date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2016/08/04
| 1,548
| 6,322
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergrad student working at a large research hospital over the summer. My research has been making very good progress; my PI has implied that we are likely to ultimately publish it.
My abstract was selected for a prestigious oral presentation (fewer than 10% of [not exclusively undergrad] students were selected), but something doesn't sit right with me about the authorship she suggested.
My PI added a few authors who never actually contributed, but she hoped would. At least one of them still hasn't. This didn't bother me but is starting to because a student who has put a lot of work in is being excluded.
This grad student conducted and scored the neuropsychological assessments for most of my participants, and those scores are key for my research question and results. The student works in a lab that collaborates closely with mine. I suggested that she should be given authorship, but my PI told me that she should not be. After sending my abstract to the list of collaborators, one of them even asked me why the grad student student was not asked to be an author.
Since this is a niche field that I likely want to work in, I am worried about creating resentment. I know that this is ultimately just a summer research project, but if it goes further and becomes published I would not feel right with my exclusion. It just doesn't sit right.
My question is two-fold:
(a) Is it worthwhile to ask that the student be given authorship? The PI of the other lab is notoriously abrasive, and I wonder if my PI wants to avoid giving her too many footholds in this project. I don't want to stick my head into institutional politics. Does this student even deserve authorship?
(b) How do I approach this subject with my PI? She is a very nice person and I don't usually feel intimidated by her, but I'm keenly aware of my position as an undergraduate researcher at the bottom of the academic ladder.
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: This is an extremely sensitive issue that must be handled with care. Although no decision can be stated black or white, there are a few things you ought to keep in mind before making it.
The decision you make depends on your morals, survival and comfort.
Assuming *X* to be the contributor in question whose name is being excluded from the author list in the first place, let's first review through the possible options you have:
>
> 1. Discuss this issue a little deeper with your PI. Inquire about the *guidelines* of authorship on her point of view (as suggested by @FábioDias). Ask why should be a contributor's name be omitted while a non-contributor be included, in a *diplomatic* way of course.
>
>
>
This option could worth a try as you wouldn't be directly opposing the choice made by your PI depending on how diplomatic you are in your conversation. Try to understand the rationale behind her decision. Her experiences may clarify your views on what an author is to be. Though this may make you a little uncomfortable by asking this, choosing this option shows that you value your morals and keep you at a relatively good term with your PI too.
>
> 2. Discuss this covertly with *X*'s PI. State the situation and let the two PIs come to a conclusion. Or, discuss this with another trusted faculty member of the same institution.
>
>
>
The covert part might not always work out right. This could backfire on you quite badly if the other *abrasive* PI do not agree with your condition of anonymity or if your PI comes to know of this by other means.
>
> 3. Try to strongly convince your PI to include *X*'s name in the author list of the paper. If not, go against your PI and submit the paper with the list of authors you choose (provided you are the corresponding author).
>
>
>
By doing this you are really staging a protest here. The next objective would be then find a different PI who matches your ideals. Frankly, I don't know of many prospective PIs who would welcome rebels. You may have to endure quite a long cold war. By choosing this option you are making a point that your value your morals far more than the survival in the institution.
>
> 4. Tell your PI that you would not submit unless *X*'s name be included.
>
>
>
Now, this does seem rebellious too but not as strong as option 3. Ultimately you may even have your paper published even without your own name in it (a very unlikely event).
>
> 5. Just do as your PI instructed and ignore that any of this had happened. You don't include *X*'s name and publish the paper.
>
>
>
This is the safest option if you want your rapport with your PI to be smooth in the future. Choose this if your survival weighs over your moral in this case. How much discomfort you feet in the end about yourself depends on your mindset.
There may be more options to this, but at any case, think through this carefully and make a decision based on what matters to you the most.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's complicated.
1) If Lab a and Lab b collaborate on a topic (and bring their own funding), and the the Contributions from both are beyond the current standard (i.e. research), then both contributors should be on it.
2) If Lab b provides a service to Lab a (sample preparation, microsopy, genetic sequencing) and gets paid for it in some way, and the this service is common knowledge, then Lab b should not be on the paper
For example: If undergrad in Lab b said "i see why the standard method is not working on your samples", the n he would have contributed. Plainly doing work does not qualify for being included on the authors list.
These things have to be dealt with between PI to PI. For sure the other PI was aware that the undergrad there was involved.
So there are a few points to consider
* Your PI does not like to include the other PIs student, since she knows the other PI want to be included as soon as the student is included.
* From the other PI's side it could be the same motivation, but the other way round.
* Authorship problem can have nasty consequences (read retraction watch) - maybe you have an ombudsman for scientific integrity issues at your institution
* The inclusion of people who did not contribute is something which some journals exclude explicitly, however, it is usual.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/05
| 389
| 1,746
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student getting ready to apply for graduate school in a few months. I have worked in two jobs in Physics (my desired field), one in experimental and one theoretical. At each job I have at least two people willing to provide reference letters, and I believe all of them would be good references.
Many of the graduate application websites indicated that 2 (or more) letters of reference are required.
When I apply to one of these programs is it better to double down and use 2 letters that apply to the same program (ie, use 2 references from experimental group when applying to an experimental graduate program)? Or would it be better to have a bit of variety (ie, one letter from each group, regardless of whether I am applying to experimental or theoretical)?
I'm leaning towards the variety, because I think that two letters from the same job would end up having the said the same thing, whereas the variety gives the university an idea of my breadth of knowledge.<issue_comment>username_1: The content of the letter is more important than whether the author is a theorist or experimentalist. I suggest you ask your letter writers what they think. They will know if they will write you a good letter better than I will.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **All else being equal, the variety would be beneficial.**
I agree with username_1 that the specific content of the letters is most important.
However, if you don't have a strong preference based on who you think will write the best letters, I would go with your instinct of getting one letter from each job. Showing that you can succeed in multiple contexts, in different kinds of work, is a good thing.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/08/05
| 2,501
| 10,939
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m currently doing my masters in chemical engineering in a relatively unknown university here in the Philippines. For my master’s thesis, I am planning to theoretically model transport processes of spray drying of nutraceuticals. Neither my advisor nor any other professors here are experts on the subject.
I wish to know:
* Is it still possible to do publishable or even outstanding research by learning the state-of-the-art of the area, specifically about transport modelling, by myself?
* How can I approach this dilemma? (I just need the extra boost in confidence since I am wading through unknown waters here.)
I do have experience on research and writing papers as I have experienced it during my bachelors. Also, I do think people in my current department will be able to understand my research since the topic that I want to pursue largely deals with basic chemical engineering principles. Although, I'm quite in doubt really in my current course of action since none of them are experts on theoretical modelling. I didn't publish anything from my bachelor's work, and I am still relatively a neophyte at research.<issue_comment>username_1: At some point in a research career you will need to learn directly from papers. Even as a practical programmer, when I wanted the absolute state of the art in an area, I would read academic papers, not wait for the material to show up in textbooks. A researcher often ends up knowing more about their topic than anyone else in the world, not just in their university, and must learn by means that don't depend on access to more knowledgeable people.
That does not mean your proposed course is a wise one at this stage in your career.
As I see it, student research has three objectives:
1. Learn how to do research
2. Collect evidence you can do research, in the form of degrees and letters of recommendation.
3. Contribute to the collective body of knowledge.
You need to decide the weight of these objectives for yourself, but generally the earlier you are in your studies and career, the greater the importance of the first two objectives.
The risk you are potentially taking is sacrificing the first two objectives at a relatively early stage. If your professors do not understand the subject of your research, they may be less able to guide you. It may also be harder for them to judge the quality of your research, which they need to do in order to grant degrees and write recommendation letters.
If you already have really good research skills, the first objective is unnecessary for you. However, if you had that much research experience I doubt you would be asking this question.
You might consider a compromise: Pick some research direction that fits with the research at your university but moves in the direction you want. For example, do a theoretical modeling project that models something your professors do know about.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. Yes, it is possible to learn everything by yourself without expert help, but it will be very inefficient.
2. I'd pick another subject. Science is full of researchers and entire research groups that are doing qualitatively good work, but are just not at the cutting edge because they have an insufficiently developed overview of the field they are working on.
My prediction is that you will spend too much time learning new things, not enough time actually researching. You'll write something that might be good enough in the end (if you're good), but very likely it will not be anything groundbreaking, and probably will be something that has already been done before or turns out to be trivial.
My suggestion (as you obviously want to do something special) is to pick a normal topic, on which your supervisors are experts, and then try to expand from there if your initial steps are successful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As already mentioned, it is quite common that an experienced researcher learns a new topic from scratch – usually to somehow combine it with topics they are already familiar with. One way to do this is to give this extension as a thesis project to an advisee, whose main task is to learn about the new topic and connect it with the group’s existing work. It’s something that happens quite frequently in our work group and may be a good approach for you.
The advisor then learns about the topic through status updates, theses, writing publications with the advisee, and possibly visiting conferences with the advisee. On the other hand, the advisee learns to research through the advisor scrutinising their work – though it may sound a bit trite, a central aspect of research is to ask the right questions and to do this, your advisor does not need to be the foremost expert on your topic. The advisee can also learn about writing, since it does not depend on the subject that much and good papers should be understandable by a broader audience than just experts on that particular topic.
However, this approach may not be suited for everybody and every topic. A few points to consider:
* Is your advisor willing to do this and does this fit his style of advising?
* How large is the topic that you would have to learn? On a related note: How important are method knowledge, specific subject knowledge, and a wide overview important in your field (or with other words: How strong is specialisation in your field?)? For example, in my interdisciplinary area, new ideas and research often come from people combining concepts of different fields, on which they are not the foremost experts.
* Is there a connection between the topic and your advisor’s topic that you can build upon?
* Do you have some connection (e.g., via your advisor) to an expert on the topic, who can give feedback on your work every now and then?
All of these things can only be decided who knows your field or supervisor, respectively.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Beyond learning the state-of-the-art (something that university prepares you for), research worth publishing, especially outstanding one, requires a few other skills. For instance (from my experience):
1. Can you identify the key relevant papers in the area where you plan to do research? An expert can point you the right direction.
2. Can you identify the implicit rules in the area that you'll need to follow? Experts might not be able to identify them, but will at least tell you if you're violating them.
3. Theoretical modeling picks some assumptions and approximations and develops the consequences of those. A good student can do the second part. But it can take more experience to understand well the first part and the implicit rules to follow for a paper (in relation to (2)). Otherwise, you might do perfect work and have its starting point challenged by reviewers.
4. For outstanding research, can you identify the questions and approaches the community sees as worthwhile?
In my field (programming languages, across computer science and maths), some of those are things I learned during PhD and that aren't written or collected in many places, they're just folklore to experts and are transmitted from advisors to students in a system that resembles in some respects a medieval guild (without any malice implied). I understand that's common in research across fields: that's one reason this website exists, but it's of course not a complete advisor ;-).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I'd stay away from that approach.
Reason: while the papers you consume will contain the cutting edge information, they will not contain the mundane basics of the field, i.e., things that "everybody" knows by practice, just by being around other people. Things that are too trivial to write down.
Ask yourself how important it is that you do a topic that is not common at your university. If you have such strong reasons for it, are they good enough for you to move to another uni (maybe abroad) where there are experts on it? If not, are there really not any experts around which have their own topics you can fit in with?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: **Definitely Yes!**
The way people do research is changing so rapidly that by the time you finish reading this answer it will probably be out of date. I'll make the intro short and go straight to what you need to solo your (theoretical) research project.
**1. Time.** When you work in a team of experts in your field, you get things done much quicker. If you work alone, everything takes much longer.
**2. Money.** You need money to buy time, mainly. If you need to pay off a student loan or work part time to pay the bills, you will probably not have enough time to finish reading all those articles and books in time.
**3. Google Scholar.** You can find full texts of most of the papers you will ever need there, and an abstract of virtually every paper.
**4. Access to book torrent trackers.** Legally, this is a grey area, but it puts everyone on the level playing field, whether you are a student from Harvard or some local college in India. Hey, there was a time when it was illegal for women to read. It still is in some countries.
**5. Stack Overflow.** Present your research results with working code, making it easily reviewable, replicable, and implementable for industry and other researchers. Leveraging the current tech will catapult you to the top.
**6. E-mail spam.** Once you have the results you suspect someone might be interested in, find them and let them know. These potential targets can be universities you want to apply to for a PhD program, companies that you want to work for, or journal editors that you suspect might be interested in publishing your work. Send a few emails per day, wait for their response, improve your letter (taking into consideration the responses of previous targets), keep sending your cold e-mails until you get a positive response.
There are so many tools out there for you to do the research independently nowadays, all you need is passion, a lot of time, and a little bit of money. Hey, Einstein figured out his theory of relativity in his patent shop without computers, Internet, Google, Stack Exchange, etc. etc..
Two more things I would like to add. The recent wave of progress is leaving a lot of "old school" researchers behind so you may not get a warm welcome when you cut a bunch of corners with your state-of-the-art tech and get their job with a higher salary just by punching a few keys on a keyboard and clicking some links. Another thing is, a lot of people are doing the same thing. People from South America to Europe, to Africa, to India, to Asia all of a sudden have all these tools to do research that for centuries was only accessible to the western elite. State-of-the-art doesn't stay state-of-the-art for too long so you got to keep up with it or you will be swept aside by the same force that you exploited on your way up.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/05
| 825
| 3,511
|
<issue_start>username_0: My coauthor and I work at some organization. After I started working with him, people told me that he allegedly took some data (used in the paper) from the organization without authorization (He was let go from the organization.)
I received a letter from the organization stating that he indeed took the data without authorization. He explained that if I finished the paper he will send the paper to the organization for clearance. I asked him to show me the document, but he only replied: “I am in good relation with that organization.” So, I gave him benefits of doubts and I did all the work, including every calculation.
While he had been claiming that “the data breach is a rumor”, I confronted him over the phone and he finally admitted that the data breach is a fact. I myself have acquired clearance with the organization regarding the data breach since then. However, he refuses to withdraw from the paper.
As for the paper, I have proved every single result, every single calculation, and every single sentence of the paper. He did not do anything. I asked him and he cannot define a very basic term used in the paper. He said: “But it is not honest to ask me to remove my name only by simple assumption like the one you raised.”
