem 8.35 in textbook, proof provided by private communication with [author]
>
>
>
even if he would rather not have a proof of the exercise published.
Of course, if he replies "I think I had a proof when I wrote the textbook, but I've forgotten it now," you might need to come up with a proof in some other way.
There is at least one exercise in a textbook whose proof is highly non-trivial, and was an open problem for several years before a journal paper giving the proof was published (and the only indication in the textbook of this is that part (b) of the problem is "optional").
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If it's a fact that needs to be justified but is not relevant enough to devote space in your thesis to proving it in detail, it's better to cite a source that gives the proof, if you can find one. If you can't, I recommend trying to come up with a proof of your own, and writing in your thesis something like
>
> This fact can be found as an exercise in [Textbook, problem 3.14] and can be shown by [1-2 sentence description of the proof strategy].
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/09
| 405
| 1,883
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am trying to publish my paper for almost two years, after two major revisions it has been rejected by an editor of an international journal. My field of study is geophysics. They complain about the English, and that does not make any sense because my paper was read by my American friend. Last time one of the reviewers complained that he does not understand algorithms that I have used (artificial intelligence). I gave detailed explanations of these algorithms instead of citations. Every time the editor changes the reviewers so I got new minor comments. How can I solve this problem? Should I try another journal, or what?<issue_comment>username_1: Welcome to research. Trust your work and rewrite the paper. If the only problem is the English, after a few revisions the writing style should be greatly improved. Also, consider asking someone who is either fluent in English or an English teacher to proofread the paper.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Reading poorly written English is aggravating. International students get more leeway for bad grammar, with the expectation that if the science is sound, the grammar can be fixed. A rejection after a major revision means you failed to adequately respond to comments made by the reviewers. Pick a different journal and try again. Don't trust a friend to read the paper: pay a professional editor to fix the paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Assuming your research is solid, your arguments well-supported, and your acknowledgements presented as expected by this journal, writing style and conventions (as Alexandros and Mikey Mike suggested) may be the key. Read some articles published in this journal--any buzz words or acronyms that enjoy special favour? Is YOUR writing style too florid? Some technical and scientific journals abhor 'poetic' phrasing.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/09
| 690
| 2,732
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been a visiting researcher to fulfil my Ph.D. and to do the experimental step of my Ph.D. A month ago I understood that my host professor stole my Ph.D. topic and idea and he is writing a proposal about my project and wants to apply for a grant for it. I come here to do some cooperation with them but he stole it and wants to have the idea for himself.
What can I do to protect my project? Is there any place that I can complain? I am working a lot on my Ph.D. and don’t want to see that this person easily steals it.<issue_comment>username_1: You are clearly (and rightly) very emotional right now, since I suspect you only recently found out about the situation, and you probably have a month or so to go before you're done working at the lab. Therefore, I think it's important to do two things right away:
1. Calm down & get some fresh air, **do not** confront anyone about this while you are emotional,
2. Create a timeline of the contributions you have made to the project both before and during your time at the host lab. This timeline needs to both be fair and complete, because you may not get a chance to add things in later. At the same time, don't go overboard (e.g. Tuesday 2:45pm, vortexed a tube.)
Once you have this list/timeline of contributions, e-mail it to your host supervisor in a week or two (via a non-interested 3rd party like Google Mail) with the subject/content of:
>
> "Hi boss, i'll be leaving in a few weeks, so I thought now would be a
> good time to identify the contributions made by your lab and myself,
> so we can discuss publication authorship properly when the time
> comes."
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As someone who has more than a bit of familiarity with the German system, I have to say that your story is a bit baffling to me. Being able to show prior results—particularly in the form of an existing peer-reviewed publication—would be of enormous benefit in getting a grant from the [Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)](http://www.dfg.de), the national funding agency of Germany. Consequently, working with you and being a co-author on your publication would *help*, not hinder, the professor's grant application.
On the other hand, it is entirely possible that the professor may have thought that he could use an *alternate* approach to generate your results. While that may look like "stealing" your PhD project, that is actually not the case when different techniques are being proposed.
My recommendation for you would be to publish a **high-quality** paper out as quickly as possible. Once it's established in the literature, it's a lot harder for someone to claim credit for basically doing the same thing.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/09
| 1,493
| 6,473
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently 2/3 of the way through a degree program, and am continually shocked and dismayed for what my school is passing off as higher learning.
* The books, which are almost all made in house, are full of typos and basic factual errors.
* Professors are late to chats and routinely do not respond to emails, requiring calls to advising and involving people in the chain above them to get basic information such as new class times, or asking that a paper I turned in on time be graded.
* Poor IT infrastructure leading to bad grades (submitted assignments disappearing after the cut-off time, making it appear as if I never submitted anything, leading to me getting a zero grade), recorded lectures having no audio, and e-readers returning license errors
* An automated testing system which is full of factual errors and ambiguous language leading to it being impossible to answer some questions by anything other than luck. Gods help you trying to determine the exact wording they want in the fill-in-the-blank answers. Humans are not involved in this system, it's all automated string matching.
* Generally nonchallenging and inappropriate for level material, including a 202-level math course covering grade school word problems, and a computer security engineering course covering basic computer literacy.
I've reported all of these issues as far up the chain as I know how to do, yet nothing is getting done. Given the quantity of money I'm paying these clowns, I'd imagine that I have some kind of rights.
Is there anything I can do other than grin, deal with it, and come out with a degree I'm not going to be proud to have? At this point, I just want my money back and the opportunity to go to a school where I'm actually learning things, rather than repeating pre-HS.<issue_comment>username_1: You mentioned that the college is accredited. You might want to contact the accrediting body (it's usually regional, like SACS and NEACS) and alert them to what's going on here. I'm very sorry to hear you're having such a poor experience with this distance learning program. It's possible that it's vastly inferior to the school's on-site program, although given the overall bad impression I'm getting of the institution from your question, maybe not. But yes, it's time to complain to an outside agency.
As for how to salvage your education, I don't think transferring credits is a bad idea. Yes, your learning suffered, but I'm guessing you're not made of money and you want to be able to get through this degree without mortgaging a child to do it. You need to transfer into a legitimate program as soon as you can, without waiting for the complaint process to resolve. But I would still get in touch with the accrediting body. This is the sort of thing they need to know about.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you're dissatisfied, the easiest approach is to vote with your feet and wallet and leave. Your best bet would be to transfer to a proper, accredited program ASAP. Don't throw good time after bad time.
For an accredited program, it's hard to believe that all of their instruction material is made in-house. This is not the norm. From an accreditation standpoint, make sure the accrediting body is legit.
Alternatively, as your program is accredited, you can raise concerns with the accrediting body. This approach is both costly, time-consuming, and not for the faint of heart. Whatever the outcome, you will likely be on unfriendly terms with the administration for the duration of your stay.
That said, you've said that so far, you've only taken gen ed classes. At many universities, these general classes are often not indicative of the quality of instruction you'll receive in upper classes. Keep that in mind.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with the answers that @Akat and @username_2 have posted. However, certain circumstances will prevent a student from leaving (financial aid, inability to transfer credits, family reasons, etc.). Leaving would probably be the best option, but in the case that you cannot leave, here is what I would suggest:
**Be brutally honest on course evaluations**
My department takes these pretty seriously and readily makes instructor changes based on them. Occasionally you will have a tenured, full professor who isn't going anywhere no matter what you say, but your response on course evals *can* make a difference - probably not for you at this point, but an honest evaluation could improve the situation for others that come after you.
**Do something to set yourself apart from your classmates**
If something is factually wrong in a course manual, respectfully challenge it during lectures, in assignments, etc. As an instructor, I really like it when students do this, and these students are stuck in my mind after doing so. I give good references to good students; I give great references to students willing to respectfully (this is vitally important) challenge my lectures/views and still perform well in the class.
If there is a better way to tackle a problem than what your instructor recommended, then try it. Try the problem both ways, compare the results, and explain your findings. If your prof is making you create charts in Excel, create something publication quality in R with ggplot2 or in Python with matplotlib. Instead of creating documents and presentations with Word and Powerpoint, create some awesome looking alternatives with LaTeX (these are just simple examples). You will probably learn new skills in the process which will be valuable in the future.
Don't let yourself sink down to the level of the program.
**Consider the possibility that you may need to give your instructors more slack**
For example, I can sympathize with an instructor who is not from the US that makes typos, as long as the concepts are still clear. If I was teaching in another language, I would make mistakes as well. Additionally, don't fault a philosophy professor, for example, for not having the greatest technical/computing skills. When a person is skilled technically (which it sounds like you are), this is difficult not to do, but don't let *your* expertise get in the way of seeing another person's expertise.
That said, if criticism really is warranted, then don't hold back.
---
Like others have said, getting out is probably the best option, but in case you can't, try to make the best of a bad situation.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/10
| 674
| 2,527
|
<issue_start>username_0: Services like Google Scholar can provide you with the h-index of a given author *at present*. Is there a way or a service that provides a *time series* of the h-index (or the number of publications) as a function of time, or even provides a plot of this time series?<issue_comment>username_1: Scopus has an author search option. You can then examine a range of graphs that show academic output over time. Many universities have a subscription to Scopus.
As with any citation and publication based metrics, the values are contingent on the citations and publications included in the underlying database. Scopus is fairly broad, but there is quite a lot of quality control. So the numbers will be quite a bit smaller than for example Google Scholar. Another option might be [PublishOrPerish](http://www.harzing.com/resources/publish-or-perish/) which is a downloadable free program which uses Google Scholar as the underlying data source.
Below I show an example for <NAME> (one of the most highly cited psychology researchers) using Scopus.
### Citations per year
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ygH6H.png)
### Documents by year
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/8kNoI.png)
### h-index by year
I could not see any easy way to just get the h-index by year. However, the h-index tab, does allow you to filter on different years. So you could manually, change the end year and repeatedly obtain the h-index to see how it went up each year.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Wp4h0.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Zd4Gg.png)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not actively aware of any tool that does this, although I vaguely remember seeing such timelines for various bibliometrics tools. However, if you are able and willing to do a little bit of coding, it should be reasonably easy to code this up yourself.
For instance, [SCOPUS](http://dev.elsevier.com) has an API that you can use to get all citation data for an author. From there, you should be able to can just browse the publications that cited this year to year backwards, remove all publications whose publication date is after the date you are currently looking at, and recompute the h-index. A Python script to this end should be quite easy to set up.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/10
| 529
| 2,372
|
<issue_start>username_0: We recently received comments from the reviewers after revision. Comments were positive, one reviewer asked us to do an experiment. EES status says its minor revision, editor's email do not say it's a minor revision and he insists we do this experiments. Ending the email, he writes we would be glad to reconsider the revised ms. Though the reason given by the reviewer to do the experiment can be rebutted, it's more of clarification issue.
Should we rebut or do the experiment; Also, does the minor revision mean it's a in principle acceptance?<issue_comment>username_1: "Minor revision" only means "in principle accepted" if it's an "accepted with minor revisions". However, these minor revisions are usually seen as a must, and the paper can indeed be rejected if the editor or the referees (who may or may not get to see the revision) think that the points are not properly addressed.
Of course you can try to not do the experiment and write a rebuttal. It is possible that this will work but nobody can tell you what will happen.
If I try to read between the lines, it sounds like the editor is not totally positive about the paper yet, but I am not particularly good at reading between the lines. In the end it depends on how convincing the rebuttal is.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In a journal, "minor revision" can mean anything. Only "acceptance", not "conditional acceptance", "could be accepted", "address minor comments before acceptance" is really acceptance; any of these can be turned into a rejection, and I've seen that happening, both rightly and wrongly.
So, either have a very good argument why you do not need to do the experiment, or, if you can do it, then proceed to demonstrate convincingly that you took the comments seriously.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **Answer:** Contact the editor and ask if they would consider a rebuttal.
**Reason:** Had a very similar situation: one of three reviewers wanted an extra experiment and the editor indicated we needed to consider running another experiment. We contacted the editor and asked if they would be willing in principle to consider a rebuttal rather than running an extra experiment. They said that they would consider it but would give us no guarantees other than that. We were successful: the reviewer backed down.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/05/10
| 2,293
| 9,939
|
<issue_start>username_0: Often I have found that research students who have learned to do experiments have not learned to use software to handle their data effectively. It's not within my power to insert the appropriate training into their prior education. Teaching people to program or use software is not within my area of expertise or a priority for me. I have observed other research supervisors expecting their students to "teach your self to use what I use" but I realize that what I use, while very powerful, may not be best for a beginner. Also, I picked my tools a long time ago so the state of the art may have changed. What should I recommend to my students, and why? I would like for students to rapidly acquire flexible, durable analysis skills.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I would like for students to rapidly acquire flexible, durable analysis skills.