I would think of proceeding as
1. ask the coauthor to provide me the formal paperwork on this issue,
2. if the coauthor fails to provide me these documents then I would need to drop him from the paper.
Do you think it make sense? Are there any other procedures that I need to follow?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I have proved every single result, every single calculation, and every single sentence of the paper. He did not do anything.
>
>
>
There are different criteria for determining authorship, but at least you must do one of the following:
* Provide funding OR
* Provide or gather data OR
* Participate in the analysis OR
* Preparation of the manuscript
It seems your co-author, regardless of his lack of action regarding the data breach, hasn't done any of this, so he wouldn't qualify for authorship even under the most generous criteria.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Criteria for authorship depend on the journal, but generally follow something along the lines of [the ICMJE recommendations](http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html#two). To be an author, you should:
1. have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of
the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data
for the work; AND
2. Drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content; AND
3. Approved the final version to be published; AND
4. Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of
the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
You don't mention who conceived or designed the study, but unless he made a substantial contribution to this he hasn't met #1, since you acquired and interpreted the data (if he initially provided the data but was not allowed to, that doesn't count). It doesn't sound like he's met #2. If you've showed him the final version he could claim he's met #3 and he would probably agree to #4 even though this would be misrepresenting his ability to follow the rest of the work.
Basically, you leave him off the author list but (potentially) acknowledge him.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/08/05
| 2,155
| 9,540
|
<issue_start>username_0: A follow up to [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/73544/41631) question.
There is an issue in science with experiments not being repeated. I asked if PhDs can be done on repeating experiments and the answer is kind of mixed. Most PhDs aren't that. I don't suspect that professors repeat experiments often.
So, who is supposed to repeat experiments in academia?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not sure anyone is supposed to repeat experiments, in any formalized way. In engineering, and I suppose physics, you end up repeating experiments because you are looking to use a method to solve a problem. So if someone has published a method to solve a particular problem, researchers will often try it in order to see how well it works for their system. Some methods work better than others, and I guess the best performing methods will be cited and used and become well known. Methods that don't work, or method with flaws and errors will tend to be forgotten over time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As far as computer science is concerned, there are some journals that require experiments to be perfectly repeatable. In such cases they even require randomizer seeds to be explicitly stated during the review stage. However, not all journals have this sort of constraint, it differs from one reviewer to another.
Coming back to PhDs, in the end, it is nearly *always* up to the scholar to repeat the results to verify and refine them as needed. If you are working in a research team, you could use the *published* results produced or repeated by your peers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Researchers don't start their work from scratch. New methods and objects appear to improve and extend previous research. If I read an article applying method X to object A and intend to apply method X to object B, I will:
* replicate the experiment with method X and object A in order to check that my understanding of method X is correct
* perform a new experiment with method X and object B
* likely send a friendly notice to the authors of the original paper to tell them I've replicated their experiment.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In my field (sub-engineering), doing an experiment can be very costly and time consuming (to be honest, I haven't really heard of anyone repeating a full experiment!). So, it is very common for a PhD student to test 1-3 full scale specimens. For each experiment we do, we often develop a very detailed (3D, nonlinear, etc.) finite element model (that is validated against our experimental data). This model is also used to conduct a parametric study. In many occasions, this model is repeated by other researchers to study other parameters/case scenarios. So, in a way (and indirectly), the experiment is repeated!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: **The gold standard is blind, independent replication.** However, this almost never happens because it costs a similar amount (of materials and time) and there is less benefit to the researcher who repeats the experiments, so there is little incentive. Next down would be independent replication by another group, then replication within the same group. **The bare minimum is that the experiment be described in sufficient detail *to be* reproduced**. For example, the 'Instructions to Authors' in the Journal of Infection and Immunity (which is fairly typical) states:
>
> the Materials and Methods section should include sufficient technical
> information to allow the experiments to be repeated.
>
>
>
Reproducibility is one of the most important issues when describing or reviewing a scientific paper ([ref](http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/IAI.00908-10)). Knowing that a result is less likely to be attributable to a chance combination of uncontrolled parameters, or a mistake on behalf of the scientist conducting the experiment or recording the experimental conditions, increases confidence that the result seen is a 'genuine' phenomenon. As <NAME>, the founder of the scientific method, put it:
>
> Non-reproducible single occurrences are of no significance to science.
>
>
>
(Popper 1959, *The logic of scientific discovery*. Hutchinson, London, United Kingdom.)
Unfortunately, most journals place a high premium on novelty and therefore it is more difficult to publish reproductions of previous studies, and when these are published they are often in less important journals. Funders, similarly, direct reviewers to score grant applications based, amongst other things, on novelty. **This greatly reduces the incentive to replicate published studies** - if you can't get funding to do something and you wouldn't be able to publish it anyway, it won't get done. Two other major and common obstacles to independent validation are:
1. that it requires the involvement of another lab with the same resources and skills, which might be very rare;
2. For experiments involving animals specifically, there is an ethical requirement to [minimise the use of experimental animals](https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/the-3rs#The%203Rs%20definitions).
The lack of reproducibility of experiments is a problem in most areas of science and awareness of this is growing. In 2012 this prompted the [Reproducibility Initiative](http://validation.scienceexchange.com/#/), where researchers can pay a fee for blind, independent replication prior to publication.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/O2Mu3.jpg)
This sounded like a step in the right direction at the time but as far as I know awareness of the initiative remains fairly low, uptake has not been great and 'proper' reproduction remains very rare indeed.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: I worked for some years in discrete optimization and must say that most computational experiments are not repeated in any rigorous way. From the scientific papers, it is usually not possible to reconstruct the method in detail because source code is not published.
In a very weak sense you could say that methods are repeated because people read about published methods and reimplement similar methods for their own optimization problems. So methods that appear in literature very often seem to be good.
On the other hand, you cannot really trust any "numerical experiments" that are published because usually nobody (not even reviewers) checked the implementations for bugs and logical errors.
I personally think that the requirement to always publish something "new" leads to a lot "inventions" of algorithms (that hide that fact that they are reformulated old algorithms), but prevents people from thoroughly analyzing the work of others.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Those whose research benefits from it
-------------------------------------
While it would be nice to repeat experiments, in practice we as a society don't really want1 scientists to repeat them just because, we want them to create new knowledge instead.
So experiments usually are repeated in three cases:
1. When a researcher doubts the original experiment - if they distrust the outcome or the procedure, then replicating the experiment (possibly with modifications!) is useful science, since it creates new knowledge in addition to the initial result, no matter if the replication yields similar or different results. A negative result would definitely be publishable, and a positive result would be publishable iff the wider community also consider the first experiment as shaky and needing confirmation.
2. When a researcher proposes an improved method or theory, they will often reproduce the previous experiment to make a proper comparison instead of just comparing reported numbers.
3. Some experiments are replicated during teaching process, either to illustrate a concept to students, or to teach grad students state-of-art techniques before setting them on new experiments.
However, for experiments that are both hard to perform and seem trustworthy, there is no incentive to repeat them, it would not be particularly useful for the required effort. If you're *really sure* about the results that you'll get, then you don't gain *any* information by doing it, and that's not research anymore.
1Ignoring empty words, this is clearly illustrated by actions of funding bodies and university leadership who are setting the direction where scientists are applied.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Many results in particle physics *are* reproduced.
The detector systems in the large collider experiments are enormously flexible devices, and each new generation can (and does) reproduce and refine the work of the previous generation of machines as part of it's commissions and general data analysis. For instance, some of the earliest interesting results from ATLAS and CMS at the LHC were improved measurements of top-quark properties (which had previously only been measured by D0 and CDF at the Tevatron).
Something similar goes on with neutrino research, and low energy facilities also do a lot of that. My advisor was a nuclear physicist by original training who moved up the energy scale as time went by, and he once joked that nuclear physicists *"do what particle physicist did twenty years ago, but ten to one hundred times as precisely"* (which is too broad a claim in general, but has enough truth in the non-perturbative regime to make it good snark).
So, in fundamental physics the answer is "the people who work at the next generation facility".
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/05
| 924
| 3,956
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started a new job a month ago, the first one after my PhD employment. Recently, a conference organizer invited an established researcher from our group to give a talk at their conference. The researcher was not available at that date, but suggested that I hold the talk, which the organizer accepted.
Now I am required to submit a "speaker biography", which I assume will be printed in the conference programme. There are parallel sessions, so I expect the speakers' biographies will have an impact on people deciding which track to attend.
The problem is that I have very done little in my career to interest the conference goers, whose background is in a completely different field than mine. None of my previously published research is of much relevance for this conference. The content I will present interests them, but it is the work my colleagues did before I joined the group.
So I see a few options:
1. Leave the biography at 50 words stating name, institution and current project. It will probably appear very short in comparison to the other speakers' (upper limit is 250 words).
2. Add previous work, even though it is neither relevant nor impressive (the PhD is not yet finished).
3. Write a bit more about the current project, which is relevant for them, but not exactly biographical. And also awkward to phrase without giving the impression that I am responsible for the work that has been done so far.
Due to a tight printing deadline and it being vacation season, I cannot get advice from the conference organizers about what they would prefer. I also don't have access to earlier years' speakers biographies, or to any other material from earlier years of this conference (abstracts, programmes, proceedings, etc).
What would be a good strategy for writing the biography in my case?<issue_comment>username_1: **Don't overthink it.** It's true that people will be attracted towards some talks because they are given by a "big name", but it's also true that people will also base their choices on the content, regardless of the speaker. The majority of attendees, if they see a talk on a topic that is of interest to them, will not turn it down just because the speaker has an unimpressive bio. In fact, I suspect many people don't read the bios at all, certainly not all 250 words!
**I would recommend a cross between 2 and 3.** Give a brief mention of your previous work, because it's a part of your background, and if nothing else, people like to know about the different career paths that others have taken. Then perhaps describe why you moved to your current role/area (avoiding phrases like "filling a mundane role"...), with an emphasis on what you find interesting about it and any ways that it links with your previous experience. That should allow you to talk a bit about the project while still keeping it relevant to you personally. You can keep it fairly brief though - don't feel like you have to use up all 250 words just for the sake of it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I understand your dilemma but it will not be the last one (sorry to be blunt :-)).
You have been proposed (not for marriage) by an established researcher. He did not give your name out of nowhere, so there must be a reason why he trusts you. The very first thing you should do is to trust yourself.
The length of your resume is not important. You are a young researcher and everyone will be OK with that. Now, did that researcher wants you to be just yourself or to represent your whole lab? I suspect that it will be the second choice so you would be the spokesperson for your lab and, then, you should speak about your lab and not about yourself. Of course that means you should know everything your lab did.
I know you have been in your lab for only 1 month. It is uncomfortable to say the least but be sure that your fellow researchers, i.e. the attendees, will not try to take you down.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/05
| 1,700
| 6,997
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting a manuscript to a journal. I wish to exclude a colleague from being the reviewer of the manuscript. The journal has a single blind review: authors are known, reviewers are anonymous.
Question in short: The reason for this exclusion request are personal (see below), and I'm not sure I want to expose those reasons. What is the most effective ways to exclude a reviewer whom you don't trust to make a fair judgement?
Personal reasons for exclusion request::
* We had a couple of harsh interactions. She had criticized me personally, and had short arguments about our different attitudes
towards publishing, writing and research.
* I believe she has already wrote a "reject" review on my manuscript (for a different venue).
* To my judgment, she has standards that are uncommon in my research community, and so would judge my work on unconventional higher
standards.
* Her personality, in my view, is harsh and critical (and unpleasant) and so each of her judgments are prone to be more negative than
others, on average.
* She is related to the area of my manuscript (I have cited her manuscript and given her full credit for the work she did), and from
her point of view me publishing the manuscript would, psychologically,
be a personal disappointment, because her related work has not been
published.
**Questions:**
1. Can I ask the editor not to send it to her review?
2. Should I ask the editor for this? Would it benefit *me*?
3. How can I explain my request, and should I explain it?
Notes: i) I **don't** want to write any of the reasons I listed
above! Because they are mostly **personal**! And would put me in a
very unpleasant situation **psychologically** at least.
ii) I believe that the review process in general is very
**subjective**, and so there is always a way to consider the same work in two opposite perspectives: positive and negative. I believe the
reviewer I want to exclude would highlight the negatives, and diminish
the positives. And recommend a rejection.
---
This question is **different** from:
[Sound reasons for excluding a reviewer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27160/sound-reasons-for-excluding-a-reviewer),
because the current question asks how to exclude a reviewer
**irrespective of the justifications of this exclusion**. In other words, I'm not asking what are "sound reasons to exclude a reviewer",
but rather HOW to exclude her, independent from the existence of sound reasons.
More details of the difference:
-------------------------------
In [Sound reasons for excluding a reviewer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27160/sound-reasons-for-excluding-a-reviewer) the term "sound" is probably meant to be an objective term. However I claim that the reviewing process is not an objective process at all. Thus, there are at least three different interpretations of [Sound reasons for excluding a reviewer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27160/sound-reasons-for-excluding-a-reviewer):
* **What kind of reason would be regarded as sound by the editor of the journal?**
Or
* **Is there a set of objective reasons that the scientific community views as legitimate to exclude a reviewer?**
Or
* **What can I, as an author do, to exclude a reviewer, if I think he/she has a grudge against me, irrespective of the objective reality, or the justifications of this act of excluding the reviewer?**
The OP has not clarified whether he/she means 1, 2, 3 or another question.
These are all *different* questions.
I'm asking 3.
=====
I cannot merge my account with I am a guest (which is also me) because I don't remember the email I used for "I am a guest".<issue_comment>username_1: As you are serious about this, you could request the editor to exclude the specific person from the prospective reviewers list.
This is not an act of misconduct as there are of course many journals who do have a *reviewers to exclude* section. If asked, you may state research rivalry as a reason.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There is often a standard statement/option on submission which offers the opportunity to declare possible "Conflict of interest." (CoI); not only for yourself, but also reviewers who might have some with you. To my knowledge this formulation intentionally leaves open whether the CoI derives from possible favouritism, antagonism, competing funding/research interests or other.
In my opinion as editor, I prefer actually not to know what the precise nature of the CoI is. As long as the author doesn't exclude a larger number of people this way, declaring isolated CoIs are perfectly in the remit of a typical researcher's career and should not count against you.
In rare cases, the editor might not have a choice but to take that reviewer on board, in which case they must take the CoI flag into account - sometimes you see reviews which are clearly not objective (biased in one or the other direction, doesn't matter); the review may still be informative, if that baseline bias is taken into account.
However, I think an isolated CoI should, if at all possible, be taken into account by a serious editor, because many things can be at stake, such as funding, priority, plagiarism accusations and more. If they do not want to do that (for inscrutable reasons), you might consider changing publishing venue.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: To be honest, many of the non-personal reasons you have given are good reasons why this person would be a good reviewer, whilst the personal reasons are quite subjective and speculative. Academia is not about meeting average standards, and so a reviewer who is unusually critical is a huge asset. Remember, it is ultimately the editor who decides whether to publish, not the reviewer, so if that reviewer's standards are **impossibly** high (and not just "higher than average"), it should not be a problem.
If this person is very familiar and connected with your work (i.e.: a collaborator, not a rival), you might argue that it would be conflict of interest to have him/her as reviewer. Otherwise, if you are really convinced that this person has some personal axe to grind against you and will be determined to stop you publishing, your best best is to submit to a publication that utilises double-blind review.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Just ask in the submission letter don't go into details if the conflict.
FWIW, I don't think the reasons are very strong or at least very personal. Not an old girlfriend or the like. Pretty standard academia tussles. I would not say the reasons are personal, just standard rivalry.
Note the editor still has the option to send it to the lady. But at least he should weigh the review with caveats.
If you don't get through this other venue, I suggest to just keep shopping it. The other thing is to consider making it more just the facts style. Mostly a report of experimental data. Minimal and caveated nterpretation.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/08/05
| 923
| 3,715
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got into a fully funded PhD program and accepted it. Somewhere along the line, my decision to attend grad school changed. My problem is that orientation week is in two weeks and I have not retracted my commitment.
I am afraid of what the outcome may be. My potential advisor was so nice to me and I assured her that I would be joining her lab. What should I do? I can’t just not show up... but I don’t know how to tell them that grad school is not something I want right now. I don’t want to offend anyone or ruin my academic reputation.<issue_comment>username_1: It's never easy to break a commitment but you have to let them know as soon as possible, the earlier the better so they can make proper preparations for themselves, perhaps even extend a last minute offer to another student. Hang in there!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I can’t just not show up
>
>
>
Indeed. Tell the office/admin first- they are the ones that deal with the paperwork. Consider writing a longer email explaining yourself to your potential supervisor if it helps you. Or if you can meet up in person, why not?
>
> I don’t want to offend anyone or ruin my academic reputation.
>
>
>
You won't ruin your academic reputation. Think of it this way: What would your reputation be after struggling through 4+ years through a program you don't want to be in?
Lastly I want to add:
1. Lots of people change their minds. In fact, some scholarships require commitment within X weeks, meaning that you will have to commit to some before you hear back from another place. (at least in the UK)
2. Plenty of people drop out even *after* starting their program. People realise it's not what they thought it would be; have second thoughts; or some life-changing events that change their perspective. It happens. That's life.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Unless you've been admitted to a tiny program, so that your personal absence would really practically disrupt everything, don't worry about it. Be straightforward, politely apologetic. Substantial universities/institutions are much, much less affected by your last-minute absence than your own life will be by any such choice... and any sane person in the university understands this. The worst inconvenience for the program is very small, almost un-noticeable in the statistical uncertainties of all these things.
And no other institution will hear about it, because no one will violate confidentiality by blabbing about such things, and hardly anyone knows (or maybe cares tooooo much) that you were scheduled to show up.
Just behave responsibly, forthrightly, and politely, given your change in plans. Although it's simpler to not see any need to change plans, in fact many people could do better by such a change! And no one should be surprised by the fact that early-20-somethings (or anyone else who's still sorting out "life") might change their minds.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You're options are limited but *think thoroughly* before choosing one.
1. **Stay only if you really want to.** You might rethink your current situation; not many scholars get an opportunity for a *fully funded PhD program*. I'm not sure what made you change your mind, but best to analyze it further to make sure it is not just an impulse.
2. **If you wish to leave, then leave now.** If you are pretty clear about not going to grad school, then don't delay your decision. With a kind apology to your advisor, leave.
Whatever it may be, the final decision is yours to make, do so wisely, you don't want to do anything that is going to give you regret for the rest of your career (that goes for both the above options).
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/05
| 2,425
| 10,325
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just checked out my office. It looks like a dungeon. There are no windows. It is kind of cramped. Everything looks kind of industrial. I don't think I would like to study/work there. There are other places in the math building that look like much less depressing places to work such as the math library. Also coffee shops, at home, etc.
I have to have some number of office hours which I will gladly have. But for studying for my classes, working on research, etc. I would much prefer other places. There is no formal rules on where you have to be. I don't have an adviser yet and when I do, he won't be watching over me just looking for results. So there is no formal reason why I have to be in my office other than office hours.
If I simply don't use my office will I look bad to other grad students or professors? Will I maybe miss out on productive discussions? I can see if my office mates are in the same classes; we can work on the problem sets together.
What are the potential pitfalls of not being in my office other than for office hours?<issue_comment>username_1: Never is an absolute. Having said that, you have outlined reasons why you should use your office (office hours, spending time between department events and classes etc.).
Unless your adviser makes it mandatory (highly unusual), I don't see why you shouldn't work wherever you feel most comfortable in. I was very fortunate, in graduate school, to have a spacious, very well lit and clean office. In spite of these structural advantages, I chose to work from coffee shops most of the time. I had no issues with the administration, faculty or my peers.
To summarize, there are some (usually official) reasons why you would need to go to your office but there is usually no compulsion to have to continue using the office at all other times.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My advisor would come by his lab (with our workstation computers and desks) a couple times a week to see who was around. I don't think he took literal, on-paper notes, but he would give grief to those who he didn't think he was seeing enough. It never made a huge difference, but it did mean that our lab was a more collegial environment to get work done in. People could collaboratively solve problems, etc. The department had other rooms for TAs to hold office hours, etc. in.
Given this, it could get you scolded by your advisor if he expects you to get work done in your provided workspace. Probably best to discuss expectations with your advisor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Look bad, not necessarily. Will it be good for you? Maybe not.
Assuming that you don't have a really significant reason not to be on the lab, you should be. **Stuff only happens with people that show up**. If you are not in the lab, you won't talk to people as much. I literally can't count how many good ideas (and papers) came out of random coffee talk, that wouldn't happen on an otherwise "official" meeting.
full disclosure: That's something I didn't do during my phd and I regret it. I had my reasons, probably not really good enough, but I was almost never at my office and that hindered my development. I could have done more if I was there.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: i had a terrible office for the first 3 years of my phd. I spent some time there initially. I eventually decided it was much smarter to use it to dump my stuff and then worked in the departmental reading room which was next to the common room. I always went to afternoon tea and ate my lunch in the common room.
I therefore had plenty of social contact and mathematical interaction with my peers when I wanted it.
Work time in maths is about solo concentration and is best done in a quiet, airy space with natural light and minimal distractions. This tends to mean a library unless you are a professor.
I now have phd students. Some of the best ones only come in when they need to. That is fine by me.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: In my experience, the reputation of a graduate student rises (or falls) primarily based on their ability to get things done – that is, to make progress on their research.
If your advisor is unhappy with how things are plodding along, then the fact that you are rarely in your office might make you look bad. (It's not hard to imagine someone thinking, "Where is (s)he? No wonder no work is getting done.")
On the other hand, if you're progressing along rather well, I think there's a good chance your long absences will likely go unnoticed.
That said, I echo what the other folks have said about spending time with your fellow students. From what you've said, though, it sounds like your office isn't a good place to do that. So long as you find other places to network and collaborate on campus, I see no reason why your dungeon can't be a little-used place to store books and such.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I feel like none of the existing answers are doing a good job answering this question.
>
> If I simply don't use my office will I look bad to other grad students or professors? Will I maybe miss out on productive discussions? I can see if my office mates are in the same classes; we can work on the problem sets together.
>
>
>
Assuming that:
* Your advisor is not co-located with you
* You are working 100% by yourself, without engaging other graduate students
You can work wherever you want with no likely no problems.
However, consider that a majority of graduate work involves other people - whether a research group, collaborating on papers, or simply sharing knowledge and brainstorming ideas (do NOT underestimate how useful it is to discuss research proposals or topics with peers/faculty). In these cases, you run into two problems.
First, how it looks to others, which is the first of your questions. It is easy to say, "people are only evaluated based on their results - you can get results regardless of whether you are in the office or not!" Unfortunately people aren't this rational and objective, and particularly in research (where it is harder to have "clear results") you will suffer from perception problems.
**This is unrelated to whether it's true or not.** The unfortunate situation is that an overwhelming majority of people correlate butt-in-seat time with productivity. Fair? True? Absolutely not. But just because something isn't fair doesn't mean you won't be *perceived* this way.
In particular, other graduate students will see you not at your desk. They won't have insight into your time at a coffee shop, working from home, or whatever. This means their impressions of you will be fairly negative. Unless you are producing crazy high quality work (which as a new grad student is unlikely), you're going to be starting from a negative place in gaining peer-status with your fellow grad students.
It will be harder to take spontaneous breaks with peers. This might be coffee, meals, games, or other silly things. While initially unrelated to research, those activities significantly contribute to how we form relationships. Working remote from peers makes it much harder to form these relationships.
This leads you to be detached from your peers (and potentially even your advisor). People quip, "out of sight, out of mind" but there's a reason it's a quip. Many advisors are really busy and their ability to drop by and talk may require you to have more flexibility. Basically, the busier your advisor is, the more important your availability becomes - if you are consistently working in a desk near your advisor's office, this helps.
>
> What are the potential pitfalls of not being in my office other than for office hours?
>
>
>
All of the above plays into the second problem, which is your overall, long term efficiency and "status" as a graduate student. If your goal is future research, whether as a professor, post-doc, industry, or a PhD (in the case of you being a masters student), developing and fostering relationships with your colleagues is quite important. These colleagues are those you will want to gain the following from:
* Collaboration/assistance with research
* Networking for collaboration, guidance, and/or project collaboration
* Finding future jobs
People often forget how important their peer relationships are. But consider that if you are pursuing a PhD, it is likely in 5-10 years some of your current peers will have positions where they can dramatically influence *your* career. This might be because they have a large grant they need more researchers on, because they are on a hiring board at a university, or know of a position that comes up. **Ultimately, these relationships are invaluable to an academic.** Realistically this applies to everyone, but if you are pursuing a PhD it is likely the number of stakeholders worldwide in your field is small enough that you could over the course of a career meet most of them (between conferences, collaboration, etc).
If your goal long term is research, you want to know, foster, and develop relationships. Alienating yourself from the first group of people who make this the easiest (peers and other faculty at your institution) is not a good move longterm.
Now... if none of the above applies to you for some reason, then it won't really matter. But I suspect a ridiculously small percentage of graduate students can realistically claim none of the above applies to them.
Graduate school efficiency
--------------------------
Ignoring the above problems entirely, another consideration is the fact that when you enter graduate school you often have no clue how graduate school works. The best way to learn is interactions and informal conversations with your peers, particularly the senior students.
Spontaneous conversation is nearly impossible if you are working remote the entire time. The lack of relationship with peers means suddenly you will be in your last few years with no working peer relationships.
If you ultimately do decide to avoid your desk, I would recommend you consider ways to avoid the above problems entirely. This will depend on your specific circumstances, so I can't really give good guidance, but it would be good to consider the entirety of this post as you begin your graduate career.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/08/05
| 2,018
| 8,275
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it possible to obtain a bachelor's degree without attending a university? I'm talking about passing some kind of test or series of tests to prove my knowledge. I'm not asking about buying a fake degree or anything related to that. Is there a name for this type of procedure/way of obtaining a degree? Is it practiced in the US? If yes, is it possible for non-US citizens to pass these tests? If not, are there any countries that practice something like this?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, no, it is not possible to get a bachelor's degree from an accredited university in the US purely through examinations.
It is possible to get course credits that can partially satisfy graduation requirements through tests such as those administered as part of the [Advanced Placement](https://apstudent.collegeboard.org/) or International Baccalaureate programs. However, these normally tend to be restricted to satisfying general education requirements, rather than the in-depth major requirements.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The simplest version of what you ask is not really possible, so far as I know. However, a more moderate version is often possible, quite far beyond merely "advanced placement" exams for first-year and second-year undergrad courses, if you are able to make a sufficient case for it. That is, it is sometimes possible to propose to an academic dept "testing out" of upper-division courses they offer... and/or getting credit for a given course by doing well participating in a more advanced course for which the given course is a prerequisite.
Unsurprisingly, the latter device is not often invoked, because it's often not clear that it is in many students' best interest to give them the opportunity to hugely screw up... Nevertheless, it may be possible, if you can convince the dept somehow that it is very plausible that you merit very-advanced-placement.
But it is probably unlikely that you could do the whole undergrad curriculum at a U.S. college or university in such fashion, in any case, due to "breadth" requirements (which are actually a very good thing, in my opinion).
Thus, in my own personal experience, I was allowed to take more-or-less grad-level math courses as an undergrad, and get some credits for the prereq undergrad courses, due to my extensive reading ... (in those days, with no internet, math books from the county library were one of the cheapest entertainments! :) This was very helpful, and saved me some money, but this device did not eliminate my need to take many other courses, by being physically present. Physical presence was also (anyway at that time) necessary to make a good case that it was reasonable for me to request such an indulgence.
So, it is probably impossible to get credits/degrees for free by "testing out". But it is probably also possible to generate credits and save money by "testing out" in one way or another, if you can convince the people that it's worth their while, and is plausible, to let you attempt to show them your competence in your major area (in the U.S. sense).