>
>
>
Your criteria are quite stringent! I think you are going to have to compromise at some point along the line. If you want them to acquire the skills rapidly, then they are probably going to have to use menu-based software, which will be limited in its flexibility. The long-term and more flexible solution would be for the students to learn statistical programming, but that of course has a steep learning curve.
In my opinion, **R** has a lot of advantages. [I imagine you have already come across it, so I may be stating the obvious here and you may have a good reason for ruling it out, but...]
* It is free and open source, and therefore once learnt, the skill can be taken anywhere.
* It's massively flexible when you take into account all of the add-on packages
* Students can "ease" into it using R commander, which gives a menu-based interface but also outputs the corresponding code.
* It is popular and therefore very well resourced.
The best compromise that I can think of would be to start the students off using the menu-based **R commander** package, but encourage them to inspect and customise the code where possible. If you are not able to give training yourself, it would probably be a good idea to arrange for someone else (either in your department, or pay someone external) to give a course. There are lots of good self-learning resources available, but a course ought to speed up the learning process. When they see how powerful the software is, it is likely to encourage them to put in the time and effort to learn to use it well.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Matlab/Octave is appropriate for physics (experimental)
Matlab is very well documented. and get all the graphs done you need as a physicist. It will allow your students to focus on the physics problem instad of hunting bugs or documentation.
Be sure that your university includes the statistics toolbox in the license.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: We're talking about students here, not currently practicing researchers, and so my comment is really made with respect to future trends rather than the current state of play which I believe the other answers address.
I believe that in the future, more and more people will be expected to know how to program if they are going to do any kind of data analysis. Perhaps not on the more theoretical side, but since you said your students are doing practical work, I will assume that is not an issue. Tools like R and Matlab are good places to start if you are unfamiliar with programming and want to get something done right now; but honestly, since the barrier to entry for programming in fully-fledge generic programming languages is so low these days (and expected to get lower), I see no reason not to point students in the direction of a full programming language and the modules they might want for doing statistical analyses that are relevant to their field.
Whilst R and Matlab are fine choices, personally, I would introduce my students to something like Python, and the excellent modules that are avalible to do all the data analysis that can be done in R/Matlab that exist in the Python ecosystem. Python has a very gradual learning curve at the beginner end of the spectrum, while at the other end advanced programmers can write code thats just as fast as C if they take advantage of the newer, optimized interpreters. These 2 pros, plus the plethora of modules for doing any kind of analysis/plotting R or Matlab can do, is what has made Python the defacto language of choice in my field (Bioinformatics), and likely a powerful tool under your student's belts going forward with whatever they decide to pursue in life.
Of course, there are other languages out there, such as Java, Julia, Rust, etc - however I would rather teach those as second or third languages to learn, once you have a strong foundation in Python.
For the record, i'm not saying "teach them python", i'm saying just make them aware of it's existence.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Teaching how to program **should be a priority** in research, in at least Sciences. Doesn't matter what STEM field you are in, almost certainly you will need to deal with data, and using "black box" software only teaches to do whatever the software tells you.
I've seen people give results using standard deviation and mean for non-normal distributions, and its just because they didn't know how to plot their distribution and just used black box software. I've seen people rename file by file a folder with 500 files with data. These are worse than "Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion".
Since nowadays almost all research in STEM is performed using computers, understanding computers is a must.
My recommendation is to make people learn MATLAB if you have access to it, or Python if you don't have access to MATLAB or you are a Open source / free software supporter. Both of this languages are designed to be very high level, and not need "advanced" computer science skills (such as inheritance in OOP, or pointers in C)\*. Both of the languages are widely used and there are numerous free online courses to learn, in Coursera, Codeacademy, Udacity, EDx or any other online learning platform.
Learning how to code to the basic point should take less than 2 months, considering that meanwhile the student is also doing other things. And they can save thousands of hours of tedious work.
Let me repeat the key message: **We need researchers with programming skills**. Its incredibly important skill to be able to perform research in the XXI century.
While this answer mainly focuses in STEM, basic programming in other fields that use statistics is also useful.
\*Of course, knowing about that helps.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Often I have found that research students who have learned to do experiments have not learned to use software to handle their data effectively
>
>
>
What kind of data handling and what kind of software program you're referring to? Is it programming language that analyze experimental data (R, Python/C++) or software (like SPSSS/Minitab, Matlab/Octave, Atlas.ti/VUE etc)?
R, C++ would be have a very steep learning curve. Even Python would not an easy entry for student who have no basic programming in their undergraduate years (based on my personal experience, it's not the syntax itself, but the early step on choosing and install IDE, configure module etc but maybe that just me).
This may sound cliche but for not starting flame wars about which software/program is the best, it all depends on the needs and background of the users. For example, those who has background in statistics would like to use R (R can do lot more than statistics, I know) but for biology students who do research in fermentation, maybe Minitab is enough. Same thing with Python/Ruby/Julia or C++/Fortran or Word/LaTeX etc.
Ask them what they learned in their undergraduate years and see if they can fully maximize it in their research. For me, the first step is not to learn fancy software but to have a clear understanding how to do research and a good research practice (research methodology, workflow, raw data management etc) and only then introduce software/program to help them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: The specific platform is going to be discipline specific so what will work for my students may not be best for your students.
However, if you teach them a proper digital-data-analysis workflow, then they will be able to transfer good habits to whatever specific analysis tool they are using.
For my students, I emphasize:
1) proper data archiving - each data set contains only data stored as plain text
2) proper metadata - each data set has accompanying detailed metadata
3) using code for data analysis - all data manipulations are completed with reproducible code and the original data are never altered
4) version control - we use git but that's just my preference
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Software that I have tried in my field:
MATLAB, SPSS, WEKA, GAMS, DigSilent, ETAP, PSpice, MS Excel, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, ...
My recommendation: MATLAB
Positive points of MATLAB:
1. It has both GUI features and coding (of course, they should go for coding).
2. The community is active and good.
3. Their documentations is very good.
4. Their examples are excellent.
These all help learn MATLAb quickly.
What I have done in MATLAB:
Genetic Algorithm, Linear and Nonlinear Optimization, Clustering, Classification, Plotting, Parallel Computing, Neural Networks, ...
Plus, tell them to work with LATEX as well. They will thank you later. Though, they should also be already an expert in MS Word.
When they get into one area in detail, let's say Optimization, then it might be time to move to a new software like GAMS. You will still need MATLAB for plotting your results, ...
Although almost all academic institutes support MATLAB and have a license, industry are fan of more freeware, like Python.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/10
| 519
| 2,245
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently checking proofs for a Springer article. The editor has asked us to provide permission details for all figures.
One of the figures is a screenshot from a software product, as found in the front page of the product's website. We use it to exemplify typical interfaces found in these types of products, and cite the site that it was taken from. With a bit of work we could re-generate the same image by downloading the product (its free, but supported by a for-profit company) and adding in sample data.
Since the screenshot is promotional material by the company, must I contact the company to request permission to use it in our paper, given that attribution is already correct, or can I already claim fair use due to its status as "promotional"? Re-creating the screenshot would also rely on fair use, according to [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26526/how-does-copyright-work-on-screen-captures).<issue_comment>username_1: It doesn't matter if the material is promotional or not. It doesn't matter if the material is freely available or not. What matters is copyright. You have to ask if you want to use copyrighted material.
On a different note, the company may really be unhappy if you use a screenshot which might be of bad quality (at least it's a pixel image) instead of a high quality, tailor made (possibly vector graphics) image for that purpose.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As the editor requires you to, it would be better to sought the permission from the site and cite the same on your paper. You may also include the caption
>
> "Courtesy of *X* [citation]" or "Included with permission [citation]"
>
>
>
along with the figure so that the permission aspect would not be questionable.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, most definitely, if you have used an image that is from a companies website then you absolutely have to get their permission. Unless they have released it under a Creative Commons licence then you need their permission to redistribute it.
You could probably call them and they'd tell you right away if it was okay or not (which under those circumstances I'd be almost certain it would).
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/10
| 1,890
| 7,961
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just came across quite a big problem for an interpretation my professor puts forward in her recently published book (a book containing original research in the humanities, not a textbook). I am not 100% sure, but I am pretty sure that I am right.
The error is not a factual error, but an error that concerns the logic of her argument. If somebody interprets a text, and I find very strong inconsistencies in this interpretation or a logical error even, this might not be objectively wrong per se, but it can come close to it in certain cases.
How am I to approach this? Shall I send her an email, explaining everything, or shall I try to publish it as a paper (assuming I am right about the severity of the problem)? I am worried that if I tell her, she might publish a paper herself or will tell me it's not so severe. I am bit paranoid here, I know.
I am also concerned with how to tell her - if I do. Shall I be confident and explain that I think I have found a problem for her interpretation or is this too bold? Or shall I formulate it more like a question? In the latter case, I am worried that she will not realise that I did really see the mistake and am only being polite. I don't want her to think that I pointed to something by asking a question, but that then she *really* came up with it. I have the feeling it would make more of an impression, if I would point straight to the problem *as a problem*. Of course, there is then also the possibility of her not liking me for this.
By the way, I am a Master student in the humanities. I will not do my PhD with this professor (or even at the same uni).<issue_comment>username_1: No, you won't make an impression by being bold. You are a Master student and she is a Professor, even if you are 100% sure of what you say, you can't just throw your arguments at her face: because **you have to show her respect**, even if what she wrote is blatantly wrong.
The best way is to point it out as a **clarification question**, like:
>
> I don't understand this point, because it seems to contradict with
> [what I have read in another book ; what we know about the
> organization of this particular structure ; with the latest research ;
> etc.].
>
>
>
In addition to not being bold, this approach has the benefit of allowing you to present your arguments point by point without seeming like you are arguing (you are trying to clarify a point you don't understand, so you can continue until you clarify it enough). And if it's your mistake, then you will learn something and you can go away without being tagged as a "smart-ass".
I used this approach on several occasions, and it always worked wonderfully well, and even opened a few opportunities (because it looks like you are pretty interested in the subject, which is probably true since you could spot an error).
And remember that **making mistakes is easy, particularly when writing a book!** So don't be too harsh on someone just because a few errors slipped in: this is bound to happen. However, if the book is full of errors, then you have another problem: do you really want to work with someone that is clearly incompetent or delusional? In this case, you don't need to point any error, you should just get out as fast as possible!
/EDIT: after OP comment clarifying that it is about a substantial reasoning error in a theory and not just a factual error: you can of course discuss with the professor, but be prepared that the debate can become heated. And that's totally normal and you should understand it: she studied the field for years, spent a couple more years to design her theories, and you think you can break her theory at your level of knowledge and study. Of course, this is possible: it is always easier to find a counter-example than to define a new theory. But remember that she put a lot of work in her theory, so even if the theory is wrong, you have to respect her for her effort in trying to advance the research in her domain.
Now you are free to either talk to her or publish a paper, it's your choice, but be sure to respect the person behind the research: **as a researcher, your goal is to rebuke/confirm hypotheses and theories, not attack the person designing them.** Focus on the content rather than the person (**forget about trying to impress**), and you should be good.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: First: Slow down.
In the academic world, books are simply collections of known things presented in a unified fashion. In fact, in some disciplines, it's almost unheard of for someone to release something novel in book form. Additionally, while book chapters are reviewed by editors and (occasionally) peers, it's not the same peer-review setting as we have in journals. To that extent, people don't typically write papers rebutting an interpretation put forth in a book; they write papers rebutting the article(s) upon which the book chapter is founded. If a book chapter does indeed contain an error, then it'll just have to be fixed in the next revision, if there is one. As such, your concern about publication is probably far overstated.
Secondly: Are you sure you have found an error? Has anyone else reviewed your work to validate what you've seen? Are you sure that you fully understand the topic? If I was a betting man, I'd place my money on the professor who's been studying the field for years and has (presumably) thoroughly reviewed the literature, so much so that they just wrote a book on it, over first- or second-year graduate student, as a simple matter of statistics.
Thirdly: You should definitely just go talk to your professor and ask her, respectfully, to clarify what she wrote. If anything, she'll probably be appreciative that you're going through it in such detail. If you have found a real issue, you'll make her aware of it, and if you're lacking some background she can explain it.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: The simple answer is that you should do both.
I do not believe you owe a professor just because she is a professor. If she has earned your respect and/or your loyalty through other means, you should certainly demonstrate it, but being a professor doesn't demand it, on its own.
That said, talking through the problem you have found with her will give you a lot of clarity on whether it is the scale of error you believe, and will help sharpen your own argument. It may not be an error at all in your professors mind. I doubt she'll hear your reasoning and slap her head, exclaiming "Oh snap! I was wrong all along!" She may simply believe it is unimportant, which is fine. It then falls to you to justify the importance of your observation.