It is also true that some other courses allow "testing out", e.g., language courses, programming courses, maybe basic science courses. But this can get you only half-way through a U.S. degree.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It is possible to attend courses remotely. Most American colleges have at least some degrees that are offered via distance learning. They are regular courses with regular assignments. You will want to use traditional nonprofit or state institutions and not the for profit firms whose reputation is concerning. You can't test out of college because an important element of college is a process of mental maturing. Various fields have a variety of mental disciplines that can't be taught faster than the mind is willing to conform to them.
In addition to acquiring within-field knowledge, students need to learn how to think about problems in an effective manner. Students need to learn how to learn so that when they leave college they can continue to advance within their field. You cannot test the ability to acquire future learning. You can capture this in other types of work such as papers, field work and so on. College isn't well designed to exam out of.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Many US universities offer online degrees (e.g., [ASU](https://asuonline.asu.edu/)), these courses generally require some degree of coursework and often have mandatory online attendance and participation. I would not describe these as simply a *series of tests to prove my knowledge*.
I am not aware of any reputable university in the US that runs a pure self-study degree program. In the UK, a degree usually consists of fewer classes (modules), fewer exams, and often no course work. The UK also attempts to have consistent marking across universities. This means that it is possible to offer self-study courses where students are evaluated to the same standards as traditional brick-and-mortar students. The [University of London](http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/courses/search) has offered a number of self-study courses that lead to BSc and BA degrees for decades. These programs have a self study option where you are only required to take, and pass, the examinations. As I said in [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/66352/do-any-british-universities-still-offer-degree-registration-from-afar-to-those-w/79208#79208) the courses are not cheap and can cost more than £4,000 a year.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In France, it is possible to graduate from many degrees by proving that you've acquired the necessary skills during at least 3 years of experience. This procedure is called [VAE](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validation_des_Acquis_de_l'Experience).
[The official web site](http://www.vae.gouv.fr)
The way the degree is awarded depends on the organisation that delivers it.
The available degrees are listed on the [National Registry of Professional Certifications](http://www.rncp.cncp.gouv.fr).
Each degree has an official description that list the skills that has the degree's holder, and the positions they're expected/prepared to hold. It is the reference against which the applicant will be evaluated.
[Example of a bachelor in management and control of chemical processes](http://www.rncp.cncp.gouv.fr/grand-public/visualisationFiche?format=fr&fiche=21413)
I've received a Master's degree using this method.
I had to write a memoir of around 100 pages describing my professional experience. For each job I had, I described the position, the skills I've applied and how they are related to the degree I wanted.
Then, I had to present it in front of a jury. They requested a supplementary work to evaluate some skills that were a bit under-described in the main document.
After receiving a positive evaluation, I received the degree. It is the exact same degree as someone who would have graduated traditionally by taking courses. There is no way to tell them apart.
The only difference is that I did not receive any grade.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The Bologna process in the European Union reorganized the higher education and, among other things, fixed a Bachelor's degree to consist of 180 credit points. Each credit point should represent roughly 30 hours of work. Thus, a Bachelor's degree is kind of hard-wired to some time of study and generally, there is no way around this in the European Union. In other words:
>
> A Bachelor's degree in the European Union is not an exam that you have to pass, but a degree that you obtain through successful studies.
>
>
>
This seems to be true in other places of the world as well. The [Wikipedia entry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor%27s_degree) starts with
>
> A bachelor's degree [...] is an undergraduate academic degree awarded by colleges and universities *upon completion of a course of study lasting three to seven years*.
>
>
>
(empahsis mine).
This is different from other certificates, such as language certificates.
As others mentioned, there are universities that do not require that you sit through any courses, but you may study at home, but still, you need to study.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/07
| 2,010
| 8,161
|
<issue_start>username_0: Professors in my department frown upon students working (part-time or full-time) during their MSc or PhD. Even extra TA hours are looked down upon...
The rent on-campus is ~$950/month and we are paid ~$18000/year. So there is enough money BUT the on-campus housing is very limited so students usually have to find off-campus res ... which is ~$150 more per month. Again, while I can make it work w/ $18k, I'd like some extra income to help pay off undergrad loans.
**What is the reason behind saying no to students working while doing graduate studies? I'd like to understand the PI's perspective.**
Does working while doing graduate studies affect the student's performance negatively?
University: top-20. Area of study: life science, computer science.
(Unrelated question: how many hrs/week should students put into their lab?)<issue_comment>username_1: I have the impression that you are pretty aware of the main reason why PIs tend to frown upon outside jobs - they take time and mental energy, and most PIs will expect you to commit as much as you can of both to your grad school project. Hence, **working on the side will typically affect the student's performance negatively**.
There is also the added problem that outside jobs often provide unwanted rigid commitments, which tend to interfere with the somewhat unstable nature of grad school workload. It is exceedingly annoying for a PI if a major paper deadline needs to pass, because the student also had important duties at their day job that they could not get away from.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There are several possible reasons for your supervisors to frown upon your involvement in non-academic work.
I think the most probable concern is that you will end up being overwhelmed by the cumulative workloads of research and flipping burgers, which might prevent you from making a significant enough scientific contribution to deserve a PhD. Most supervisors care about the career prospects of their students.
Of course there is a corollary: your commitment and output to the lab is smaller if you're invested in a side activity. A student is a significant investment in money and effort for PIs and they naturally prefer focused and high performing ones.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This may not be totally relevant to your question, but I think it should be noted that there exist PIs who don't think the same. For instance, my professor does not have a problem with me having a *part-time* job, as long as I do my main job. The reason is, as he told me once, life is hard enough for us and if we are prohibited from making some money, although we would have more free time, but our mind would most likely be occupied by financial concerns and primary needs, which results in declining the overall performance. He made his point by saying that a PhD degree is on top of Maslow's hierarchy of needs while food and shelter lies at the bottom. And it is really hard for a human mind to ignore the bottom and focus on the top.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I actually did try working parttime during graduate school for the reasons you give. In my grad work, I was paid for 20 hours a week of research (I had a research assistanceship) officially.
This doesn't sound too bad until you:
* Add in time for classwork
+ Both homework and attending the class
* Add in time for breaks (lunch, etc)
* Add in buffer time for busy seasons for my grad work
Additionally, there are a few other factors. First, you greatly benefit in graduate school by having time and flexibility to ponder/investigate things without feeling time stressed. This is harder to do if your entire week and evenings are full.
Second, *most* graduate research jobs are effectively a "fulltime" job. I was paid for 20 hours a week, but my advisor/PI's expectation was more to treat it as a fulltime job, between all the above factors (homework/classwork/etc).
YMMV on hours expected. Some assistanceships will be incredibly focused on 20.000 hours a week, no more no less. Many will not, particularly research ones.
Graduate school tends to be more loose and spontaneous than work, too. Each department/PI will have their own feeling here, but in my experience graduate school is a lot more likely to spontaneously decide to have a meeting or cancel/reschedule something than the working world in such a way to inconvenience you. At work, moving a meeting from 10am to 11am has minimal impact since I'm at work all day anyways. In grad school, if portions of my schedule are blocked with work, it's *really* hard to do this effectively.
Ultimately, I ended up finding myself frazzled to the point where I couldn't keep up in graduate school, so I quit my part-time job.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: The PI wants to pay you for 20 hours/week of work and get 40-80 hours/week of work out of you.
If you get a part time job, or any other commitments really, you won't be available to work 40-80 hours on the stuff the PI wants you to do.
A really bright student working 40-80 hours/week on the PI's projects will both help the PI advance their own career, get the things that the PI wants done done, and is (very slightly) more likely to be a student who graduates and goes on to become a useful contact for said PI in the future.
They don't want to pay what a really bright person who is competent in computer science can earn outside of academia on a 40-80/hour schedule. Instead, they pay 18$/hour for a fake 20 hours/week 50 weeks/year and hope for 40-80 hours of work.
Initially, you may be spending the extra hours/week on classroom instruction, but that tends to fade rapidly.
This is similar to the internist trap in other industries like publishing. Underpaid or unpaid interns at the start of their career are expected to donate their effort to produce things of value to prove themselves. A percentage of those are then invited onto the next tier (postdoc), where they are still underpaid (after all they compete with the previous tier somewhat) in precarious contracts for a period of years.
A percentage of those are then invited onto the next tier (tenure track in the academic case). Some percent of those are still winnowed out, with the remaining fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction going on to get tenure. Most of those who get tenure are at some small university with limited research opportunities, and only a small fraction end up being the kind of professors that are imposing the above constraints.
With tenure, your promotion/salary increases are then tied to your ability to do the same to the next generation. If you can convince dozens of new grad students and postdocs to work 40-80 hours/week on your research you'll be co-author on all of their work. When they graduate, they'll cite your papers, granting them a high impact factor.
So why does the PI frown on outside work?
There is an oversupply of overly optimistic people who want to be academics, caused by the lottary nature of the system and the fact that each layer is selected from the people who "won" the previous layer. They can use this to convince you to work extremely long hours for little pay. Those who do not buy in are not as useful to the PI.
Or, because the PI can.
Now, if you really want to become an academic, or really want to focus on your research problem because you want to solve it, this is in your long-term best interests as well. A chunk of the payoff for the PI is having those students who graduate and go on to do great things, and by putting in the hard long hours you are more likely to make it out the other side of the pyramid intact.
Still unlikely to make it out, but *less* unlikely.
Now, I know of at least one Computer Science grad student whose PhD project (with their supervisor's work as well) turned into a commercially semi-viable startup, which then sold for a few million dollars. They then semi-retired and started working on fun projects (what others might call work) outside of academia. Being paid enough to eat while working on such a project *may* be economically reasonable.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/08/07
| 442
| 1,896
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have have a BA in Visual Arts and quite literally hate my field to death and back and want to pursue engineering. The problem is that, since I have a BA already, I can't get into JC classes I need to transfer back into a 4 year(all the math classes) since my priority is dead last and unchangeable. Can I just annul my BA? All it does at the moment is block enrollment and give employers a chance to use the word "overqualified".<issue_comment>username_1: Typically, no. That is a good thing as gaps in a cv are a lot worse than the "wrong" field.
Instead what people do is get a higher degree in their preferred field. This is where you appear to have trouble. However there is very little we can say about that, as the rules typically differ greatly from institution to institution, and even department to department. However, there are often people in departments whose job it is to help students with just that kind of administrative hurdles. So my advise is: find that person that is responsible for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You seem to have picked one route to your target, junior college classes in your current area. Even if there were a procedure to "annul" a degree, it would not help with your priority. The people setting the priorities want as many people as possible to have a shot at post-secondary education, and you have already spent one shot on something that you now dislike. You may be able to make that work by consulting advisors there or at a four year college.
If not, consider alternatives:
* Move to a different area. Different districts and states have different policies on priorities, and different availability of classes.
* Go a more trade-school route. Get certifications that will let you work in a field that interests you better. Personally, I wish more web designers had some visual arts training.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/07
| 834
| 3,381
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting an SPIE journal article. In between references to figure 5 and figure 6, I reference figure 14 (which appears in a much further section) as an example of something specific. One of my reviewers has complained that it breaks the ordering of the figures. I could, of course, insert figure 14 after this first reference, and then back-reference it in the corresponding section, but I think that would be even more confusing for the reader.
Is there some standard preference for this kind of references? Or maybe should I avoid the early reference altogether?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> If you mention a figure after fig 5, that figure is fig 6, by definition.
>
>
>
You are confusing your own mental order with the order in the paper, which are not the same. Your reviewer is correct, that is, at least for me, weird and indeed breaks the flow of the text. And it could be a symptom of bad text structure.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Certainly, there are vastly different personal preferences among readers and authors alike. Unless you can establish a pattern that matches the preferences of the reviewers1, you will have to go with what you (and your co-authors, and others who you ask for advice) think makes most sense in the concrete case.
If you conclude that Figure 14 is best left where it is (between Figures 13 and 15), because e.g. Figure 14 is descussed in depth in a later section while the mention between Figures 5 and 6 is only a side note, it sounds correct to me to leave Figure 14 as Figure 14, even though it is mentioned earlier. (More concretely, it would sound extremely cumbersome to show Figure 14 early in the paper between Figures 5 and 6, and then, later on, where the figure is discussed in depth, force readers to constantly switch between pages while reading the text.)
In that case (if only to appease reviewers who think otherwise), it could be adviseable to explicitly acknowledge the side note character of the early mention of Figure 14:
>
> This can also be seen in Figure 14, presented/discussed below in Section ... .
>
>
>
1: Note that I consider it at least somewhat ethically questionable to deviate from what might be most conductive to the readability/comprehensibility of the paper just to please a specific small set of reviewers (who might not think in terms of what supports the reader's mental model in the concrete case, but rather based upon "general formal criteria" such as "Are figures ordered by the order of their first mention?"). So, it is up to you whether to actually follow such a pattern.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: As you stated that the related figure appears in a *much later section* refer the section instead of the figure like this
>
> ... as illustrated/explained in Section *N* ...
>
>
>
or something similar. To be general, it would be better to avoid mentioning the figure at all, but rather refer the concept of the section which is ahead.
This way, you don't break your ordering of figure references.
Referencing a section earlier in the topic is not too uncommon in literature. It is usually done at the beginning for an overview, so this won't be a bad practice. You may take a look at this [sample SPIE journal](http://biomedicaloptics.spiedigitallibrary.org/article.aspx?articleid=1166895) for reference.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/07
| 693
| 2,999
|
<issue_start>username_0: *Note that the difference between this question and a related question ([Recently published paper does not cite my very relevant work](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/49208/recently-published-paper-does-not-cite-my-very-relevant-work)) is that the authors in my question are **fully aware of our work**, whereas, in the related question, the authors **were not aware of OP's work**.*
A recent paper did not cite our very relevant work.
There are significant overlaps among the scopes of the papers, and one of the important figures and the related conclusion are almost identical.
The leading author of the paper in question has been informed about our work even before we submitted the paper. I've asked for a reason for not mentioning it, and the answer was that our paper was noticed during the revision of the paper, and the authors do not feel obliged to mention it.
Is it OK to not mention a paper because of ``seeing it too late?''
Regarding this: does the date of submission/acceptance play a role?
Our publication date is before their submission date.<issue_comment>username_1: As per your post, the concerned paper which was published utilized your work but didn't cite it. There are two angles to look at this.