Then you should publish this idea. The object of academia is to engage in the "Great Debate" and if you have found a doorway into that debate, and you believe in your argument, then you should absolutely walk through that door. If your professor has published the opposite, then all the better because it is something that is already in the "academic consciousness" and will consequently be relevant to both the discipline—assuming your professor is not a marginal figure—and your immediate environment.
I don't understand where the idea comes from among students that most good ideas are 'sprung' on the world through publication, or are kept private until the last minute. I know this is a common idea but the reality is much more complex, and really doesn't vary that much by discipline. Most ideas are talked out, written, then rewritten, sent to conferences, sent to journals and finally published, and that process does and should include the hostile interlocutors. By the time most ideas get published, regardless of article or book, the idea has already been widely discussed. Publication isn't really the revelation of an idea to the community but the codification of an idea, and an attempt to spread it to a wider audience.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2016/05/11
| 823
| 3,526
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently studying (Undergraduate) Physics in a University where, regardless of their department, every student must take some English, Turkish and History courses, which I don't want to attend. Turkish and History courses are non-credit but not English, so it affects my GPA. Moreover, I will take violin, astrophysics and philosophy courses as non-included.
So here is my question: when I am applying for a PhD in Physics or Mathematics, does any of these courses have any effect on my admission?
Note: My main concern is whether having low grades in English ,which is not a non-credit course, affect my Phd admission ?<issue_comment>username_1: In general I am pretty sure attending those courses will definitely not have a bad effect on your admission. Attending courses with topics outside the subjects area shows that you don't have a much 'limited horizon' and they broaden your interdisciplinary skills. To gain expertise in philosophy and astrophysics is maybe leading to have an eye of a bigger picture when solving problems and playing the violin testifies character. Those courses will so be seen as a plus regarding your personal skills when applying.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Any university worth its salt welcomes grad school candidates with eclectic academic backgrounds, *provided* they have an appropriate range of courses, with top grades, in their primary discipline. A nerd with nothing but courses in his/her discipline often lacks depth and perspective. The Dean of Law at a major Canadian U. was asked what he regarded as the ideal degree as prep for Law School. He said that would be a five-year double-Honours BA in Philosophy and English Literature. And I wouldn't be concerned about a low grade in English affecting your GPA. Your grad school committee will see that it is your only low grade.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Anything that affects your GPA will get considered. If it has resulted in your GPA being low, but your grades in relevant subjects were considerably higher, you should absolutely address it in your application letter or have it addressed in your recommendation letters. If it is just one or two Cs that don't really have much effect on your GPA, it is probably nothing to worry about.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are applying to programs in the US, more important than your grades in English classes is your performance on the TOEFL. Many universities have a minimum TOEFL score required before the department can even *consider* your application, and these rules are often difficult or impossible for the department to bend, even for an exceptionally attractive candidate.
There is more information in the answers to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18637/). (For example, someone there mentions that the minimums at "Yale and Stanford are about 100, Harvard is 109" -- out of 120 points total.)
Given the quality of the English in your original question (before it was improved by helpful editors), I don't think you can afford to blow off your English classes if you have any hope of studying in the US.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: If you are applying to a USA University, English courses will play some factor as many grad students end up being the ones teaching lab sessions etc.
If you are currently a student in Turkey who plans to take Physics at a grad school in Turkey, Physics/Math is probably all you need to care about.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/11
| 1,399
| 5,927
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working on a graph theory paper with two of my friends. The problem stated in the paper is solved by me. However, our supervisor professor pointed out that in all of the graph theory journals (and other mathematics journals as well), names of authors are sorted by an alphabetic order which puts me in the third position after one of my friends who was mainly in charge of half of the editings (which I greatly thank his efforts) and our supervisor professor.
I wonder if there is any way to point out who was the main contributor in a graph paper or not.
I think this may be a very deciding factor in being accepted by a good university for a master program because we can only have a few papers before graduation.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I wanted to see if there is any way to point out who was the main contributor in a graph paper or not?
>
>
>
Generally not. In pure mathematics it's extremely unconventional to use any author ordering other than alphabetical. You could try, but it will look weird and attract negative attention, and nobody will be quite sure how to interpret it. In particular, you run the risk of having people think "this jerk insisted on being listed first despite the near-universal use of alphabetical order". I virtually never see papers with any other author ordering, and I would not recommend it.
It's also rare and considered awkward to include any discussion in the paper of who contributed what. One reason is that it's difficult to write such a discussion fairly. For example, suppose your collaborators try three approaches that fail before you find one that works. Reasonable people could disagree as to whether your collaborators were obviously on the wrong track all along, or whether they pointed the way to the solution by eliminating other plausible methods. (The general principle is that if your collaborators aren't useful, then you shouldn't be working with them. Turning this around, if they are useful enough that you are happy to work with them before the problem is solved, then you can't retroactively decide that they weren't useful enough afterwards.)
The flip side of this is that the standards for being an author are fairly demanding, and coauthors should have seriously worked on the mathematics itself. In particular, supervising the project or editing the paper are not by themselves sufficient for coauthorship. But it's reasonable for these people to be coauthors if they worked on the problem with you, even if you were the one who ended up making the decisive contribution.
>
> I think it may be a very deciding factor in being accepted by a good university for a master program because we can only have a few papers before graduation.
>
>
>
The usual way this information is conveyed is a letter of recommendation from your supervisor, who can highlight the role you played in the project.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My view on this is the same as the one expressed in the answer by username_1.
In addition, some journals (and also math journals) have the notion of "corresponding author". This is not mean the same thing as "main contributor" but really "author to whom correspondence shall be addressed". This may be the author for which the affiliation will stay valid the longest, but can also be the author who is most competent to answer any questions. Check other publications in the journal (and/or journal guidelines) if your journal of choice has this feature.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know 'graph theory' from the Graf Spree, but I know a bit about publishing conventions. First suggestion (getting outside the box)--if you solved the problem, were you also the principal investigator and writer? If so, would the others agree to the piece being published with you as the *sole* author, with full acknowledgement of their relative contributions in a footnote? If the answer is 'No', then (second suggestion) publish the authors alphabetically--which seems to be the way of it in your discipline--with an asterisk after your name and a footnote acknowledging you as the team member who solved the problem. If that solution doesn't appeal, then (third suggestion) insert a "Prefatory Note" or "Acknowledgement" page, in which your primary role is detailed.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> I think this may be a very deciding factor in being accepted by a good university for a master program because we can only have a few papers before graduation.
>
>
>
Not being first author in a field where authors are ordered alphabetically won't hurt you. If you're worried that people won't realise the author list is alphabetical, you can always point this out in your application. If the programme you're applying to is in pure mathematics, then the people reviewing applications will know that authors are alphabetical.
I used to have a version of my CV that had the note "Authors are ordered alphabetically" at the top of the publications section. I used that version when I was applying for fellowships and other positions where the people who were making the decisions might not know that my field uses alphabetical order.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> ...in all of the graph theory journals (and other mathematics journals as well), names of authors are sorted by an alphabetic order...
>
>
>
The rule is not set in stone, even in mathematics. Here's a recent mathematics paper of mine with authors not in alphabetical order:
>
> <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, [On computing the number of Latin rectangles](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00373-015-1643-1). Graphs and Combinatorics, 32 (2016) pp. 1187-1202.
>
>
>
While this particular example is not a graph theory paper, it's in a journal that routinely publishes graph theory papers. Nobody (except the authors) even discussed the author order.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/11
| 1,504
| 6,929
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an assistant professor at a lower-tier research university. Recently I learned that my university and department have a dysfunctional system for reading and evaluating applications to our Ph.D. program.
There is no way to read the applications online, or indeed to collect all the applications together in one place so that applications can be compared. Instead, applications were printed out as they arrive, passed around with a comment sheet on top, and then discussed. This happened several times; after each go-around, the files that were just evaluated would disappear, usually to not be seen again.
As my colleague on the committee put it: "While I took notes, it was incredibly difficult to compare people even a week apart. ... Overall the process was much too opaque for me."
This is in *stark* contrast to our hiring, for which we used [MathJobs](http://www.mathjobs.org/jobs). This system is designed perfectly: it provides online, secure access to all the applications online. When I was on our hiring committee we individually read applications in detail (and were able to read the files of candidates on our shortlist as frequently as we wishes). We came to meetings well prepared; these meetings were short, to the point, and resulted in excellent hires.
There is a similar site [MathPrograms](http://www.mathprograms.org/db) which we could use for graduate admissions, which is also extremely well designed, requires almost no effort to set up, and which costs well under a thousand dollars. If we were allowed to use this, we could evaluate applications much easier without the Graduate School's "help" than with it.
Two questions:
1. Are graduate admissions systems this way for some "good" reason which I may have overlooked?
2. As a faculty member, is there any way I can usefully push for using MathPrograms, or some similarly sensible system?<issue_comment>username_1: Who decides how the application process is handled? If it's decided in your department, then I'd think you have a good chance of making it more reasonable --- maybe not anything like MathPrograms that costs money, but at least keeping all the files in one place where you can review what you saw last week. Maybe you can get a secretary to scan the files and make them available on-line to the appropriate faculty members. If the decision is made at the college level, then you may have more work changing the process, but money may cease to be an issue; a big expense at the department level can look trivial to a dean, provided the dean understands how bad the current system is. If you need to deal with a central Graduate School, the subject of "help" (in quotation marks) in your message, then all I can do is wish you good luck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, there are good reasons, which might not apply in your department (and somewhat apply to mine), as to why graduate admissions are handled that way.
There are still many places in which admissions, even graduate admissions, are non-competitive. This means there are some standards, which vaguely correspond to having sufficient qualifications to indicate the applicant is likely to be able to complete the program in a reasonable amount of time, and everyone over that standard is admitted. Applications are not meant to be compared against each other but rather only to a fixed standard (even if that fixed standard can't be precisely specified or easily explained to an outsider). When admissions is non-competitive, the system you are describing means that applicants can get a decision on their application fairly soon after their application is complete, instead of waiting until after a fixed application deadline date. It also means that you don't have to have a deadline for applications, since you decide on an application without worrying a better one will come later.
Not having deadlines for applications can be an advantage, since some people don't decide until very late to apply to graduate school. Being quick is also an advantage, because some people may take the first offer they get. Note both these advantages are more important for applicants to the lower-ranked schools for which admissions tend to be less competitive.
You might be shocked that graduate admissions could ever be non-competitive, but this makes sense in several kinds of situations. One situation is for a program that usually barely gets enough qualified applicants to fill their spots. In that case, it makes sense to simply take everyone who is qualified, and the quicker the better, since one is worried some spots might go unfilled. Another situation is for departments which have enough faculty resources to support all their applicants (or whose universities want the faculty to stretch if necessary) in subjects where students commonly go to graduate school without funding. In that case, admissions can be made on a non-competitive basis with funding (which is limited and hence has to be competitive) decided later, even perhaps with students being forced to decide whether to attend or not before they know if they will get funding or have to pay from their own pocket.
Now as to whether you can change this, it depends. First, if in fact your department really is in a situation where it should just admit every qualified person who applies, there is no point in changing this. If that's not the case, and your department is in control of its admissions process, it's not so hard to change.
However, in many cases, graduate admissions is controlled university-wide, and your university may very well have a general philosophy of accepting every qualified applicant. If non-competitive applications make sense for most of the departments in your university and your department is an exception, it doesn't make sense to change the university rules just for you. In that case, your department might be able to get permission to institute a pre-application process where potential applicants who don't first make contact with your department before a certain deadline automatically get rejected, and you notify the pre-applicants soon after the deadline whether it will be worthwhile for them to make an official application (which costs an application fee) or not.
Be careful. If you make a change that causes enrollment in your program to drop, you might get in trouble and your graduate program might simply get eliminated. It's hard enough already for us to explain to our administration why we can't have 30 students in our program with only 15 university-funded TAships, since mathematics is one of the few subjects with neither grant funding that covers tuition for a neither percentage of students nor many students willing to pay for graduate school from their own pocket. If your graduate program runs at a financial loss, your university may not be willing (or even may not be able) to keep it going.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/11
| 1,623
| 7,177
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my professors is quite enthusiastic about teaching the subject. He often deviates from the main content and gets lost in details vastly beside or beyond the matter at hand - which is interesting, though not immediately helpful.
Effectively, this means that he regularly fails to complete the day's chapter. To compensate, he always overruns on time (15 minutes are not unusual at all).
Despite that, he failed to finish several chapters that (according to him) were intended to be taught (and indeed have been in the year before), and did not discuss or even provide solutions to previous homework due to lack of time in class.
I'm looking for advice how to deal with this situation. How can we make him stick to relevant content?
My fear is that the students will a) lack knowledge from missing several chapters, leading to future problems in subsequent courses and b) have worse conditions to succeed in this course's exam, as they lack relevant information and experience.
I'm baffled how he is able to continue like this - he clearly noticed the problem and also apologized to the students about it several times, but did not yet change his habits at all.
As I have already talked to him about other problems before, which he is attempting to fix now, I do not want to "complain" to him again if possible. I'm also a bit unsure what that would accomplish, seeing that he appears to be completely unable to keep his lectures on point.
If the students were to talk to the department head, is he likely to take action, or is this rather within the professors individual judgement? If they do, I'm clueless to imagine how he would take it.
Regarding the missing homework solutions, I considered requesting written solutions to the tasks we failed to look at in class. However, this kind of exercise does not benefit from just solutions and instead requires explanations.<issue_comment>username_1: I would no longer take your concern up with the professor in question, but rather follow the chain of command and file a complaint. First, keep it informal and talk to the Chair. Ask anyone who has good standing in the class to add their input in the same way. If no progress has been made within a reasonable time frame (let the Chair decide this), then file a formal complaint with the Chair. If it gets worse, go up the chain to the Assistant Dean of your college branch (like College of the Arts). Keep at it until some progress is made. Whatever you do, keep it factual, not emotional.
Good luck.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would encourage you to view this not as poor teaching style, necessarily, but as a particular teaching style which may not suit you.
You should not take for granted the fact that this teacher actually seems to care about the material and be excited about it. That is a great opportunity for you to learn and you should take advantage of it if you can. Ask questions, try to gain some of this person's intuition and insight into the topic - you are probably paying for access to this professor, and this is a way to learn things you cannot learn from the book.
You should describe the teaching style in any reviews you submit about the course or professor. Some students would love the type of course you describe, and some (such as yourself) will not find that it meets their needs. This is the proper way to give feedback. Complaining to the administration will probably not be effective because the professor is not doing anything wrong (except perhaps running classes too long), just adopting a particular teaching style.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Is this graduate school? Then I have to recommend sucking it up and covering the chapters on your own. This is a point in your education when you should be learning material mostly independently, with professors to guide you. In this case the professor provides guidance by selecting a book, designing a syllabus and course outline telling you what you are expected to learn, plus you get interesting lectures that deviate from the material of the book. He is hopefully also willing and able to answer questions through email or in office hours.
If his teaching style doesn't agree with you, then you can avoid taking courses from him in the future. But you should completely be able to learn the course material without having it explicitly covered in lecture.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't mean this in a mean way but ...Just suck it up! And don't even think about filing a complaint... We don't get to choose the style that our teachers use in the classroom. It may not fit you but it may fit others just fine. If you are expecting the professor's lectures to be the sole method of learning you are going to have a very hard time in life in general. Take what you can from the lectures; augment it with the text books; and do some research of your own on the topics. By the way, what subject is this class you are taking?
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: First, you should realize that what the professor intends (hopes) to teach may be different from what he is expected to teach. There are lots of things that I hope to cover in classes that I often don't get a chance to, and as an instructor you have to make trade offs between covering more breadth versus depth. This is normal. What I feel I am "required" to cover depends on the course, and if it is a standard course I usually rely on the official course description, though there is still a lot of leeway.
However, there certainly are course where not covering certain content is unacceptable (e.g., not covering integration by parts in a standard calculus sequence). Also, at many places regularly running over time by 15 minutes without prior student agreement is not at all acceptable.
If you want something done about it, you should first talk to other students to see if they are of the same opinion as you. Then you can either try talking to the instructor or the department head, depending on what you feel comfortable with, and preferably with a couple other students. (As an instructor, I would generally prefer you bring a concern to me first before talking to the chair.) Particularly if talk to the instructor, you should try to make it a conversation, e.g., "if we don't cover XXX in this course, will this be an issue when I take Class Y?" rather than a list of complaints, although pointing out "some students have another class after this, so they can't stay after without being late for their next" is fine.
Note the department head usually gives faculty the benefit of the doubt, in part because faculty usually get a fair amount of autonomy over their courses. So if you do have a conversation with the department head, you want to focus on concrete, objective facts as much as possible. Afterwards, I would expect the department head to have a conversation with the instructor, which may make a difference if the instructor is told that something they are doing is unacceptable. This happened in at least one class I was in where no one knew what was going on, and then the course it became much more elementary.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/12
| 298
| 1,345
|
<issue_start>username_0: Putting aside the issue of obviously automated inquiries, what should I do with personalized emails I receive from students asking to be my PhD student? Assume that I know the student is not going to become my PhD student any time soon, possibly because there are no vacancies currently. In particular, I am interested in departments where PhD admissions are not centralized.<issue_comment>username_1: If your department or institution has an established centralized procedure for admitting graduate students, I would prepare a template that says:
>
> All interested students must apply through (insert method here). I do not respond to direct unsolicited requests for PhD positions.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If the local culture is to apply to professors and then to the department, school, college, or university, then you might respond that you're full, not accepting students right now, or don't see a fit or whatever else is true. If the local procedure is to apply to the large organization first, then you could pass along that information and a link to the instructions. I just ignore them since I only post GRA position openings when I have them open and expect interested students to be able to find relevant postings for jobs when we have them just like other applicants do.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/12
| 1,833
| 8,038
|
<issue_start>username_0: Short version: a potentially upcoming 5-authors maths paper already have authorship dispute drama. I am not among the 5, but I believe I found the solution to the part they got stuck on. Should I tell them?
=====
Full story:
A is a new graduate student, never have any papers, decided to work with B a post-doc (who had a few paper before) on a topic. They did some significant amount of work, but still nowhere close to a result. A tells his friend C (another graduate student with 1 paper), not to ask for help but just to let him what kind of thing he is working on. But unexpectedly, C got interested and work on it for a while and get some new results, before telling A and B. The work is significant, but A claims that give it a few more weeks and they could have gotten that themselves. C's advisor come to his defense and insist that it is only fair that C got credits as well. Unfortunately, C asked D - an undergraduate in his junior year - to develop a computer simulation, which ended up allowing C to realize that a tweak to the hypothesis is necessary. C never told D what it is for, but D realized that after chitchat with B. Now D's advisor also want him on the paper, since he did some work, and it would really help him in applying to grad school if the paper can be done soon. Neither A nor B is happy about this of course. To make thing worse, E a post-doc from CS department, happen to see the problem and some work on the blackboard. He knew some papers in CS that happen to solve some aspect of the problem, and told B about it, which eventually cause their earlier work to be much more simplified. B thinks E deserve coauthorship too, much to A's resentment.
Now I was not there for the drama. A told me about this over beer a few months ago. I curiously asked what the problem is, and A told me everything including what they are stuck on, after making me promise to never work on this and never tell anyone else about the problem (A don't want to have a 6-author paper). I kept the promise, until recently, when reading some papers, and I found something and realized that this could be as well the key to the problem. After some more computation, I am 90% sure that this method would solve the problem, but I promised not to work on it, so I did not work out everything. Now I am torn. They are unlikely to ever know about this method (I'm in a very different specialty), but their effort had been walking in circle for a few months now. I had never had a paper before, so if I do put effort into this, at least I wanted to be recognized for it.
EDIT: as far as I know, there are only 10 people who know about the paper, us 6 and 4 professors who don't really care nor contribute; it is not public. I think A considered me his emotional crutch which is why he told me about it. The work is probably not good enough for publication, right now it consists of a bunch of different approaches and reformulation that all seemed very close to solve the problem, but did not.<issue_comment>username_1: It sounds to me like you're asking this question in the hope that someone will come along and tell you to do the right thing. Well, here goes: **you need to do the right thing and not break your promise**.
Honestly, aside from the obvious moral and ethical argument (which by itself is already pretty compelling), even from a purely selfish and utilitarian point of view I don't see how anything good can come out of you surreptitiously solving the problem and then claiming your place as the sixth coauthor. Given that apparently this is not going to be a very major result or paper anyway, the only thing you will achieve is to make an already messy and acrimonious situation only more messy and acrimonious. Most likely the paper will never get written, and even if it does, everybody including you will come away with a bad taste and little to show for all their efforts and frustration other than a dubious coauthorship, whose value will be more than negated by the effects on the reputations of a few of the people involved, especially you for breaking an explicit promise.
With that said, I think there are two options that could potentially let you participate in the work and benefit from your idea without breaking any promises or acting dishonestly:
1. Tell A that you have an idea that may be used to attack the problem. Make it clear that you intend to honor your promise not to work on the problem, unless he gives you explicit permission to do so (until the 5-author paper is made public, at which time your promise becomes void anyway). At the same time, you are also under no obligation to tell him your idea, and may legitimately ask to be allowed to officially join the project (with the implied promise of coauthorship of the paper in the event that you end up making a meaningful contribution) as a condition of revealing your ideas to the group. They can then decide if that's something they're interested in or not - either way you are morally in the clear in my opinion.
2. In the event that you prefer not to discuss your idea with A and the rest of the group, or if you ask them to join the project and they refuse, you can simply wait until they make their results public, and then (as <NAME> proposed in the comments) you will be free to use your methods to improve their results and publish your own paper, assuming your improvement is sufficiently interesting to make for a publishable result.
Finally, I should add that although six-author papers are relatively rare in pure math, there is nothing wrong or shameful about publishing such papers, and if each of the authors can indeed claim to have made a reasonably meaningful contribution, then the paper will still have positive value to everyone's careers. Furthermore, going from 5 to 6 coauthors does not involve such a major dilution of the credit (beyond the level to which it is already diluted), so if you have a genuinely new and useful idea to contribute that could make this a pretty attractive proposition for the existing coauthors.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds to me like everyone has got their toes trodden on a little, but if the paper is still not publishable then no one author currently has a claim to precedence. While I can certainly understand each person feeling protective of their work, they will have to get used to it, because it can happen reasonably often.
It seems to me that in this case everyone would actually be better off by forming a collaboration and getting on with improving the work together. If having 6 authors is considered particularly unusual (it would be in my field), then having a small number of such papers and a growing group of collaborators would be a plus point on a CV (given that this is clearly not going to be a single-author paper). Also, pulling together a range of different techniques into a *coherent* whole would be a good outcome.
From your point of view, there's probably still something to be gained by thinking about the 'social' side of your choice. Asking someone not to work on something seems a little silly, although understandable.
You could simply tell your friend that you came across something that you think would work, and that you didn't go out of your way to work on the problem but came across the idea while doing other work. You contribution may or may not end up being worth authorship.
Alternatively, you could choose to not actively pursue authorship (I don't think what you've done so far would be enough necessarily; it sounds more like acknowledgements-level), and instead take a more circumspect route with something like 'I came across this in my reading and it reminded me of your problem; do you want to take a look?' You might then end up being asked to contribute and become an author, or they might do the work themselves. But you would have less chance of upsetting them that way, and might put yourself into their category of 'people I might work with in future'.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/12
| 2,671
| 11,562
|
<issue_start>username_0: How exactly do Math theses/dissertations work?
Is it fair to assume that the work involves trying to prove something? What happens if you can't?
I did a thesis in Computer Science, and though my results weren't great, I still had something to show. I learned from it and had a plan for future work.
But if you have X years to prove something for, say, a PhD and you can't, what happens? Do you just not get a PhD?
I understand that advisors will try to pick a problem that they think is doable, but what if they misjudge?<issue_comment>username_1: I wrote a failed dissertation myself. No papers resulted from it. Fortunately, I had a significant side project which was published, and 11 years later, the main thread of my research still comes from this side project. (I suppose I could have written up the side project as my dissertation instead, but I didn't.)
First, no project is ever a complete failure. At the very least, you manage to prove some (possibly almost trivial) special cases, you prove some helpful lemmas, you find that certain lemmas you might have hoped would be helpful have counterexamples, and you find certain methods that you might use don't apply because some hypotheses needed to use those methods aren't satisfied in your case. It's possible to write all of these things up, ending up with a dissertation that's basically about "How not to solve Problem X (except in this very tiny special case)". (This is basically my dissertation.)
Second, it's rare for mathematics graduate students, especially at top programs, to work on only one problem. Your advisor might suggest a main problem for you to work on, but you go to seminars and hear about other problems, talk to other graduate students or postdocs and learn about other problems, and so on, and graduate students are generally encouraged to spend at least a little time thinking about these other problems. If you get stuck on your main problem, you still have other problems to solve, and it's quite common that what you learned to work on your main problem ends up helping you in solving these other problems instead. (This is basically what happened to me, except this other problem didn't end up in my dissertation.)
Third, especially in the early stages of working on a problem, advisors are usually fairly quick at pulling the hook if it looks like no progress is being made. Most advisors know of lots of problems, and they know what complete lack of progress due to a problem being too hard looks like. Even later on, advisors can sometimes suggest simpler problems that can be solved in a shorter time frame (given what a student has already learned). In some cases, after a few rounds of failed problems, the student ends up with a dissertation that's about as weighty as a half-decent undergraduate research project (and results in zero papers or one paper in a "write-only" journal).