1. **Plagiarism**. *If* they really did copy-modify your figure and conclusion, then it could be considered as an act of plagiarism -- the use of a work of another without proper attribution. With sufficient evidence, you can claim against this, *if* you are willing to go through the trouble for this one citation.
2. **Lack of research defense**. You stated that the party in question was informed of your paper before publication. This is something you ought to avoid. If their submission date is before your publication date, then you cannot claim against them for plagiarizing your content.
Having said the above, it should be up to your responsibility to guard your research before its publication. This sort of thing happens all the time. All you have lost so far is a citation, but people have lost their opportunities for the publication of research ideas for the lack of protection of their research ideas. It would be advisable to take it to your experience and move on.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: In such a situation, you should warn the editor. Articles can be changed between the time they are published on the internet and the time they are printed. Whatever happens, the editor should know and will make a decision.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: You have no real recourse. Authors can cite what they like and snub others for no reason. Plus, you can't cite *everything* so someone's going to get left out. But if it seems purposeful it very well may be. I would send your paper(s) to the snubbing PI and say something like 'looks like these slipped past you'.
It's in their best interest because of your work truly is that related, you'll probably review their papers eventually.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/07
| 1,920
| 8,728
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently doing Physics undergrad at a first tier university. Due to my previous experience in Mathematics and slightly advanced age (five years my classmates' senior) I look at my classmates from a different perspective, and am honestly slightly disturbed.
Despite having received a class in *LaTeX* (with the express purpose of encouraging its usage) most students continue to use *Word* for reports (with sometimes shambolic results), most students neglect bibliographies, and I've witnessed students using only *Wikipedia* as a source, even when I pointed out that some of the information was inaccurate and referred them to a paper with correct information.
I've talked to one of the librarians, and he virtually pleaded for me to bring up such issues with the staff. Stating that he'd like to give a course on how to use the library, access online papers, write a report etc. to first years. Most students I've talked to were unaware they had free access to most scientific publications, and almost none seemed to have ever read a scientific paper.
I'm not quite sure what to do. On the one hand I feel it's not really my place, and I have other stuff to do, it's not my fault if other students are sub-par, and they are unlikely to go very far anyway.
However, in second year (approx half of students fail out after first year in physics), my partner in Experimental Physics performed so poorly I ended up doing almost everything myself in order to ensure my continued good grades.
I got special commendations from two of the three PhD students overseeing my three projects (the third didn't have the time to actually grade my report yet), though I personally feel my reports were simply on par.
Is it feasible, *or even acceptable*, for me to communicate concerns with staff, or to relay the request of the librarian with my own concerns added?<issue_comment>username_1: It is very unlikely that any action on your part would help future students. The issues you report are already visible to the professors.
They can see whether reports lack bibliographies, or have bibliographies that reference Wikipedia. They could set marking rules that penalize those things to such an extent that students would have to do better, if they thought it appropriate.
If they cared, for some strange reason, what tools students are using to prepare their reports they could insist on reports in the preferred format.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: An undergraduate student is absolutely in no position to make any institutional changes in regards to the problems you've observed. In many cases, even the full professors have little ability to change the situation, due to departmental or administrative requirements for certain passing rates or median scores out of a class, etc. Possibly the faculty have seen this, and/or counseled concerned students about it, hundreds of times already.
You should take some amount of confidence that this is evidence you're ready for your next big step (which seems well-timed, in that your Master's starts next year). You know how to properly research, cite, support, and use LaTeX to write a paper; and you will doubtlessly be using those skills in your next position.
Frankly, the librarian was very much out of place to put the burden of responsibility for this on an undergraduate student. I call "foul" on that.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: 20% of what undergraduates learn is the technical content of their specialist curriculum, and 80% is general life skills such as managing their time, learning how to learn, and learning how to communicate and collaborate (and how to use technology to prepare documents). Because of your previous experience you've got a head start on the other students in those areas, and you shouldn't be surprised by that.
What should you do? The same as I do on StackOverflow: offer my advice, and sigh inwardly when it isn't accepted.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: To answer your specific question, "Is it feasible, or even acceptable, for me to communicate concerns with staff, or to relay the request of the librarian with my own concerns added?", it is certainly OK to share your concerns. But recognize that, as other answers have indicated, the staff at your university are not blind to the work that your peers are submitting; they may have similar concerns, but lack the practical ability to do anything about them.
The natural question that arises then is: if the staff does not have the ability to address your concerns, what can you, as a student, do on your own? Here are some things that have proven effective in my experience:
* Understand that your peers are dealing with personal and academic challenges, some of which they may have in common with you and some of which they may not. Realize that what is important to you is not necessarily as high a priority to them. You will be much more successful if you are able to address your concerns in a way that *also* addresses things that are important to your peers.
* Get involved in student clubs and organizations, and organize workshops and other club events to help your peers gain useful skills. For example, as an electrical engineering undergraduate I was on the board of my university's IEEE student branch, and we organized workshops on technical and soft skills, participation in student research competitions, and other activities for our peers.
* Look for opportunities to get more involved in your department. If you are the undergraduate research assistant who attends all the department seminars and helps faculty and graduate students with their research and teaching, the well-known and effective TA for the first year physics labs, or someone else who all the faculty in your department know and respect, your suggestions and concerns will be taken more seriously. Not because your concerns are unwelcome now, but just because you don't have a lot of insight into the inner workings of your department, what they are struggling with, and what their priorities are.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In the UK, most universities have academic skills modules which are often mixed with employability or the research skills module. So students are likely to know what the standards are.
Universities also have academic review boards although with different names such as the academic integrity department or the institutional compliance board which would be able to take in your views and pass this down to the programme leaders.
If you feel that other student's work is not up to standard you can raise this issue with the board, programme lead or the dean of the school but how they will implement your idea will be considered academic judgement.
In my opinion you should not submit this in the form of a formal complaint as there can be unwanted consequences.
Other students can however make an appeal to the review or assessment board if they feel that the teaching standards are not being observed and the outcome will be much like extenuation where they would be allowed to retake the assessment.
Furthermore, the students can take the university to court under breach of contract or on basis of procedural impropriety, etc.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: To extend username_4's response, there is in many universities a **Student Representative** system, where students elect a few of their peers near the start of the academic year to pass on their concerns and questions to faculty and board members who control the running of their course. Becoming (or at least interacting with) relevant student rep's is in theory a good way to have your opinion heard. As an older student with more experience of university life, you would be an excellent candidate for such a role.
A vital point is that you mustn't let yourself be discouraged from positive action: too many universities suffer from their senior staff retaining and endorsing outdated or inefficient practices out of indifference, despite change being in the students' best interest. It may well be that the staff can't do much, but it could equally be that they consider other issues more relevant for discussion, and *that which is being improved* at any given time can be greatly affected by student demand.
In this example, the librarian you spoke with has probably requested funds and and a small amount of curriculum time for their idea, but whichever board they applied to has seen it as an unnecessary hassle or decided that there is not enough demand. Getting your opinion heard through, for example, student representatives could be helpful to many who don't even realize what they're missing.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/08/07
| 480
| 2,051
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have received a postdoc offer from a world famous university (ranking ~ 60 worldwide) early June and accepted the offer via email. The university helped me applied for the visa an I have obtained the visa. The hardcopy of the contract, however, has not been signed. in early Aug. I received another interview from a top university (top 3 by some ranking) and got another offer. I have emailed the supervisor in the latter university and explained my situation and his idea is that it is OK to change to his offer since the work has not started. Is it OK to tell the first supervisor about my condition and ask whether he could permit my turning down on his offer?<issue_comment>username_1: It is legally fine to turn down your offer as you didn't sign anything (as @Heinrich pointed out) but it may seem different from an ethical point of view. Then again this view does differ from one person to another.
Technically, there is no right or wrong answer for your particular question. In the end, the decision is to made with respect to your values and your future.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: While it may be legally OK, if your field is a small one, there may be damage to reputation as word of you withdrawing from an informal acceptance propagates.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If we are talking about moral aspects, was it ethical to apply for another position on the first place? If the OP has no problem of applying for a second position after receiving the offer, there should be no problem of turning it down. But why not base the decision not on the university ranking, money, country, etc., but on the **topic of research, expertise each group has and prospects of further growing up scientifically**.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Life goes on. Think ahead 10 years and ask yourself who's going to care. If someone is going to hold a grudge that long then you wouldn't want to work for them anyway. Take the new job. Unless its in my old lab. Don't do that to yourself ;-)
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/08/07
| 393
| 1,734
|
<issue_start>username_0: In Europe, is it common practice to ask an external member of your PhD committee to be a reference on a resume for job applications?<issue_comment>username_1: If I understand correctly, you are talking about whether to include certain references on your CV (and not about who to ask to write a reference letter for you - thanks JeffE for pointing this difference out to us).
In general, as far as I know, potential employers consult **references mainly to obtain information** about things ***not* evident from your CV**. That is, for example, your overall work attitude, your ambitions, whether you can work in a group, how you tackle problems, how you handle set backs, what your specific expertise is and any other personal experiences that are noteworthy to a potential new employer.
All of these things are pretty much unknown to external references. While additional references are likely welcomed, your reference list should, dependent where you are in your career, at least have one or two potential contacts that have worked personally with you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For academic jobs, I think that an external committee member is a good referee. They have read through your thesis, so they are one of the few people able to offer an opinion on the quality of your research.
For non-academic jobs, I think Christiaan's answer makes sense, they aren't going to be as interested in your research but more your work-related skills.
Personally, I (UK-based) have used the external examiner of my PhD as a referee in the application for my first postdoc and in a successful fellowship application.
Not being from the same institution probably looks good.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/08/08
| 510
| 2,203
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there a good, reputable preprint service that is used in the environmental and earth sciences, and considered acceptable by the major publishers? Many journals specifically state that it is okay to submit a paper that has been uploaded to arXiv and I would like to take advantage of that, however I am not in a field covered by arXiv.
[I'm aware of the similar question, [Preprint services other than arXiv (for other fields)](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/84/preprint-services-other-than-arxiv-for-other-fields), but it is fairly old and there are no answers relevant to my field]<issue_comment>username_1: If I understand correctly, you are talking about whether to include certain references on your CV (and not about who to ask to write a reference letter for you - thanks JeffE for pointing this difference out to us).
In general, as far as I know, potential employers consult **references mainly to obtain information** about things ***not* evident from your CV**. That is, for example, your overall work attitude, your ambitions, whether you can work in a group, how you tackle problems, how you handle set backs, what your specific expertise is and any other personal experiences that are noteworthy to a potential new employer.
All of these things are pretty much unknown to external references. While additional references are likely welcomed, your reference list should, dependent where you are in your career, at least have one or two potential contacts that have worked personally with you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For academic jobs, I think that an external committee member is a good referee. They have read through your thesis, so they are one of the few people able to offer an opinion on the quality of your research.
For non-academic jobs, I think Christiaan's answer makes sense, they aren't going to be as interested in your research but more your work-related skills.
Personally, I (UK-based) have used the external examiner of my PhD as a referee in the application for my first postdoc and in a successful fellowship application.
Not being from the same institution probably looks good.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2016/08/08
| 736
| 2,738
|
<issue_start>username_0: One way of identifying influential researchers in a field is to rank researchers by their h-index.
I found only a list of researchers ranked by h-index for those with very high h-indices ( >40). However, I cannot see the ranking researchers that are under this number.
Is there a way to get a complete list of researchers in a field classified by their h-index (e.g., h-index > 5)?<issue_comment>username_1: You can get a list of researchers who have Google Scholar profiles and have identified themselves with the field, ranked in order of total citation count by searching for researchers in that field on Google Scholar, via <https://scholar.google.com.au/citations?hl=en&view_op=search_authors>. That's not quite the same thing but will give you some of the answers you are looking for.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Supposing that the h-index could be used to measure researcher influence (which is debated), I would strongly suggest, in addition to @username_1, to use at least the three main sources: Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. In [What do bibliometric indicators measure?](http://What%20do%20bibliometric%20indicators%20measure?), 2007, Kermarrec *et al.* showed the high disparity in coverage and results, and the sensitivity to errors (same names, duplications). This information can be complemented by [Which h-index? – A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar](http://www.zalf.de/de/institute_einrichtungen/bib/Documents/BibliometrischeIndizes/Bar-Ilan_2008_h-factor.pdf), 2008, Bar-Ilan. The bias observed with Google Scholar is highly dependent on the field.
Using a measure with three different tools (after some cleansing), and plotting the profiles on a 3D axis might help to avoid "missing" influential authors who lay off the main diagonal (data from Bar-Ilan's paper):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zLUpg.png)
A pending issue is the difficulty to get authors assigned to a field. Journals can be associated to differents fields, and you could make a rule like: "an author who has published at least x papers in a journal from the field is taken into account". A drawback is that an author in that may have an high h-index mainly because of papers published in different fields. So although "influential" in your sense, he might as well not be influential at all in your field.
A solution could be to collect DOI of papers, and then use retrieval tools as the ones described in [Scientometric/bibliometric data retrieval from a list of DOI](https://opendata.stackexchange.com/questions/6924/scientometric-bibliometric-data-retrieval-from-a-list-of-doi).
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/08/08
| 1,218
| 5,380
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some journals require the author to propose potential reviewers. Should I just propose reviewers and let the editor contact them? Or should I first contact the potential reviewers myself and ask if they agree?<issue_comment>username_1: I never asked them and never heard of anybody doing so. It’s the journal who is responsible to organise peer review, not you, and they have to and will humbly ask¹ potential reviewers anyway. By asking potential reviewers yourself, you cause the following problems:
* Not every reviewer you suggest will be chosen by the editor. For a reviewer who will not be chosen to review, deciding upon your request will be a waste of time.
* Even a reviewer who is eventually chosen will waste a little time by responding to the same request twice.
* If a potential reviewer declines your request and you do not suggest them, the editor may still choose them on their own (most editors to whom I have talked make a point of choosing at least one reviewer who was not suggested). In that case, the potential reviewer may think that you ignored their wish.
* Asking reviewers directly is a first step to breaching the independence of peer review as it opens up the path for manipulating peer review: “Sure I will review your paper [favourably] – provided that you will do the same thing for my next paper.” Some oppose even the mere option to suggest peer reviewers for this reason.
* If you know only a limited list of potential reviewers for your paper, removing those who deny your request may make the list smaller than what is requested by the journal. If those reviewers only refuse when asked by the journal, you still did your duty of suggesting sufficiently many potential reviewers (and this may not even be a problem, if the journal requests a list that is longer than the number of actual reviewers).
* You waste some of your time by asking the potential reviewers and waiting for their response may delay the actual submission.
* If you show your paper to your potential reviewers privately, they have an advantage in the rare case that they try to steal your ideas or commit other dishonesties. By contrast, peer reviewers are often bound to terms of non-disclosure and similar and also the journal serves as an independent register of who had knowledge of the manuscript. This point does of course not apply, if you trust all potential reviewers or published a preprint of your paper anyway.
---
¹ Except perhaps for some journals with a questionably demanding demeanor.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would say that any contact between referees and authors should be minimized. Just mention any potential referees when submitting.
Secondly, my personal experience is, is that referees are chosen from the existing journal's database, regardless whether and how many potential referees are provided. This, on the basis of the types and quality of the referee's reports I received in a number of cases; for example quite poor and obviously not one of my suggested referees, or their response was way too knowledgeable about certain topics to meet the knowledge on those topics of my suggested referees.
And to add to that: I've talked to an editor-in-chief who gave a crash-course in article writing and he said that he would rather *not* use the potential referees as they are likely related to the manuscript author(s) in one way or another, professionally or otherwise. He told us that he, therefore, never provided any potential referees with his submissions, unless he had to.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You should never ask someone as an author whether they would be willing to serve as a referee for your paper. In addition to [username_1's issues](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/74899):
1. It looks suspicious, like you may be filtering your suggested referees based on how enthusiastic they seem to you. This could happen even if it's honestly not your goal. For example, suppose you ask A, who replies "Wow, I can't wait to read it!", and B, who replies "I'm really busy but I could do it if necessary." If you suggest only A to the editor, are you biasing the process in favor of your paper, or just being respectful of B's time? There's no clear way to draw the line.
2. You're putting potential reviewers in an awkward position by making them tell you whether they could do it. For example, they may feel more comfortable telling an editor that they are too busy or feel the paper is outside their area of expertise, rather than telling you. They may also worry that giving you this information decreases their anonymity.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You definitely should contact with reviewers, talk to them and then redirect to the editor.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: Managing the review of the paper, including the contact with reviewers, is the task of the editor in charge. The process should remain as blind a possible. Knowing too much may bias the review.
However I have witnessed some outlier cases:
* a researcher I know had trouble with a paper, for which the editor add difficulties finding reviewers, asked me (and somebody else he knew) as a service to review it. I would probably have refused if it were send by the editor only
* acting as both an author and a guest editor for a special issue or a book.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/08
| 504
| 2,260
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am completing my first postdoc and I had a pretty bad experience with my current adviser. I finally got to publish something, contribute in a grant writing etc., but overall it hasn't been great...
Now, I am going to start a new postdoctoral appointment under the supervision of a faculty I have been working with for several years and I will apply for tenure track positions once this last appointment has ended. I am pretty sure that my new adviser will be able to provide very good recommendation letters for me in the future. So the question is, will I need to provide recommendation letters from my current adviser? What if those are not good?<issue_comment>username_1: In my field in the USA, you normally only need to send 3 letters of recommendation:
1. One of them should be your dissertation supervisor (if diss < 5 years old)
2. One should be a current supervisor (such as your new postdoc advisor)
3. One should be from a committee member or someone else who knows your work well
As long as you have three, I think you're fine in not including a letter from the postdoc advisor that you're having problems with.
Note: Some programs require more. Even if *n* number of letters are required, there is no requirement that the *n* be comprehensive.
**tl;dr:** Letters of recommendation are used to indicate that **some** (at least *n*) faculty think highly of you, not necessarily that **all** do.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: When applying for your first tenure track job most search committees will expect that your PhD supervisor and current supervisor will be amongst the N letters of recommendation that you provide. While having your PhD supervisor and current supervisor write letters is not a strict requirement their absence would be noticed. The other letters can come from anyone that knows you well and is experienced enough to write letters for a TT position. There is no expectation that you have letters from all supervisors that you worked with.
That said, you should talk with your current supervisor about the possibility of getting a letter. There maybe some positions they are willing to recommend you for and there may be cases where you need N+1 letters and you only have N.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/08
| 773
| 3,076
|
<issue_start>username_0: I understand why people mention the grant agency, but what's the point in specifying the grant number in a paper's acknowledgments?
[Examples](http://aclweb.org/anthology/N15-1):
>
> The authors acknowledge
> the support of the U.S. Army Research Office under
> *grant number W911NF-10-1-0533*
>
>
> This work was supported
> by the National Key Basic Research Program of
> China via *grant 2014CB340503*
>
>
>
I am mostly interested in the field of computer science > machine learning, and English-speaking venues.<issue_comment>username_1: The agencies that provide this funding often require such acknowledgement. NSF does. The format, more or less, is up to the agency. I don't know why they do it, but I believe they want readers to be able to find the programs that fund the work so that other potential applicant can find future versions of the program and possibly apply.
Edit: [Look at Part J of NSF's grants guide for their format](https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/nsf04_23/6.jsp)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I understand why people mention the grant agency, but what's the point in specifying the grant number in a paper's acknowledgments?
>
>
>
As @BillBarth states, some funding agencies require that you list the grant number in the acknowledgment (or first-page footnote, etc.).
For example, from past experience with the US Department of Defense (DoD), several of my papers had to go through a public clearance process with the DoD. On a few occasions, I had sent my manuscripts to the DoD to be cleared, and those times that I did not include the grant number in my paper, I received instructions from the DoD that I had to include the grant number in the acknowledgments first, before they would clear my manuscript for public release, preventing me from submitting my paper for peer review.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It's a "bibliographical" issue. Agencies want people to know which agencies and which grants supported which papers, for the benefit of people applying in the future for grants.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The funding agency is responsible for making sure that grant money was used according to the respective Call for Proposals and its terms and conditions. In case of public funding (e.g. government-funded) research the funding body reports to a higher authority, e.g. the government or a governmental department.
Publications are a key outcome of research. Besides the obligation to clear a manuscript before publication and having funding agency and/or grant number acknowledged, handing in a copy of the publication for *them* to file offers such proof of the projects results. Having the grant number on it simplifies the bookkeeping for the higher-ups that might not be subject matter experts.
Not questioning the conduct and honesty of scientists... but having the grant number explicitely on the manuscript further aids the avoiding of double / multiple funding as it clearly states under which grant the presented research was conducted.
Upvotes: 5
|
2016/08/09
| 2,377
| 9,773
|
<issue_start>username_0: [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hamming), in one of his talks about research, said that scientists have to put up with stress, and he talked about his ulcers (and he was amongst other things a mathematician). I thought mathematical research should be mostly thinking / living a life of the mind and, thus, while involved, it shouldn't be anxiety-producing.
Is mathematical research typically stressful? Are there good researchers who don't have stress?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not a mathematician, but being an academic in a tenure-track position may be stressful itself if you're on a publish-or-perish program. I.e., either you generate (mathematical) results year to year in six or seven years or you get fired. The stress may not be in the work itself but in the built up angst thinking about how achieving each new result quickly is, and it can be so bad that sitting down to work on a new problem or even thinking about it can be stressful.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: (I write from a U.S. perspective.) The stresses of the job of academic mathematician include many that have little to do with mathematics itself, but are due to various commodified forms of mathematics. I'll get back to the stresses of research itself at the end.
For example, there're the issues of getting a job after the PhD, getting a tenure-track job after that, and getting tenure after that. These are not research issues per se. Similarly, "getting grants" certainly helps travel to conferences to see other work and promote one's own (though this may be less critical nowadays with Internet), but/and is sometimes used as an "objective external" evaluation of one's research program, so that getting tenure in upper-tier places may be impossible if one does not have an external grant.
The game of "getting grants" is much as what a skeptic would imagine, apart from various degenerative "streamlined" aspects as time goes on. That is, one must propose a thing that one can approximately do, but it is not considered entirely ok to propose to do things one already secretly knows one can do, etc. And "do" has to mean "in a year or two, at most", or it won't help the final report on the grant, nor on the re-application. Also, nowadays, apparently NSF wants its "panels" to favor certain general directions, certain subjects, etc, rather than attempting to seriously evaluate all proposals, thus "steering" research insofar as funding affects it. In particular, it's harder to get grants if you're not doing an "approved" thing.
"Publication in peer-refereed journals" is somewhat less "coerced" than federal funding, "status" is very important for getting tenure, and journals will reject papers perceived as insufficiently high-status to match them. Status is the chief commodity journals possess, and squandering it would be a mistake. But, of course, not all topics of research have equal status. Trying to *establish* status for a particular topic, or spend one's personal status-currency to do so, is a game in itself.
The long history of mathematics, and the fact that (mostly) things don't "become wrong" in mathematics, mean that there is a looooong backstory, and much low-hanging fruit is gone. (I can see the substantial changes in the 40+ years I've been observing...) Lots of things have been done, and many of the ideas that pop into the heads of people have popped into others' heads before. Stress: how to think of a new thing, that is worthwhile, and, once observed, other people would wish they'd thought of it themselves... but they hadn't??? Sounds like there'd be a scarcity issue, and, in many ways, there is. People have to find "ecological" niches that will generate sufficient status in dept heads' and deans' worlds to get jobs, get tenure.
And, yes, for many of us there is stress in doing the work itself, but there is perverse pleasure in it, or at least no viable alternative. I might claim that it would be silly to try to make a living as an academic mathematician unless one *did* care about the details so much that confusion or frustration did provide significant stress. Maybe there are better and worse stresses... But, yes, I'm unhappy and bored if I'm not confused or provoked by some mathematical thing, and if I'm confused or provoked I don't sleep well, etc. Just great. :)
But, seriously, apart from the job/business-aspect stresses (which are often hard to overlook), I would indeed claim that there is genuine stress (mostly of a less venal sort) in doing serious mathematical research. Significant scholarship is a prerequisite for not reinventing wheels, and for not thinking that trivial exercises are "research".
Probably the conclusion is that unless the "positive" piquant stress of the confusion of research is sufficiently fun/gratifying, the ugly/bad stress of the business aspect is possibly expensive. But the job/business stresses are universal, apparently, simply manifest in different ways.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: First of all, I think it is helpful to separate the stress and anxiety which arises as part of being a **mathematician**, and that which arises due to being an **academic**, the latter referring to all the stress *surrounding* the job, such as publishing, finding a permanent position, grant applications, dealing with students and supervisors and relationships and so on, none of which are unique to being a mathematician.
So I assume you're more interested in the former. You state that
>
> I thought mathematical research should be mostly thinking/ living a life of the mind and thus while involved shouldn't be anxiety-producing...
>
>
>
But surely living a life of the mind, as you put it, opens the doorway to a unique kind of anxiety?
For me the notion of a low stress job is one where I have some concrete task or goal which I am able to carry out successfully each day, one that doesn't involve a great deal of effort, after which I am able go home in the evening and switch off.
Mathematics is anything but this. At a given point in time a researcher will probably have a set of vague goals, problems they want to solve or areas they want to get to know better. They might be in the process of writing up a new result, tidying up the details and watching it develop into something publishable. This is can be quite satisfying. But for the most part *progress* in mathematics is extremely painful, involving long periods of frustration where you might be going nowhere. This in turn often leads you to doubt not only your methods and approach but sometimes even your own ability and value as a mathematician. Moreover it is rarely easy to switch off. I often find myself 'relaxing' with family or friends, when in reality the whole time I'm unable to ignore the research problem which is persistently gnawing away at me.
Don't get me wrong, I love my profession and I wouldn't change it for the world. But like any creative pursuit it sucks you in, and while there are brief moments where you see something and feel elated, there is a lot of time where you're banging your head against a wall day after day.
Of course, anyone working in a vaguely scientific subject might have broadly similar experiences. But I think that these experiences are particularly acute the more towards the theoretical end of the spectrum you get, and maths is right there at the apex. When you're stuck there's typically little input from the real world to help you, no experiments you can run to test your approach, and once you're past graduate level often only a handful of people in the world who even understand your work.
As a result, it can feel like you're living alone in a big dark room with no idea where the light switch is, all the time worrying that actually there might not be a light switch after all, and that maybe you walked into the wrong room in the first place! So we have our fair share of stress and anxiety in mathematics. But to avoid slipping into self-pity as well I think I'll stop here!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: All people, everywhere, need food, clothing, and shelter. 99% of us or more gain those things by working. Work is **guaranteed** to cause stress at some point in your career, regardless of the career.
I've spent my entire life trying to avoid stress, without success. It's a stupid endeavor considering the fact that I'm an engineer that works in a production environment. Bean-counters are ALWAYS watching my productivity. It brings back memories of when I used to think that the practical application of science and math would be a utopian existence. LOL! I personally don't know of any engineer who would choose to do it again.
[Here is a list of supposedly low-stress, high-paying jobs](http://www.businessinsider.com/high-paying-low-stress-jobs-2014-7?op=1/#od-scientists-4). I believe very little of it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm no longer in acadamia and work as a software engineer (US).
One thing I've found is that thinking about the technical problems brings me joy, and if I'm walking my dogs and think about them, it is a happy situation.
Thinking about office politics, however, is quite the opposite.
For math in academia, this would include a larger world mentioned by others: publishing, pressure, getting tenure, etc.
Therefore, concentrate on the math itself, if you can.
To me, one thing that would help is a **back-up plan**: What would happen if you didn't get tenure? Can you work in industry (as I did), do programming, web-tutoring, teaching at a community college (in US, usually an education degree is required for K-12).
One engineer I knew ran a bakery for a few years, so you can think outside of the box.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/09
| 684
| 3,289
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a PhD student in computational social science, and I feel like my work doesn't really contribute positively to humanity. Basically I feel like I am running analyses and producing plots to "prove a point" or (optimistically) discover new insights about the world. But I'm not actually sure that the point is true, because if I run the analysis in a slightly different way, it proves another point entirely. It seems to very much depend on the specific dataset you use and the specific way you conduct your analyses.