It's true that a dissertation written out of a failed or almost trivial project tends not to bode well in applications for jobs where research matters (unless there is a more substantial side project). Sometimes an influential or convincing advisor can make a strong enough case in recommendation letters for the student to get a postdoc, but this is harder now then it was 10 years ago given how much more competitive the job market is.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are a number of successful outcomes that don't involve finding that desired proof. Here are some examples:
1. Very often, a good mathematical question is good not simply because the answer would be useful, but because the techniques that might lead to an answer are useful. If you develop new mathematical tools, those might form a worthy thesis in themselves even if they don't amount to a proof.
2. You may achieve some intermediate result that opens a new possibility to prove the bigger result. Indeed, many theses only aim for this if the bigger result is something huge like the Riemann hypothesis, the BSD conjecture, etc.
3. In searching for a proof of X, you may discover a related question Y and find a proof that resolves Y. Y might be more interesting than X, or simply more approachable. This is discussed in [<NAME>'s well-known short paper on choosing a problem](http://eloquentscience.com/2011/10/how-to-choose-a-good-scientific-problem/); I recommend that paper to anyone who is asking this question.
A good advisor will help you find a thesis topic that has multiple avenues and multiple stages of potential progress, so that it is not an all-or-nothing venture.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it fair to assume that the work involves trying to prove something? What happens if you can't?
>
>
>
No. Not all theses are about "proving things," at least not in the narrow sense. A thesis may be very computational, may be about formulating conjectures, or it may be about finding examples/counterexamples of some phenomena. Many theses (and papers), even if they prove a theorem, boil down to understanding some theory and doing some (not necessarily numerical) calculations.
As username_1 says, even if you can't prove what you set out to, you can typically find something new (sometimes just a new point of view) if you're reasonably competent and spend enough time on it. Actually it's more common than not, even for professional researchers, that you don't prove what you set out to. I didn't prove what I tried to for my thesis, but I got some results and a couple papers out of it. Several years is plenty of time for most people to get at least something.
>
> But if you have X years to prove something for, say, a PhD and you can't, what happens? Do you just not get a PhD?
>
>
>
As I said, the chance is good that you will at least get something new, or you may move to another project when it seems hopeless. Your advisor will hopefully help guide you and keep you from following dead ends for too long. I try to make the projects for my students in areas where there are lots of nearby problems, so if their project doesn't work out, they don't need to learn much more to try a different problem. When your advisor thinks you have enough for a PhD then you can submit a thesis, but of course you don't get a PhD just for having worked on something for X years.
I don't have hard data on this, but my experience is that most PhD students who make it through the first couple of years (say, at good schools in the US) do get a PhD. Where I went, almost everybody who started got a PhD--and almost all of the ones who didn't left during or after the first year because they realized a PhD wasn't for them. At less prestigious schools, the success rates aren't quite as good, but I still think most of the people who don't finish their PhD quit before they spend a long time on research.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: My stats professor last semester said that she is saddened by the fact that journals no longer tend to publish failed studies/theories. A failed theory is just that, it shows you had a theory, but you proved it wrong! That is an incredible amount of information and if you combine that with multiple other studies that show the same thing, you have mounting evidence that the theory is wrong. For instance, if we only publish the successful theories/studies, we are biasing our results in a sense, because there may have been 50 studies that show there was no evidence for the theory being true, but if there was one single study, who just barely made it over the threshold for proving the theory true, that one could have been published and now boom, the only published information about said theory is one that "proves it true". I am also not a math major, but I thought this was an interesting topic enough to share with you. The result of an inconclusive experiment still holds a very large amount of data that could still be very important to someone else years down the road.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: One case:
I had in mind an interesting problem. I thought of the absolute simplest case, and gave it to the student to work on. After that I thought we could try more general cases, working up gradually to the whole thing. Well, it turned out that initial special case took two years for the student to finish, so that was the thesis. (As far as I know, the more general problem has never been done to this day.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: A good advisor will steer students away from "all or nothing" problems, the sort of problems where complete failure is a realistic possibility. For example, one stereotypical case is an elementary attempt to resolve a famous question in number theory, where the most likely outcome is a concrete understanding of why this specific approach just can't work, and nobody else will be terribly interested since they never thought it had a chance in the first place.
A good thesis problem needs to have several properties:
1. It should be interesting and attention-getting if solved. This is the easy property to achieve.
2. It should be in a rich and diverse enough area that any serious attempt to solve it will uncover something worthwhile in its own right, even if it doesn't lead to a solution of the original problem.
3. It should help the student build knowledge and prepare to branch off in several new directions. (I.e., you shouldn't reach the state of being done with nothing more to do, and continuing work should naturally grow broader rather than narrower.)
In particular, #1 is far from enough by itself. If you have #2 as well, then it doesn't really matter whether the original problem is solved, while #3 is important for setting the student up for success beyond graduate school.
So the optimistic answer to your question is that the advisor should take care to prevent this from becoming a problem, by guiding the student to a problem where failure to solve it is not a disaster. Of course there's also the pessimistic scenario in which the advisor screwed up or the student wouldn't take advice, and the problem really isn't suitable for a thesis. In that case you have to muddle through as best you can, probably by writing a suboptimal thesis and then trying to make up for it by other work afterwards. Fortunately this scenario doesn't seem to occur all that often. (And the worst case of all is when the student just isn't accomplishing anything, but that can happen in any field.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: You're not always trying to prove an existing theorem. In my experience, the central theorem(s) of the thesis are not known initially. You tackle a rough problem and try to find some new results - in my particular case, it was about analysing a situation where partial results existed, but no reasonable estimates for some of the constants had been found. My central result was a theorem characterising situations where you could find optimal constants, plus how to actually compute them.
I had the same problem with 'no results' initially though - in the end I had to select a new topic after 2 years. There were still some results along the way, though. Even if the main proof won't work it's unlikely you won't even get some partial results or discover something new along the way.
I was still able to fill about 30 pages in my thesis with the results I had from the first topic. It wouldn't have been enough for a PhD on its own, but it wasn't nothing either. It helped that the topics were similar and one could draw a few parallels.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/12
| 1,082
| 4,869
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my graduate students, doing their PhD in another university, is doing quite well. Recently, he told me that he is having a tussle with his supervisor on communication of his work to a specific journal. His supervisor insists he submit his research to a very high profile journal, but my student does not believe that his research work would be accepted by this journal. Side note: His supervisor does not have any publications in this high profile journal.
Now my question is that, how to deal with such situation?<issue_comment>username_1: Everyone should be so lucky to have an advisor who pushes them to excel and to aspire to the highest standards of achievement. Really, I don't see why your friend is complaining -- he should just go ahead and submit the paper to the high-profile journal.
Moreover, your friend's advisor, whether he published in the journal before or not, is considerably more qualified than your friend to judge the chances of the paper to be accepted to the journal. If the advisor thinks that's where the paper should be submitted, your friend would in all likelihood be foolish to disagree, especially since the worst that can happen is the paper will get rejected, probably sooner rather than later.
The only exception to this advice is in the bizarre situation in which the advisor is clearly delusional. In that case, your friend has much bigger problems and should probably look for a different advisor, not because of the small and self-correcting problem with the journal but because having an advisor who is so delusional and has such poor judgment does not bode well for your friend's eventual success in his research.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: As others have noted, there is absolutely nothing wrong in aiming high when publishing papers (unless some exceptional situations with university deadlines etc.). When you get rejected - you can just try another journal.
When you do the other way around and get accepted for the first any low-profile journal you will never know if your work didn't deserve something better - and possibly you will regret that decision :)
Another advantage of trying high-profile journals first, is that even if you get rejected you will get great, constructive reviews, which are really worth the wait.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Most answers/comments seem to have the philosophy that "there is nothing to lose by submitting to the top journals, so go for it". I would like to offer a different perspective.
There are costs to every journal submission.
* Time spent formatting the manuscript to fit the journal. This sometimes requires relatively minor changes such as formatting references, but might involve more significant effort such as adapting the length to fit a word limit, or altering the focus of the introduction. A lot of the very top journals have quite specific style requirements that are very different to other journals.
* Time waiting for a response. At least if it is a desk reject, this will be quick. If it's a rejection after reviews, then as Bartosz points out, at least you will get some good feedback. But the wait can be important at certain stages in a scientific career. One paper can make a big difference to a grad student's CV.
* Potential (but often very real) emotional cost of (possibly repeated) rejections.
* Costs to the system. If everyone adopts a policy of always submitting to the highest journals, editors become swamped and even more likely just to reject on sight. (Yes, I know, it will still happen because of the Tragedy of the Commons).
These costs need to weighed against the potential benefits if the paper is accepted, which of course are large, but far from guaranteed in the case of high-ranking journals.
Therefore, I don't think it is as simple as saying "you might as well try, you've got nothing to lose". There comes a point where the chance of acceptance drops so low that it is not worth sinking the above costs into an effort that is very unlikely to succeed.
Notice that the costs listed above are much reduced or absent for the supervisor. Therefore, **while there is little harm *for the supervisor* in aiming high to start with, the same is not necessarily true for the student**. Therefore, it may well be worth getting some further opinions as to the chance of success for the submission. Ideally, try asking some other faculty members whom you know and trust to have a quick read of the manuscript and give their opinion. They may agree with the supervisor, in which case, great, go ahead and try! But it is worth asking around before putting in all that effort.
NOTE: This is not meant to sound negative. The answer for your friend may well be that he should give it a go. But I do think that there is a non-trivial decision to be made.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]
|
2016/05/12
| 390
| 1,722
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently my research paper got major revision in which one of the reviewer ask me to look again at the results I have derived without pointing to any specific item of results. I have double checked my results and all results found to be correct and now I am confused that what actually reviewer is trying to say as he/she did not specifically mentioned nature of error in my results.
So how should I respond? (The second reviewer is satisfied with my results)<issue_comment>username_1: Maybe the first reviewer could not understand the derivation or the paper (perhaps it is outside his/her field)? If they have found something wrong, I believe they would (and should) have pointed it out! If you are comfortable with the results and as you said "double checked them", you should be fine. You can address his comment by stating that the results have been rechecked and validated (if possible) - as my advisor says, a vague question requires a general answer!
I will play the devil advocates for a second. I understand that the second reviewer is happy with the results (but, that does not assure us (the readers), that the results are fine). For all we know, s/he did not even go through them! Or maybe they did, but could not see the point of the first reviewer (if any). The first reviewer's comment is vague and to be it to rest, perhaps, you can ask a colleague of yours (who knows your field) to go over them again?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Email the editor to ask for clarification. They are the person you need to satisfy. If they don't understand what is needed either, they will either get in touch with the reviewer to ask, or they will tell you not to worry.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/05/12
| 1,246
| 5,068
|
<issue_start>username_0: So, my advisor works in a group style, meaning we have these weekly meetings, where all of his PhD students and RAs are present. We plan the work ahead and set aims, but these aims are always very general and non-specific.
For example, it is always like "you must publish in the X journal something about improving the 4G network, because that's where the money is". He usually asks for publication planning without having done the work first.
We rarely have 1-1 meetings and even when we do, he does not provide any guidance, he just sets aims and I have to work alone to achieve them (no one else in our group works on the same topic).
This gets even worse by the facts that:
1. I do not enjoy the topic that much. Long story short, I was assigned this topic after changing supervisors for logistics reason (Worth mentioning the relation with my previous supervisor was excellent, but unfortunately as I said, I cannot go back to him due to logistics).
2. More importantly, he is very cautious with sharing his research and does not like to work with people outside the group.
As an example of the 2nd, I had asked him if I could write a paper with another researcher outside our group. He said yes, but after a month of work and 2 days before the deadline, he changed his mind and said I should remove the other person's work and name from the paper, otherwise we are not going to submit.
I am 2.5 years into the PhD out of a 5-year long program, so half-way through. However, I cannot work alone on a topic I do not enjoy, with a person I do not get along with. What should I do? Should I change supervisor again, keep working alone or quit maybe with a MRes?
Some people I have talked with say this situation is common and normal.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Some people I have talked with say this situation is common and normal
>
>
>
Absolutely!
It is going to be a very hard process to change how your advisor work! Most of the time, you won't be able to! So, you will need to learn to **adapt**. You need to consider the following;
1. This is not your first PhD! You changed advisors before.
2. You are half-way through your **current** PhD (only you knows how many years you *wasted* or what's your *current family situation*).
3. You need to graduate!
So, my advice is to follow your adviosr and be flexible.
When I first started my PhD, a new PhD student joined my grouped and have similar issues like yours. He changed advisors, schools and wanted to continue publishing with another researcher (his friend who have finished his PhD from a previous school where he joined before). The bottom line is, my advisor tolerated him for sometime but then gave him two options;
1. If he [the student] continues the "drama", he can leave. If fact, he told him that he knows a professor in another school that might be willing to take him.
2. Follow the process and get his degree!
To me, that student was very brilliant, had very unique way of thinking and solving for solutions! But, it was very clear that he needed to do everything on his own (and way)! Many advisors do not like that (especially, well-known ones).
I get that sometimes you can get a project that you do not like! So, what!! Do you think that you ganna be always working on projects that you like! I doubt that! At this level, you are a researcher (try to be a professional one). Think of it this way, if you are a surgeon, you operate on people! You can not say, "No, I do not want to operate on this guy because I do not like him" This may sound harsh, but in a way, is true!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: "What should I do" is hard question, but you must answer it yourself :) If you find the cooperation hard then it might be a good reason to change.
Usually you should learn (at least on a general level) the form of cooperation with an advisor *before* you start to work with him. You do that by asking his/her students about this and asking him/her directly. If you do that, there should be little surprise on how things work when you decide to join the team.
Regarding the "not enjoyable topic" problem, one of the aims of PhD studies is to prove that you are capable of doing research on your own, so I'm not surprised that you are not given any concrete solutions and specific guidance.
On the other hand, you are right to expect *some* help in problems you're facing and at least a fruitful discussion about the topic, especially if your advisor is the co-author of papers you produce.
Working on a topic completely unrelated to your PhD research might be alarming, and a reason to quit - but then again, this is still something that helps you to learn how to conduct research on your own and write papers.
During my PhD studies I was also participating in projects/papers that weren't directly within my field of interest - but I don't consider them a waste of time. On the contrary - they helped me to improve my general research skills. And this was really helpful in conducting research for my thesis.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/12
| 3,617
| 15,005
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Background / My problem:**
I believe to have found a substantial error in my professor's original research. After getting [answers to my previous question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/68467/found-mistake-in-my-professors-book-tell-her-or-publish-if-so-how), I emailed her about it, but she was dismissive. Of course, I could be wrong and it is very possible that I am. My professor seemed not interested at all to talk to me though, so I cannot discuss this with her further.
It is not a factual error, but an error that concerns the logic of her argument. To simplify, I think that she says that both P & -P. This is not obvious at first, and it becomes apparent only after some entangling of her whole argument.
**The field is small:**
Now, I do not personally know anyone who is interested this field. The field is very small and I can assume that pretty much everyone knows my professor and that my professor knows pretty much everyone too and that they talk.
**What do I do now? / How do I get feedback?**
Ideally I would like to get feedback from other experts. Maybe I am wrong. I am happy to be wrong, but I need to understand why. I could maybe email them, but I am not sure how responsive they would be.
Also, I am worried now that if I ask other people to have a look, my professor will hear of that. She will then know that I did not take her dismissal seriously, and am working on a paper. How would I go about this? I am worried to look like a backstabber, esp. if I email other people and say "Look, I believe I have found an error in Professor XXXX work" after my professor already told me it is not an error. If I do something like this, I would also be especially worried that should I be wrong, all of this will be very embarrassing for me.
PS: This concerns original research, not a textbook. I am in the Humanities. Please give me a chance, even if you believe that I am probably wrong,<issue_comment>username_1: In this case, you should consider iterating with you professor again. Perhaps in person, rather through email (the explanation could be lengthy and that might be the reason why your professor was dismissive). You should also consider changing your approach, try to assume that the original research is correct and from that standpoint approach your professor for an explanation (again a situation when a personal approach might be better than an electronic one - the tone of your email might be misunderstood). You can then guide the discussion toward the issues you see.
If all the above fails, I would still hesitate to go to other people (whether in the field or not) with the attitude "My professor made a mistake and refuses to discuss it with me, I need you to confirm for me that I'm right". You course in this case is to learn as much as possible about the area and determine for yourself whether or not there was a mistake. During these actions you can and should ask and discuss **your** work with as many people as possible.
With original research it is often the case that even experienced researchers need to follow the above path (although their's is shorter than a student's) to state whether or not something is wrong.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If you found an error, and its a substantial one and the response was to just dismiss you then I suspect that you are probably correct in your thinking. Professors love to talk about how much they know (at least they are in the field I am in) and I'm sure that she would have enjoyed explaining why you were mistaken if that was actually the case. It's a very odd response, I know for me at least, if someone suggested my research was wrong I'd explain to them exactly why they were wrong.
One thing you could do is try speaking to her and bring it up in such a way that it looks like your saying you don't understand could she explain why it is right (so you can learn from her great wisdom). If she is still dismissive then drop it, and never speak of it again.
My reasoning behind that is that as much as it pains me to say this, there are people who knowingly commit misconduct in research. There are also people who've become so arrogant/have so much to lose that they'd refuse to even consider for a second that they could ever be wrong. If your professor happened to be one of these people then for your careers sake, it would be best that it was left alone. I know this from experience, I was niave, there were fundemental flaws in some research, I wouldn't leave it alone, you do not want to make that mistake.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If I were in your shoes, I would approach another professor in the department—preferably one I'm on good terms with—and ask my question of them. Specifically, I would show them the relevant passage in the textbook, and bring the references that I think contradict the statement, or set of references from which I infer that the conclusion in the textbook is wrong. If I couldn't find a professor with whom you can discuss this I would approach a postdoctorate fellow with similar expertise. At the very least, I would approach the professor who taught the course that covered this material, or at least the material most similar to the topic. Basically, I would try to find someone else who could either corroborate or argue the point with me.
At the end of the day, you're in a scenario pretty similar to this one:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qteIt.png)
Sometimes you just can't fix the world.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I'd go something like this:
* read the book again
* read the paragraph/section/chapter which contains the error again and again (these first two points are just for your safety; you want to be 100% sure of what and why you're criticizing)
* write down in a (not too long) document your prof's statements, your concerns and why do you think you're right/prof's wrong
* ask your teacher **politely** to read your concerns, to explain the problematic statements in the book and to show you why your arguments are wrong (doing this by email is not indicated... maybe a discussion face to face is in order)
* if your professor refuses to speak with you or to explain those things to you, search for other opinions
Only after you've exhausted all these and you are still convinced you are right, then try something else (eventual publication). I'd also think about the consequences of going after an error in the book. Is it essential for you to correct it if the prof still claims it is valid? Is it worth fighting for? (it may get ugly)
Young researchers are not in a good position of going after established researchers. If you are wrong and you make a big fuss out of nothing you may throw away any chance of working in that field of research and in academics at all... That's why you must be sure what you're doing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Approach the professor with some variation of this statement:
>
> Could you help me understand my mistake?
>
>
>
In other words, **assume you are wrong and approach the disagreement with that attitude**. You should do so *even though you think you are correct*.
Why?
### 1. Humility and Respect
From the way you phrase and respond to things in this question and the preceding one, I think you have a small problem being humble, which goes hand in hand with being respectful. This isn't a slight of any kind; it's something I struggle with personally. I understand just how difficult it can be. Many other people do as well (maybe even a vast majority of people), and a lot of people with this problem aren't aware of it or have no interest in addressing it.
But the reality is that humility is *extremely* valuable to everyone. Showing it reduces personal conflict and negative emotions, allowing everyone involved to bypass ego and get to the real issue (*especially* yourself). This happens *even if only one side shows it*. By showing it, you make it easier for your professor and anyone else to analyze your work seriously.
### 2. Inexperience
You have studied your field far less than your professor. Statistically, the odds are in her favor. By assuming that you're incorrect, you acknowledge this reality.
### 3. Learning
By approaching this from the perspective that you're wrong, you will make yourself more receptive to new information you hadn't considered before. This will let you *learn* about the topic. It's very likely that your professor has acquired knowledge over the years that you haven't yet, and some of this knowledge could be the key to understanding her reasoning.
### 4. Involving others
If for some reason the professor can't help you understand the issue, by setting your goal as proving yourself wrong, you make it easier for her to recommend someone else you could approach.
It also makes it easier for you to involve someone else without dragging them into the middle of a conflict between you and your professor. They're not trying to help you disprove her work; they're trying to help you disprove *yours*.
### 5. Strengthening your case
In the event that you're correct (as unlikely as it may be), trying to prove yourself wrong can only make your case *stronger*. You will flush out problems with your ideas you hadn't even considered, and you will learn much more effective ways of defending it. *But doing this cannot be your starting goal*. You **must** start by legitimately assuming you are wrong and looking for *why* you're wrong.
If this all sounds sort of general, it is. This kind of approach is helpful in resolving all sorts of disagreements, not just ones in academic fields.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: As I [previously answered](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/68469/3971), you shouldn't have gone as frontally as you did. Now you are at a serious risk of getting in bad terms with her.
I know you're not planning to do your PhD with her, but as you said, she has far more connections than you in the field, and in addition this is a small field: everyone knows everybody else. So if you plan to continue your academic career in this field, I suggest you step carefully from now on.
From your comment above, you are stating that her error is a clear logical contradiction ("P & -P"). If this is true and you are not mistaken, this leads you to two things:
1. This is a very interesting opportunity, and you can (should) publish something about it.
2. Your professor probably won't be happy about it.
So what can you do about it?
First, as suggested by others, you should definitely go to your professor and ask her about this issue as a **clarification question**. First because you are less likely to get in a heated argument, and secondly because this will allow you to understand her reasoning, and **confirm if your finding is correct or wrong**.
After that, either you were wrong and this discussion will have clarified everything, you're done here. Either you were correct, and then in this case you are presented with two choices:
1. Publish your finding in a journal, knowing that probably your professor will make a bad reputation out of you. This will decrease your opportunities in the field, but you may get others if you find opponents of her theory that are interested in your work (so be sure to make a really good work!).
2. Forget about this whole story and publish it later during PhD or Post-doc when you have a firmer root in the field.
It's your choice, for you to see which path you want to take. But definitely you should go see your professor, you can think your next moves after having clarified if your theory is correct or not. Until then, there is no point in trying to do anything else, like contacting another professor: if you are wrong, you will be blacklisted not just by your professor but also by the others. So that's definitely not a good move.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: If as you're saying her theory *leads* to a contradiction down the road, then it's both plausible that she didn't foresee it and plausible that the "leads" bit is debatable. Given that, I (as someone coming from philosophy specifically) would suggest the following procedure:
1. Write out very carefully the series of steps that you think show Professor Q contradicts herself in book A. *If you still think so, when it's written out, then*
2. Show this to someone with experience in the humanities (preferably not someone that you have a close friendship or romantic relationship with) even if they don't share the specialization of professor Q. *If they find what you're saying convincing and/or plausible, then*
3. Show the argument you've made with edits to professor Q. Listen carefully to where Professor Q think you're going wrong with your interpretation of their text. (Alternately, Professor Q could agree with you and possibly co-author a paper correcting this error). *If on the other hand Professor Q is unimpressed but you yourself find this unconvincing, then*
4. Try to improve the clarity of your critique so it will be easier to follow / accept. Adjust places where Professor Q has helped you better understand her argument. Collect the feedback of several more people by perhaps presenting your paper somewhere. *If people think it's an on-point criticism, then ...*
5. Submit an article to a journal in that field explaining why Professor Q is wrong in book A.
At 5, there's a fork, *If the editors find it convincing, then ...* You'll have a published paper on the topic. *If editors within subfield don't find it convincing*, look at the field more broadly and see if there's a more sympathetic group for it.
To give an example of the fork at five, let's say we're talking Hume and Kant. If you find a flaw in Hume, then probably Hume journals are interested (assuming a non-trivial flaw). But if the flaw you identify is basically Kant's (or very Kantian), then Hume scholars are going to be a lot less interested. In that case, find Kant scholars and submit how Hume was wrong and Kant was right on some point.
Alternately, if you don't want to work your way through 1-5 for this, then there's another very simple option: **do absolutely nothing**. The world will not come to an end merely because an error remains in an obscure subfield of a humanities discipline. If anything, most books from say 50 years ago in many subfields are riddled with errors or sub-par argumentation. Many of these have been greeted by the cold arms of being forgotten and nothing has been lost.
---
I get that you've already tried showing your objection to Professor Q, but I do not entirely grasp *how* you did so and under what manner of presentation. Moreover, I don't know how many people you've confirmed your understanding with. But basically, if something is (has?) to be done about the problems in Book A within the bounds of academia in the humanities, this is how you do it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/12
| 510
| 2,222
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there a list of libraries which are included in the Scopus database?
I am working in the field of Human Computer Interaction and searching for a list of included libraries (e.g. ACM, AIS and so on).<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think Scopus manages their indexing by what you call "Libraries" (you probably mean publishers, and I agree that many publishers seem to call their online publishing platforms something like "digital library"). Instead, Scopus selects individual **titles** for indexing. That means that not all titles offered in a specific "library" may be contained in the database. Scopus offers a list of titles they are indexing on [their website](https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/content), which you could use to research the titles that you are interested in.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have little to add to username_1's spot-on answer, but to answer an implied question: If your study is in HCI, then why not use ACM Digital Library citation counts? Why do you want to use Scopus? The idea of citation counts is that you want to see how many times all relevant literature has cited you studies of interest. In my view, any rigorous citation analysis study should use at least two sources:
* Google Scholar: This is the biggest citation database, and captures almost everything, with no concern about the quality of the referring articles. Every other citation database is pretty much a subset of what Google Scholar captures.