I want to switch to a field where this doesn't happen. Ideally in order to have a publication you would have to produce a piece of software that does something useful for the world, and it would be impossible to fake its usefulness. I am affiliated with the computer science department at my university, so I was wondering what fields of computer science are the most "legitimate" in this way, and also friendly to people with very little background in them.<issue_comment>username_1: You can find examples in safety, integrity and security related applications. The first ones jumping to my mind: real-time computing, cryptography, computer system security, compression.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I work in the field of computational social science and during my PhD, there were many instances in which I had similar thoughts.
You provide me a hint in your second paragraph - you are affiliated with the CS department in your university. Unfortunately, a common fallacy of most CS departments which have programs in computational social science is to focus on the "computational" part and not really on the "social science" part. It is not an uncommon workflow to use machine learning techniques on a dataset collected using other computational techniques and then report results. This is because of many reasons, the least of which is that folks need to know computation in great detail - this is at many times possible in computer science departments and not in social sciences (although that is changing in many departments that I know of)
This is what is probably causing the disconnect in your mind. I strongly suggest either expanding your reading to the parts of social science that you work on or are interested in and talking to more social scientists. You need to think at the intersection of both computational and social sciences and not as a computer scientist. Social science contributes many understandings of individual and collective behavior (often in networks) For instance, there is a big difference in paper writing and reporting of results in WWW, KDD versus CSCW and CHI although all these venues promote and support computational social science.
Ultimately, at the end of the day, if you feel like you need to change your field you probably should! You should do what excites you the most but I just wanted to point out possible avenues of thinking about computational social science since it is quite novel.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: There are many fields of applied CS where your computational analysis/design/calculation produces a result that is then tested experimentally. Some examples are computational biology, computational physics and computational chemistry.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/09
| 397
| 1,813
|
<issue_start>username_0: Let's say that some person has a Ph.D. in mathematics and several publications in peer-reviewed journals. After that he worked several years in another field (not directly related to mathematics). Now he is thinking about returning to mathematics. The downside is that:
1. he doesn't have any teaching experience, and
2. he can't arrange for any recommendation letters (I am not going to explain why, let's just consider it as a given for the purpose of this question).
All mathematics postdoc position announcements that I've seen so far require recommendation letters, and the vast majority of them require teaching experience. Do you know of any postdoc positions in mathematics that would make an exception?
Also, are there any other positions (in the private sector) related to mathematics that you would suggest to look for in this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: I can't imagine taking on someone who wasn't able to provide *any* recommendation letters, even if the candidate had several *Science* and *Nature* papers. However, I would be happy to consider strong recommendation letters from an employer in another field in combination with a very strong publication record.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think complete lack of *any* sort of recommendation letters would be a serious red flag, to the extent that the application would be a non-starter (for example, at my large, state, R1 university). That is, even assuming the research record is excellent, there will be other applicants for post-docs with excellent research records, *and* with excellent letters of recommendation. In the U.S., the letters matter a lot. I gather this is not the case in some scenarios in the EU, for example, but I cannot speak authoritatively on those situations.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/08/09
| 196
| 740
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am intending to write a journal paper for Elsevier Gait & Posture publication, but so far I found contradictory answers to the above question.<issue_comment>username_1: Check the journal's guidelines. Different Elsevier journals have different preferences. Some are happy with either American or British English, as long as you are consistent.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This type of information can usually be found in the instructions for authors. The [Gait & Posture instructions](https://www.elsevier.com/journals/gait-and-posture/0966-6362/guide-for-authors) say:
>
> Please write your text in good English (American or British usage is accepted, but not a mixture of these).
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/08/09
| 1,548
| 6,591
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a mathematician. In my subject, the normal means of disseminating research is to write it up with full and detailed proofs of the main results, which are then typically subjected to a rigourous peer-review process which can often take several years.
Much of my work, however, has an overlap with theoretical computer science, and I am often asked to referee articles sent to computer science conferences, which sometimes seem to me to have a slightly less rigourous review process. Therefore I have the following questions:
* As a reviewer, should I insist that CS conference papers contain full proofs of their main results?
* Should referees of conference papers actually check these proofs before accepting an article for publication?
These questions stem from a number of bad reviewing experiences I've had recently (as reviewer), in which I've rejected papers for basically a lack of rigour. One, which was submitted to a highly reputable conference, contained about ten additional pages of key proofs in a technical appendix, which was to be consulted ''at the reviewer's discretion'', and which would not have formed part of the final article. I rejected this on the basis that not only were the proofs themselves highly suspect (obviously grounds enough), but that the reader would never have had access to them and would have had to take everything on trust!
However, it turned out that I was the only reviewer who had these issues. The others were not only happy to have the main technical content of the paper relegated to a disposable appendix, but had not even bothered reading it! Eventually the paper did get rejected, but only after a fair amount of arguing on my part.
This is not by any means my only experience of this kind of attitude in computer science peer-reviewing (which would be frankly unthinkable in mathematics), but it illustrates the kind of problems I have as a reviewer.
I understand that there are cultural differences here, and that the speed of the conference system has its merits, so I am wondering whether I am being unfair to judge this system by the standards of rigour one normally expects from mathematical journals?<issue_comment>username_1: A conference paper in TCS is usually best seen as an abstract or an advertisement of the full paper.
The full paper should appear in e.g. ArXiv before the conference, and it should eventually be published in a journal.
It is perfectly normal that there are some proofs that are in the appendix in the submitted version and entirely missing in the final conference version. The reader can find the omitted details in ArXiv.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: What you're describing is quite common. Page limit in a conference can be, say, 15 pages, and in this case there's no way to include a 10 page proof in the main text. It is also likely that the proof is not seen as the main contribution of the paper.
Proceedings of the conference will indeed not include the appendices, but often authors upload papers to their web-pages, to their institutions' repositories, etc, so the proofs may be eventually accessible to the readers.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: "Rigour" is a nice sounding word. I like the way it feels when I say it. But aside from making nice sounds, it has some issues:
>
> ... which are then typically subjected to a rigorous peer-review process which can often take **several years**.
>
>
>
Let's forget about how nice the word sounds and take a stab at a pros and cons analysis of having fast-to-write, fast-to-review, fast-to-publish, not-so-rigorous conference papers.
Pros:
* Time-to-publish is reduced (moving from a couple of years to a couple of months), meaning that results can have impact faster.
* Other authors will become aware that there are results in this area, rather than trying to prove results that have already been proven but are stuck in a multi-year peer-review process.
* Reviewers have to expend less effort reviewing less rigorous papers in a less rigorous way. They can use that excess effort elsewhere.
* Authors have to expend less effort to write less rigorous papers. They can use that excess effort elsewhere.
* The ability to write less rigorous papers does not preclude the possibility of writing a follow-up paper that is more rigorous.
* Authors have something to lose by publishing incorrect non-rigorous results: their reputation. (Not really a pro, rather more of a check-and-balance.)
Cons:
* Less rigorous papers may be more prone to being incorrect. This may lead to incorrect papers building on these results.
* Once a lack of rigour seeps in, one is on a slippery slope. Without any rigour, one is not proving anything. The whole thing become pointless.
I do not believe in some absolute notion of "rigour" for any non-trivial proof. I believe it's a relative term. One writes proofs for one's audience. The notion of "rigour" is thus community dependent. It is up to a community to decide what level of "rigour" is most appropriate for that community. If the "rigour" drops too low and incorrect results become a problem, the community should adjust. If the "rigour" becomes too high and reviewers have to spend months checking the dotted i's and crossed t's on long proofs for results that are simply not worth that effort, then that will carry its own costs, particularly in terms of the capacity of the community to do work, where diversity of work will inevitably become the first victim (the trend will be towards safe incremental papers).
Applying the standards of rigour from one community to another is, in my mind, thus inappropriate in and of itself. Rigour is, in my mind, not the goal. The goal, in my mind, is that the community be "productive" in whatever notions they and society deem productive (in the sense that society, after all, is funding this cost, and will not continue to fund this cost if the community is expending its capacity in pursuing rigour for rigour's sake).
**tl;dr**: I believe that "rigour" is a means, not an ends. I think if you really want to take exception to the lack of rigour in a community, you should show that the cons are outweighing the pros, which is to say you should highlight incorrect results and the time wasted by the community on following-up those incorrect results. Simply arguing that community A chooses to have less rigour than community B and thus community A is doing something wrong, is, in my mind, insufficient as an argument. You need to argue that the perceived lack of rigour is a problem.
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/08/10
| 1,830
| 7,337
|
<issue_start>username_0: For instance, one of my professors went to Princeton (for his undergrad math degree) for free, because his parents are tenured faculty at Princeton. Is such a benefit available to tenured faculty at most U.S. universities? This is assuming that a tenured professor's children are qualified to be admitted to the school.
Besides having academic freedom, what are some other, lesser-known, considerable perks of being in academia as a tenured professor as opposed to being tenure track?
(Main motivation for the question is to follow up on a previous question in which the OP asked about the stresses of academic life, specifically, in mathematics research.)<issue_comment>username_1: My father is a retired college professor, and these were some of his "perks."
1) Tuition reimbursement for all his children, up to that of the university[s own fees. In the case of the Princeton professor, that meant his children's tuition at Princeton was paid for.
2) Chances of earning additional money, under the auspices of the University, for government or other consulting projects.
3) A very generous retirement package, similar to that of the military or government employees. The "salaries" aren't so great, but the retirement benefits are.
Note that this refers to *what has been in the past,for people who are now closer to retirement than to receiving tenure, and may or may not be true going forward.* But the question was cast as 'up to now."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While some universities offer tuition waivers, that is not universal, even in the United States -- and where it is available, it is usually a perk offered to *all* full time staff and faculty, not just tenured faculty.
For example, I have been employed at three public, research-intensive universities in Michigan:
* At Oakland University, children of all full-time staff or faculty get full tuition if they are admitted to, and enrolled full-time in, any degree-granting program.
* At Michigan State University, children of all full-time staff or faculty get a 50% tuition courtesy if they are admitted to, and enrolled full-time, a *first undergraduate* program. (In other words they cannot use this to get a discount on a second Bachelors degree or a graduate degree.)
* At the University of Michigan, there is no tuition benefit at all.
Other perks that full-time staff and instructional faculty may get (depending on the university and department) include a computer, office space, retirement (often including a 2-to-1 match in a tax-deferred 403(b) retirement fund up to some maximum), and a generous health care package. But again, these same perks are (often) not restricted to tenured faculty.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Universities offer all sort of "benefits" to its employees. Some of these "benefits" do not have a monetary value (e.g., flexible work schedule). The benefits available to faculty are often different from the cleaning staff. Further there are differences in benefits between tenured/tenure track and adjunct faculty. I can only think of three benefits, that have a monetary value, for which there are differences between tenure track and tenured faculty
**Sabbatical**: Some universities do not permit pretenure sabbaticals. It is often hard to differentiate if sabbatical eligibility is tied to tenure or time in service. [Brown University](https://www.brown.edu/about/administration/dean-of-faculty/sabbaticals-and-leaves) provides different sabbatical benefits pre and post tenure.
**Housing Assistance**: Some universities provide housing assistance (discounted homes, mortgage assistance, loans, etc). Portions of the [housing assistance program at Columbia](http://worklife.columbia.edu/faculty-recruitment-relocation) requires tenure.
**Parking**: Some universities provide parking passes. [Carroll College](http://www.carroll.edu/students/studentlife/parking.cc) provides reserved spaces for tenured faculty while other faculty and staff simply get a parking pass.
In terms of perks that do not have a monetary value, this varies widely by department. Tenured faculty often get to be chair of the department (which may or may not be a perk). Departments may also give tenured faculty priority in terms of teaching schedule, departmental and university service requirements, office space, and lab space. The sabbatical system, internal funding, and administrative support may be skewed in their favor also.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: At the community college where I teach, there are two huge benefits of being tenured (or tenure-track) which other answers have not touched on:
1. You get representation by a labor union that effectively advocates for you on issues of pay and working conditions.
2. You get effective representation in the faculty senate, which has a lot of influence over academic and professional matters.
(This is very different from the situation experienced by adjunct faculty. Part-timers have a different union, which is basically powerless, and although they have representation on the faculty senate, they have very little influence there.)
A great number of other benefits flow from these. Here are a couple of random examples.
My school claims in its catalog that it is a smoke-free campus, but in fact when they wrote up the rules, they decided that it wasn't practical to make that policy apply to union members. I have a tenured colleague who has a nicotine addiction, and for harm reduction she gets her nicotine fix by vaping in her office. For comparison, I had a nicotine-addicted student last year who couldn't make it through a three-hour physics lab without a fix. He had to leave lab and walk off campus to get his nicotine, because the campus police would hassle him if he vaped outside.
A decade ago, I was attacked by a student who threw me over a bench and into some bushes and threatened to kill me. An inaccurate version of the story got written up in the police report, apparently making me look bad. Once I realized that *I* might be in trouble, maybe even in danger of getting fired, I asked to see the police report so that I could understand what they thought I had done, but my management supervisor said that I couldn't see it because that would violate the student's privacy. I got nowhere on this until I got the union involved, after which the whole problem evaporated.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: As others have noted, not all universities give their faculty tuition waivers for their kids (not at mine, for example), and parking is not always free (not at mine, for example, and football season ticket holders usurp my contract space on "football Saturdays"), and the office space is not necessarily climate-controlled (I once had a thermostat in my office, which, it turned out, controlled all the offices on my side of the hallway... but they took it away. Now the temperature and ventilation is pretty random.), and so on.
Nevertheless, apart from thinking about these myriad petty annoyances, I almost entirely determine what it is that I think about on a day-to-day basis. Having weaned myself from external grant money, etc., I am not obliged to please federal agencies, either! That was what I hoped for, and on good days that is what I appreciate. :)
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/10
| 1,482
| 6,349
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting a a paper to a top conference and I need to determine the reviewers with conflicts of interests.
There is a big competition in having papers accepted at this conference, among people working in this area. Also, it is very likely that my paper goes to people who are in the same area for judgement. Particularly, some of these people are not very honest and they blindly reject other people's works, in order to publish their own papers. To myself, it has been proven the dishonesty of them.