* At least one other relevant citation database: "Relevant" means that the citation database in question specializes on the topic area of interest, normally including almost all high-quality sources in the field. For HCI, this is doubtlessly ACM Digital Library (ACMDL)--HCI is a very explicit focus for ACM. ACMDL would probably have lower citation counts than Scopus, since Scopus includes far more sources, but in a sense they would "count" more, since they better reflect how much the articles have been cited in the HCI community.
I'm not sure if this captures your intent, but it is worth considering. If so, then it would render your concern moot about what exactly Scopus might or might not index.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/05/12
| 1,179
| 4,678
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it right practice to place "Dr." before name of PhD degree holder? What is reason for placing such "Doctor" label before name?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, this is the right practice.
A PhD degree is a "Doctor of Philosophy", and the appropriate formal title for that is "Doctor". That there are other professions that can be called "Doctor", for example holders of an MD degree, is simply because there are multiple fields one could be a Doctor of.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: "Doctor" is from the Latin meaning "teacher" (much like "doctrine," or much as "docent" for either similar positions overseas or the post of museum guide domestically), the premise being that those skilled in actual medicine (and not the guesswork that had prevailed for the millennia before) were now considered expert enough to guide or instruct others. It had actually been used for non-medical fields for centuries earlier.
The twist, of course, is that we now use the title in a "social context" *only* for those in the Johnny-come-lately field of medicine, perhaps because of the obvious embarrassment that might arise when someone styling themselves "Doctor" is rushed to a trauma scene at a party and asked to save someone's life; the need to distinguish those individuals possessing such skills has trumped the prestige factor for all those in other worthy disciplines. As someone who pursued both for a time, I can say: my job is important, even critical, but it ain't lifesaving.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Only Ph.D’s must be refered as to Doctors because they hold doctoral degrees and they “teach”. The word Doctor means “teacher or I teach”. Physicians should be only called “Physicians” because they hold only Bachelors degrees in medicine. In the USA, they took the Bachelors in medicine and surgery program and divided into two programs only to be addressed as to doctors. Physicians are only treating people not teaching people.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Not in Austria. In Austria, Dr. is an official part of the name of a person who has a doctorate degree (or has undergone "Nostrifikation", which means that a degree is formally certified to be equivalents of a Dr.) For the most part, "Dr." degrees have been phased out after the Bologna process.
Post-Bologna doctoral studies usually award a PhD, which, as an academic degree, is also oficially part of the name.
So roughly speaking, if you finished (more or less) the same course of studies in pre-Bologna days, you're Dr. IgotiT, whereas if you finished it in post-Bologna days, you're IgotiT, PhD.
The degrees may well be equivalent as far as their academic value is concerned, but nevertheless, you cannot use them interchangably.
Carrying an academic degree that you're not legally entitled to is punishable by up to one year of jail, although I find it unlikely that anyone is actually going to convict you for using "Dr", when in fact you're a "PhD". Don't count on it though, I am not a lawyer.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: The term, "Doctor", has been used to describe accomplished scholars as early as the 1300s. It's derived from the latin verb, "docere", which means, to teach. Historically I think that's the inevitable conclusion of any sort of learning journey--the drive to share that accumulated knowledge with others. The title of Doctor is a means to socially honor those that have dedicated years to learning. The point is to recognize them as subject matter experts, regardless of what they choose to do with that attained knowledge.
In recent centuries, we developed a convention to call physicians "Doctors". They may or may not treat patients. They may or may not hold a PhD. They may or may not teach. None of that is the point. The point is to demonstrate that a physician is learned enough to be trusted and respected in their field of study--medicine.
This is uniquely important considering that lives are on the line, but the reasoning is the same as those with a Doctorate degree. I suppose they wanted to make it very clear to the public that medical doctors are experts, even though many don't hold a mainstream post-graduate degree. Other, non-medical disciplines may be incredibly complex in their own right, but they don't require the same level of public faith.
So, in a way, medical providers being called Doctors is a deceptively clever marketing device used to safeguard the health of countless millions of lives.
...and regardless of the formalities and technicalities of any country's academic taxonomy, it just boils down to the title's original purpose, to honor learning.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/05/12
| 391
| 1,627
|
<issue_start>username_0: I see people here often use the term 'top-tier' when referring to journals/conferences. Is it used to refer to the top publications in terms of metrics like the impact factor? Or is it used to refer to venues which are traditionally highly-regarded but not necessarily having high impact factors?<issue_comment>username_1: Top tier can mean a lot of different things to different people - and indeed, can mean a lot of things to different *fields*. Ask a diverse group of academics drawing from math, health science, and the humanities what a "good" impact factor is sometime if you have the chance - the variability is massive.
Personally, for me, when I say "Top Tier" I'm usually thinking of soft factors - journals where solid publications go, venues that you'd highlight on the cover letter of a CV, etc. That often has an association with Impact Factor, but it's not necessarily fixed. For example, *PLoS One* has an impact factor that's about on par with several journals I'd consider "Top Tier" in my field, but *PLoS One* isn't on that list.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I many parts of Asia "Top Tier" tends mean journals and conferences that are high ranked by their National Research Foundation. The NRF tend to rank journals based on journal index, and other criteria.
In Europe top tier tended to mean the journals that the respective community believed to be of high quality.
Very generally, journals could be ranked by impact, but even high-impact journals may not be considered top tier by your research community / university / funding agency.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/12
| 391
| 1,632
|
<issue_start>username_0: What is the difference between bursary, scholarship and fellowship funding?
Is a fellowship more prestigious than a scholarship which in turn is more prestigious than a bursary?<issue_comment>username_1: These three terms essentially mean the same thing. Bursary is the term for scholarship used in the UK. Normally, a bursary is given based on need which is not always the case with fellowships/scholarships. In my personal experience in America, the term bursary is rarely used. Instead, we often use the term "grant", which is a synonym for bursary.
Fellowship is also another term for bursary/scholarship. However, fellowships are usually awarded at the graduate level whereas a scholarship can be awarded at either grad or undergrad level. In addition, fellowships are often considered a highly prestigious award.
As you can see, there are minor differences in these three terms. Determining which to use will mainly depend on the context of the situation
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In the UK, a bursary refers to funding given on the basis of financial need, whereas a scholarship is given on the basis of academic merit (this distinction is currently important with regard to student finance).
I'm not sure on the distinction between scholarship and fellowship. However, my experience would be consistent with the interpretation that a scholarship typically provides funding for a position you already have, whereas a fellowship itself provides the position. I don't think I've come across 'fellowship' referring to a student position, only to employment.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/12
| 3,246
| 14,029
|
<issue_start>username_0: Often while reading a paper, I will see a citation that that seems more relevant than my current one. I'll switch to the new paper, only to experience a similar feeling. Or maybe I need to look something up on Wikipedia. An hour later, I'll still feel as if I didn't really **digest** anything. I will have skimmed 2-4 papers' introductions and conclusions, scratched some notes on the side, and generally feel overwhelmed.
Is this a bad habit? An abnormal feeling? How have others dealt with this to become more productive readers?
I'm fairly new to research, if that matters.<issue_comment>username_1: Your problem is quite common among researchers. Actually it's not really a problem, being overwhelmed like this is just natural. Me and all my friends and colleagues face it.
How I overcame this issue: I try to focus on one paper at a time. Try starting reading the latest research paper on a particular subject and go back chronologically. Print the research paper in hard copy, leave your computer and cell phone (if possible) behind and start reading the paper. The point here is to avoid internet access. No matter what question you have, do not search it right away. Write it on the side notes and keep reading. Most of the time the answer will be in the later sections of the same article. Even if you do not get the answers, once you finish reading the paper, you can go online and find all the answers. That's how I read literature without falling in a rabbit hole.
Also, reading the Abstract first, then the conclusion, and then the rest of the paper is also effective.
For me, changing place of study also helps to focus and good instrumental music is always a plus.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: (For context, I am in mathematics, and worked on it for almost 20 years before the convenience of the internet...) As suggested by @JonCuster's comment, I think this is what is *supposed* to happen when one is studying (!). That is, I think genuine study of the literature *is* "going down the rabbit hole"... and/but not giving up or bailing out somehow. Sure, sometimes there's a "grass is greener on the other side" feeling, but when looking at the research literature it is entirely reasonable to be stubborn in the sense of insisting on explanations.
It struck me that you mention "after an hour, and looking at 2-4 papers"... when I often find myself looking at papers all day long with the conclusion being that there were things that I didn't understand, or wasn't aware of, or had forgotten, that have surprising/significant impacts on the issue I'm considering.
It is true that this (I claim *genuine*) seeming-inefficiency is wildly incompatible with the assembly-line notion of "research" that we find ourselves being pushed into for various reasons. Hmm... :)
Making notes with good bibliographic indicators, and typing-up these notes rather than leaving them handwritten, and *dating* everything clearly, is the only thing I know to keep back the deluge. *Dating*, especially, so that months or years later you can see at least your own personal chronology of awareness is very useful, I think, since it can explain things to your future self about your present and past self's behavior.
In a similar vein, rather than attempting to organize computer files "by concept", in some cases (when the concept is not entirely clear!) it is simply best to organize by chronology.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: It is interesting that you used the concept of "rabbit hole" when you are new to research. Couple of things:
**Uncertainty is Always There**: You read it right. The "rabbit hole" is always there. In fact at first it is the "black hole" that sucks you in and you are amazed/sad/angry all at once!. This is normal because the area is new, you have no idea how to make something out of it. As you progress the hole starts to fill in more and more, however the uncertainty is always there but your approach at the research become more and more clear and becoming more smart and you will guess what your contribution will be. This bring me to the second point.
**Contribution**: Take your area, and work toward a contribution. You can never be 100% sure about a contribution until you could prove it in a respectable publication. This is the whole point, you dont fill the "hole" completely, however you fill it a little so the next researcher that comes to your area, feel a little more comfortable in the "rabbit hole".
**Read Read Read!**: Keep reading, take notes, see who is doing what, and then after a year or two, if I ask you about your area, you know the history and you know who did what. Most of the time it comes down to few people. You will be amazed how many few people are bringing your research area forward.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Getting hold of a good literature survey paper helps especially if written recently...given that it exists for your topic.If so you probably wont do better than citing the relevant paper mentioned in the survey. Hand-books also help identify which papers ought to be the go to papers for citation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I have previously written an [answer](https://math.stackexchange.com/a/617995/26580) to the math version of the same question. I see no reason why it can't be applied to this case as well.
The human tendency is to prefer worrying about the most recently raised concern: You are reading paper X. You see a term T you don't recognize. You decide to pause reading X to quickly look up T (of course, underestimating how long that will take). You find a paper Y explaining T. While reading Y you find another unclear term U. U has been encountered just now, but T and X were minutes or hours ago - of course U seems like the more urgent thing to figure out. Next thing you know, you're in a meeting about X, you don't know a damn thing about X, but you sure learned everything there is to know about U!
So the human mind, at least in my experience, operates as a stack (in fact a leaky stack, since our attention is quite limited and things at the bottom often become forgotten instead of just delayed). The stack happens to be the defining feature of depth-first search algorithms.
By many relevant metrics, depth-first search (DFS) is a particularly bad choice for reading papers. For instance, presumably the paper you are reading is expected to contain the most important information to you at the time; if there was one that seemed more important, you would read that instead. But with DFS, you will spend a lot of time reading other papers, only distantly related to the original paper - ie. you will waste your time on less useful things.
Because human knowledge is vast, your attention will become exhausted long before DFS hits the wall and starts returning to the original topic.
Probably the biggest reason more efficient approaches (for instance breadth-first search [BFS]) are not more common is that they require additional hardware. Namely, a pen and paper to write a list of things to look up as you read the paper, so that you don't have to split your attention between reading the paper and remembering this growing to-do list. One also has to fight one's own laziness when going to grab a pen and paper, and then (gasp) actually writing, which is much slower than thinking.
Also, the only important point isn't the order in which you look things up. There is also a pruning issue. Many people (including myself) will overestimate how important a term is to understanding the main point (quite a silly habit, since it's essentially trying to guess what it will take to understand a text you have yet neither read nor understood). With a BFS style approach, often it turns out that most of those things you thought you should look up don't really matter and you don't need to look them up. With the DFS, it is much harder to tell what terms actually matter, which ones are irrelevant and which ones become obvious by the end of the text.
Basically, you have to exercise your patience and rebuke your inner sloth. Finish reading your current thing first before looking everything up. Don't worry, you won't forget - just write down what needs to be looked up, with references to where it occurred if you are very worried. Yes, you do have to physically write things, which is clumsy (hence why I say rebuke your inner sloth) but absolutely necessary to overcome some crucial limitations of the human brain. You can type instead of writing, or highlight, or draw !'s on the margins - doesn't really matter, so long as you use a physical (as opposed to mental) means of recording it, and finish what you're reading before starting to read other things.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: As username_1 already said, if you know that there is one paper you need to focus on, a good solution is to print out the paper, turn your phone off, leave the office, and go read it in a cafe/park/at home/on holiday/in the library without the ability to download another paper. Bring a notebook with you and make notes on paper or in the margins. If there's a reference that seems important, just make a note of it for later, when you're back at your computer. Setting aside time like this can be a greatly enjoyable experience, especially if your normal mode is skimming.
If the issue is that you don't know which papers you need to focus on, an excellent solution is to join a reading group. Or, if there isn't an appropriate one in existence, start one yourself. Find some likeminded people with an interest in a similar area, decide collectively which paper to read next, and set a date to discuss it. This not only provides a great motivation for sticking to the target paper, but you also get the help of other people in deciding what's important, and the subsequent discussion can be an enormous help in understanding both technical details and the broader context. You'll almost certainly be doing your colleagues a favour as well by starting a reading group, and it will also give you experience organising groups of people, which is invaluable for a future research career.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: One way would be to write down every term or phrase that spark your interest and look them up later.
The best way in this day and age, in my opinion, is to **open up each paper you plan to read in a new tab in your browser and sort them in order of importance**. For example, the paper that you are currently reading should be in the active tab; the next tab should be the paper you want to read after you stop reading your current paper, and so on. Then you can easily stop reading one paper, switch to another and deprioritize what you were just reading by moving it down the tabs list so you can get back to it right away or a bit later. You can also utilize favorites to add papers you want to go back to later.
However...
Falling down one of those rabbit holes led me to changing fields and a different career path. I am very happy about that and I think others might be too if they just follow their thirst for knowledge and do not resist it. It is very natural for a scientist (and for any person!) to be open minded and constantly search for something more interesting, fascinating, amazing, and readjust academic and personal goals accordingly. Whenever you find something interesting that seems more important than what you are doing now, check it out, maybe it is! If it's not, drop it like a rock and go to the next paper, or back to your previous one. You can get really, REALLY fast at multitasking like that using browser tabs/favorites to organize/reorganize your reading list. Use CTRL+F searches to quickly find the phrases you need. Modern PDF viewers also utilize tab systems, which gives you even more organizing power. Get good at this and those deep rabbit holes won't seem that deep anymore and you will find plenty of wonderlands down there with much less effort.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Some tips for dealing with the rabbit-hole when starting in a new area:
* **Try to find an existing literature review of the field:** When you are entering a new field, the best resource to start with (if it exists!) is a well-written literature review that takes you through the history of the field, and tells you about the main papers, research questions, results, etc. For example, [Fang and Moro (2010)](http://www.nber.org/papers/w15860) gives an excellent summary of economic literature on discrimination, which is pitched with a level of detail that allows a good overview of models, without wading into every bit of minutia. This kind of resource allows you to learn about some of the main papers in a field without a huge reading investment.
* **Find and read the "core" papers in the field:** After you have read a good literature review of the field, the next step is to read the "core" papers in detail, to get a good understanding of the main investigations and results. (Even if there is no literature summary to find these, when you look up papers in a new field, most of them will cite some of the core papers in the literature somewhere in the introduction, to establish themselves within a context of broader work. If you see that multiple papers in the field all cite certain core papers in their introduction, this can be a good indication that those papers are important starting points in the literature.) Reading and re-reading the main papers in the literature is a good way to get good core knowledge of the main results of the field. This is a good platform to learn the field in the long-run.
* **Now you're ready to go back down the rabbit-hole:** Once you have a good overview of the field, and have read some of the core papers, you are in a good position to go back down the rabbit-hole of reading individual papers, which give you leads to more papers, which give you leads to more papers, etc. Welcome to academic research!
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/12
| 897
| 3,703
|
<issue_start>username_0: What concerns/worries a potential PhD supervisor might have when he/she sees an application from someone who already has a PhD and applying for the second one? The fields of study are distantly related (engineering - physics).
What questions should be addressed in the initial letter by the applicant?
The first PhD is not a complete failure but an applicant wants to pursue his ultimate interests. The applicant has a postdoc position secured but has serious doubts working in the field that is not of major interest for him. Postdoc applications in the field of main interest didn't result in getting a position.<issue_comment>username_1: Here are the concerns *I* would have:
* Is this person seriously going to spend another N-years getting a second doctoral degree, and then go seek a postdoctoral position before pursuing the job they presumably want to have? If so, what is this going to do to their career, and do I want to be party to that?
* How did this person get all the way through a PhD in something other than their "ultimate interest"? Do they know what their "ultimate interest" is now?
* Did they try to switch fields mid-PhD, or get some credentializing in the field they wanted to be in. If so, how much? If not, why not?
* Do I think this person has strong prospects in this field? They've failed to get a postdoc - was this the result of just a small number of applications, or genuinely a problem. Again, if their postdoc application was weak, do I think it could be salvaged?
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think every PhD graduate was in your situation to some degree. Let me advise you to do not waste (you read it right!) your time for the second PhD degree. Nothing will come out of it. You could get a posdoc in the area that you like if it is applicable. Also you could find a job in the area of your interest. Again, don't waste your time, you already learned your lessons during your PhD degree and it is time to move on.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I know of one person who has two PhDs in somewhat related fields. His first PhD was on pure mathematics, and he managed to complete his second PhD in 3 years in operations research. For this person, earning this second PhD allowed him to get a job in a business school which pays quite a bit more than a job at a math department. He was also able to complete his PhD faster than average (the average/median at his school was about 5 years).
I know another person who got a PhD in physics and is now studying for a PhD in finance. While the fields are related, I suspect he is doing so because a PhD in finance would open doors that would not open with a PhD in physics.
To summarize, it is not typical for a person to study a second PhD but some people choose to do so and it can work out for them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: To bring in the key idea from the linked question:
I would expect one thought might be 'What does this person think a PhD is about?'
A PhD is not just about learning some new facts. That can be done by getting a book out of the library. A PhD is also about learning to be a researcher. Some of that will be the same for any subject - getting better at thinking carefully and reasoning well. Some of that will be shared between, say, sciences - getting better at research techniques, learning to write papers, style of teaching and presenting. The smaller part that is subject specific is often learned by doing a postdoc, or just as part of life as an academic.
Given that, I would think there needs to be a reason why a second PhD is the best way of acquiring new skills, rather than the alternatives.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/05/12
| 1,993
| 8,213
|
<issue_start>username_0: First, my question is **not** about how to write a good a paper, since there are already many guidelines on the internet, e.g. [this one](http://cs.stanford.edu/people/widom/paper-writing.html).
What often happens to me is: I designed algorithm, did all the experiments, and got good results. Now, I only need to write up the results to submit. But I just feel I can't do it, or at least not efficiently.
Although I have everything in my mind, I just stare at the screen and can't write anything. I just can't do it. And this leads to *procrastination*, which I hate so much.
Sometime, when I was doing the experiment, I thought I should write this way in the paper, and it should be very awesome. But when I actually wrote the first few sentences, they were just crap.
I thought I would start by describing the core algorithm first. But I didn't know how to present the idea, so I ended up polishing the introduction first, etc.
I'm not a new researcher; I'm already nearly one year into my post-doc, and have 6 papers published. It never took me less than a month to write just a 10-page paper, after several iterations, while some of my collaborators can write a paper in just a couple of days.
I thought it would be better with experience, but it didn't and I'm really frustrated with myself.
---
UPDATE
======
I think I'm suffering from the so-called *''blank page syndrome''* (or white page syndrome), but I'm not sure.<issue_comment>username_1: Based on my experience it helps to have the introduction and prior works at least somewhat taken care of. Then you can focus on writing up your algorithm. I do this by:
1. Reading at least one article every 2 days **and write about its strengths and weaknesses**. Save this abstract somewhere - like [Zotero](https://www.zotero.org/) or [Mendeley](https://mendeley.com/) notes.
2. When you start to write your paper, chose the most relevant from the prior works that you have already read.
3. Get the abstracts you wrote, paste in, edit.
If you use this method you will know the relevant prior works, and have a lot of the introduction already written. After that you can focus on the fun main contents. The only hard part is writing the abstract every two days.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm not sure if it helps, but here are two ideas that work for me (sometimes).
1. Don't try to write the paper in its order. Instead, start from the technical parts. This is simple - it is just writing your algorithm. Now, once you try to write the algorithm (and abstract it from code into pseudo-code), you will get stuck because something is missing (notations? a neat observation? a cool idea that makes things clearer?); note these down. Then, expand on the things you wrote down. Another way to begin is with the "cold" facts: the numbers, the experiments - just write the details down in the most dry way... (After the technical parts are written, move to writing the introduction and conclusion; by that time, you will have already broken your "writer's block", and the writing will flow much easier).
**tl;dr** start with the most simple (and technical) parts just to make the writing start.
2. Writing a paper is telling a story. You can't write it down? Try this - tell "the story of you paper" to someone else, say, a colleague or a family member. Do this twice or thrice, until you have a complete "story" in your head, and you gained some practice in telling it. Now, writing it down (just following the conversation you had with real people) may be way more simple.
---
Addendum: This is not a competition. Writing a paper *well*, takes about a month. Writing a good draft takes at least 2 weeks (of intense work!). Of course, some people can pull an all-nighter and come up with a paper. Don't pay attention to those, they are at the tail of the distribution.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I got around a similar problem by using a top-down approach:
1. Leave your desk, go outside, and take a walk. Return when you have decided on the overall story the paper is going to tell.
2. Write down placeholders for section headings. You can change them later. They just describe the high-level structure of the paper for you.
3. Write down subsection headings. You're probably not going to use subsections in the final paper, but the headings help laying down the second-level structure of the paper.
4. Describe the contents of each subsection with a few bullet points.
5. Write a little bit every day. Finish one subsection in the morning and another in the afternoon. Spend the rest of the day doing something else. Remember that the other subsections don't exist, and writing them up is not your problem.
6. After a couple of weeks, you have the first draft of the paper. You probably didn't spend more than a couple of days on it.
The natural order of writing a paper is often different from the natural order of reading it. My typical writing order is something like definitions and notation -> technical background -> results -> experiments -> conclusions -> introduction -> abstract.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I had the same problem. My solution is ridiculously simple: just write every day.
Recipe: You write every working day a specific number of words. Start with a small amount, say 150-200, and it can be any part of the paper you are writing. When you start, most of it will be garbage, but that is fine. You can re-write it the next day and that will likely go faster and smoother. As your "writing muscles" develop, the quality will become better. When I had this problem, I had to start my day with this writing task, which is what I would recommend for you as well. Also, very important: no vacations from writing days until you have mastered the skill.
I hope this helps.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The "ridiculously simple" solution offered by @username_4 is, I think, borne out not only by the experience of many authors from all kinds of backgrounds and with all kinds of material (novels, short stories, poetry, etc.), it is also one of the lynch-pins in the approach described by <NAME> in her book *Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks: A Guide to Academic Publishing Success*. If you aren't familiar with the book, I suggest that you get a copy. If you know of it, but believe that it could only be relevant to inexperienced writers, then I would like to disabuse you. Moreover, you should not be put off the idea of working steadily through the book while you write at least one paper, even though you want "efficiency" as your primary outcome. As Belcher remarks in the book, she's had many academics say to her, "I haven't got 12 weeks; I have to write my paper in a week". The fact is, that the tools in the book will help you to write any paper more efficiently that you are likely to be doing currently. I commend it to you.
There is one other point that I'd make which links @username_4's remarks to your own. You remark that you "designed algorithm, did all the experiments, and got good results. Now, [you] only need to write up the results to submit". I would suggest that if you wrote every single day, no matter whether you think you have much to write about or not, then you would already have a considerable amount of written material about your algorithm, your experiments, and the results that you would be revising and amalgamating to turn the pieces into a thesis, journal paper, or whatever. This is not intended as a criticism; rather, I'm pressing a point made by <NAME>. Namely, that it is a mistake to believe that writing, thinking and doing experiments, are separate activities. For many people, writing is thinking. We discover what we think by writing. And if you're working every single day on writing something, whether it's directly connected with your thesis or not, you will become more efficient. Sure, work on the easier (non-argument) parts first, but write something every day. You don't become an efficient craftsman by slogging away with blunt tools; it is by sharpening the axe of writing that you will be able to cut through your task more efficiently.
Upvotes: 2
|