Is it OK to put these people in my list of reviewers to exclude because of conflicts of interests? There are other researchers who can judge the quality of my paper honestly, because I am not putting everybody on that list. But is it right to do so?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, when a conference asks authors to identify reviewers that are conflicted, they want you to identify reviewers who fall into certain categories of people who should not review your work because they have a relationship with *you* personally that could bias their review. For example: your advisor, your colleagues, your current collaborators, your family members, etc. They are *not* asking you to list reviewers who you consider to be your competition.
For example, the instructions for [POPL 2017](http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/adg/POPL2017/dbr-faq.html#a7) say:
>
> As an author, you should list PC and ERC members (and any others, since others may be asked for outside reviewers) which you believe have a conflict with you. While particular criteria for making this determination may vary, please apply the following guidelines, identifying a potential reviewer Bob as conflicted if
>
>
> * Bob was your co-author or collaborator at some point within the last 2 years
> * Bob is an advisor or advisee of yours
> * Bob is a family member
> * Bob has a non-trivial financial stake in your work (e.g., invested in your startup company)
>
>
> Also please identify institutions with which you are affiliated; all employees or affiliates of these institutions will also be considered conflicted.
>
>
> If a possible reviewer does not meet the above criteria, please do not identify him/her as conflicted. Doing so could be viewed as an attempt to prevent a qualified, but possibly skeptical reviewer from reviewing your paper. If you nevertheless believe that a reviewer who does not meet the above criteria is conflicted, you may identify the person and send a note to the PC Chair.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The answer is no.
Being in competition with you for acceptance is not a valid reason to exclude reviewers. That competition is implicit and you'd be excluding everyone then. Peer review assumes good faith on both authors and reviewers sides.
In your question you seem to imply that some reviewers are being dishonest, that is an entirely other issue.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You should *read the guidelines* carefully. Not every field/journal/conference will see things the same way. In particular it may depend heavily on whether you are asked for a *reason* for exclusion. Note that previous co-authors are easily spotted in bibliometric systems (including the journal's in-house system if you habitually publish there); competitors are harder to find.
According to [AIP](https://publishing.aip.org/authors/ethics)'s ethics guidelines.
>
> Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be
> kept confidential and not used for competitive gain. Reviewers must
> disclose conflicts of interest resulting from direct competitive,
> collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, and
> avoid cases in which such conflicts preclude an objective evaluation.
>
>
>
Thus the onus is on the reviewers. However (from memory, if I'm wrong I'm thinking of another publisher) when you're asked for reviewers to avoid, you're also asked to provide a reason. By stating that you are competing with another group you can help the editor make a judgement call bearing in mind that in the editors' responsibilities section:
>
> Situations that may lead to real or perceived conflicts of interest should be avoided.
>
>
>
The editor may think "perfect, someone who can review this really critically" and choose to ignore your *suggestion* (that's all it usually is) but then they have to be able to stand by this decision. It could affect how they choose the other reviewer(s). But you need to be specific and polite -- not "<NAME> has it in for me" but "Prof X's group are working on very similar material and we feel it would be a conflict of interest if they were to see this work ahead of publication".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Assuming good faith,
your competitors are the best peer reviewers
--------------------------------------------
and you are one of the most appropriate reviewers for your competitors. **You want a reviewer that is an *expert* on your field.** Not some student of a different subdomain that gives you a "reject, I don't like Figure 5 and your result on data 3 could be better" kind of review.
Don't forget there (usually) is some senior pc/editor handling the reviews and doing the final decision. If a competitor is just giving a review "our method X is better, reject" then the handling PC may ignore his review.
It may help to *treat competitors fair*. Discuss their work, compare to their method. Show when and why your approach is better. Your competitors will like their work being read, understood, cited and improved. You can establish healthy competitions on the research direction along with respect for one another's work. Treat them as *peers*, not as enemies.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: While I mainly agree with username_3's answer, it seems that most people here are saying you shouldn't and it would be unethical, so I thought I should add that I have seem guidelines for reviewers that, in their section on declaring conflict of interest, it specifies people in direct competition as well as friends and family etc.
There would hopefully be enough people in your field working on related things that you can exclude a couple who are working on directly contradictory theories without running out of reviewers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/10
| 423
| 1,848
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing my thesis and am quite far already. However, I have discovered a paper now which troubles me quite a bit, as it pretty much destroys everything I am arguing for (and very convincingly so!). I know that this would not be so bad, had the paper been published only recently. But it came out about 10 years ago - I should probably have found & read that much earlier! What am I to do now? I am worried to tell my supervisor!<issue_comment>username_1: It's just one paper. Papers in academia conflict quite often, sometimes with reasonable explanation.
What you should do depends a lot on the nature of the conflict. At a minimum, you should address the paper's arguments in your literature review and why you think your dissertation will find different results, or why the paper doesn't apply, or why you think parts of the paper are relevant but other parts are not, or what have you.
If the paper reveals a much more substantial error in your argument, you may have to rework sections of your argument or tweak your approach.
But the discovery of one paper is very unlikely to torpedo an entire dissertation project.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It had happened to me while I was working on my masters thesis. However, it was not completely the same which I had formulated. But, still people/reviewers might reject all your hard works with the reference (existing old work). However, I didn't stop like that. Because, in this world many things are already done and the existing ones are improved based on some new directions.
So, it is not so late that you have to pack off everything. You could argue or propose in a different way than the existing paper has already. However, please not that you might need to cite the paper which has already been published.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/10
| 808
| 3,352
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the various projects I've worked on, professors have insisted that a writeup for a journal submission should state and prove only the *final* results (rather than describe the process of arriving at those results). I see how this makes things concise, but it seems to obscure the process of discovery.
Here's an example of this situation from a mathematics paper I've worked on.
What I did:
1. I have a direct proof for "X".
2. After looking at my direct proof for "X", I see that I could generalize "X" if I prove "Y" (it was not immediately clear that proving "Y" was useful for proving "X").
3. I prove "Y", then prove "Generalized X" (duplicating some work from the proof of "X").
What the paper does:
1. Prove "Y".
2. Use "Y" to prove "Generalized X".
3. Refine the proof of "Generalized X" ever so slightly to get "X".
My frustration:
I feel like the paper is good reference material, but it's not educational. I think a reader would stand to benefit much more from a direct proof of "X", since it shows why I would try to show "Y" in the first place.<issue_comment>username_1: I think this comes down to the subtle but important difference between *communication* and *education*. The target audience of a research paper is experts in the field, not students. Most readers want to know what your theorem says, why it's important and relevant, intuition about why it "should" be true and why the proof works, and (sometimes) the details of the proof. Few people are reading in order to learn how to prove theorems, which is what your suggested presentation would serve.
Having said that, it's possible to take the "uneducational" approach too far and actively cover one's tracks, so that the paper is hard to understand but looks impressive. By all means, if an informal discussion of the special case "X" will help give intuition about the main theorem, include such in your introduction.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **What will be most useful to readers, for understanding the final result?**
The primary purpose of a research paper is communicating its original results. Educating the reader about how research works in general is great, but should generally be considered a secondary priority in a research article; if you want to focus on that, you can write it up separately in a different venue.
On the other hand, sometimes the final result — if simply given on its own — may seem unmotivated, or overly abstract, and will be difficult for readers to understand. In that case, it can be very helpful to lead up to it by presenting some edited highlights of the process of discovery. (Or by giving a worked example, or a high-level overview, or various other things.)
So if your co-authors are really saying “You should always give just the final result!” then they’re being shortsighted and unreasonable. But if — and I guess this is more likely — they’re suggesting it *because they think it’s clearer for readers,* then it’s a judgement call about exposition and pedagogy, and you need to discuss it as such.
There’s not much value in recording the process of discovery for its own sake. There is great value in describing the process of discovery if it will give readers a path to understanding results which otherwise might seem abstract and impenetrable.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/08/11
| 1,540
| 6,943
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have recently completed a course where a very large assignment was handed in just before the exam. After the course finished, we were never given feedback on this assignment. I am very frustrated about this because, even though I can see my grade and that I did well, it means nothing to me--I pay tuition so that I can learn and **not so that I can get a grade**. I have emailed the professor and have not received a response. I have also emailed my program's coordinator and she has told me that she has "no leverage with other departments and their profs". If it is of any value, the course was in Psychology.
I see this as a business transaction. I have paid the university for the service of teaching me. The professor is made responsible by the university to teach me. Teaching **requires** providing feedback. Therefore, if the professor is not providing feedback, the university is not fulfilling their part of the business transaction.
What are the professor's obligations with respect to my education once I have been put in his class?
How should I deal with this? The professor does not answer emails and I've never been fortunate enough to run into him at his office.
Edit: I've trimmed unnecessary information.<issue_comment>username_1: Giving good feedback is good practice. However, people working at the university have multiple responsibilities and they need to make trade-offs. So it is very well possible that your professor made a legitimate choice, we don't know and neither do you. Moreover, professors have substantial freedom in making those trade-offs. So there is very little you can do to force him to give feedback. Trying that will certainly back-fire. Instead, your best bet is to politely ask for an appointment, and be flexible about when that appointment takes place.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer your question, the teacher's obligation depends on the institution, and the country where you're studying, and on the bargaining agreement that the academic entered into when they where hired (their contract).
I understand that you want to receive useful feedback as part of your learning process to improve your skills and I'd be as upset as you if I were in your situation, but if you've already talked to the program coordinator and she says there's nothing she can do, then enquire somewhere else. Are you truly interested in the obligations of the instructor, or is the feedback actually what you want? If it's the former, your university or college should have a Dean of Academics or related department in charge of teaching and learning excellence and perhaps they can point you in the right direction. If it's a matter of principle for you, try to get your hands on the bargaining agreement (contract) and read the whole thing.
If all you want is the feedback, you might have to live with the fact that this instructor is just a shitty teacher and won't give you feedback. It's very common, especially in undergraduate courses that students 'just want a grade to find out how they did' at least this is my experience, so feedback may not be given for the last assessments, or if it is, it's very minimal. "Why did I get the grade that I did?" is probably the best question to ask the instructor, and if they're not around to answer that question, go up the chain, department chair, Dean of school, Provost, until you get that answer. With that being said, many instructors' roles are made up of more than just teaching, so if they're not around, you might have to wait to meet with them. Honestly, this route might raise your blood pressure more than anything, so if this instructor wasn't that good, just get the feedback from somewhere else. Ask to meet with another instructor in the department, or a graduate student perhaps, or go to your university's writing lab or tutoring center and have someone go through your assignment with you. Regardless of what grade you got, they'll still be able to provide you with some useful feedback.
The important thing is that you get the feedback you need to improve your skills. Whether that SHOULD come from your instructor isn't productive for you, so go find someone who is willing to help, file a grievance or a complaint against the instructor for not doing what most instructors consider to be their job, but don't get too upset about it. You're right, education is a transaction, but unfortunately, many institutions including the one you're enrolled in, may not agree with you 100% on the nature of that transaction - some schools just care how many students graduate per year, it doesn't matter if those students learned anything or not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are two types of assessment: [formative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formative_assessment) and [summative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summative_assessment). Formative assessment is part of the teaching and learning process and feedback is a critical component. Summative assessment is not really part of the learning process, but rather is designed to assess the learning outcomes. In this respect, feedback, or more specifically, qualitative feedback, is not needed with summative assessment.
The requirements on providing feedback can vary across universities and even departments within a university. Sometimes instructors are required to give feedback on both formative and summative assessment, sometimes only on formative assessment, and sometimes never at all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Generally no.
Professors are bound by their contract to the institution and by the contract they have with students usually through some written course outline or course description. Every contract I know forces the instructor to give a final mark in a timely manner, but I do not know of any of these containing a broad clause forcing instructors to give detailed feedbacks on assignments (there may be individual exceptions). Our contract states that a certain fraction if the total grade must be assigned before the withdraw date, but nothing more precise than this.
In practice forcing a specific type of feedback would be difficult to implement since the teaching styles and course contents are so variable.
Usually students have a formal right to review final examinations and appeal their marks, but this is a very hassle-full path to getting some feedbacks.
The practical recourse of students is to formally complain to the chair/head of unit. The cumulative effects of these complaint *may* lead to changes - the chair *might* eventually require that the course description mention detailed feedbacks - or might lead to a change of teaching assignments or denied promotion or salary increases but this is very rare. Tenured faculty have academic freedom, which means they are given very broad autonomy as to the contents and evaluation methods in the courses they are assigned.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/11
| 670
| 3,012
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a paper accepted as an oral presentation at a conference that has an acceptance rate of 3.5 %. My field is computer vision and the conference is CVPR, the largest and most important international conference. In my field, conferences, rather than journals, are the main publication medium.
In a cover letter I am writing, I want to reinforce how prestigious it is to have such a paper accepted, especially to a non-expert audience. Now, I know that Science / Nature have acceptance rates of around 7%, so I was thinking of writing something like the following:
"I recently had a paper accepted as an oral presentation at CVPR, at an acceptance rate of 3.5 %, which is half that of the Science and Nature journals."
Does this read well? Or does it sound arrogant? And is putting this in context with Science and Nature necessary, or is the acceptance rate itself ok on its own?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: I am a CS researcher and I know the reputation of CVPR conference.
Please see the following situations:
1. People submit to Science/Nature journals when they see that their work is highly qualitative and could give a high level of contribution to the scientific world. It is not like someone does a small thing and submits. So, if 1000 papers are submitted to journals like this and only 450 gets accepted then, the acceptance rate is far high.
2. However, similar case as above does not happen in conferences. Anyone can submit anything, even if it is a small contribution.
Please remember, it is NOT WISE to compare conference with such journals. Journals are far better than conferences given the amount of contribution you may find in the published works.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Taken on its own, the acceptance/rejection rate is not particularly useful as a measure of quality or "prestige" since journals often also *differ by the average quality of submissions they receive*. In theory, it would be entirely possible to have a journal that receives such a large volume of low-quality submissions that even with a low acceptance rate it still publishes a lot of garbage. Similarly, it is possible to have a journal that receives such high quality submissions that even with a high acceptance rate it still publishes only high-quality paper.
Of course, this does not mean that the acceptance/rejection rate is useless in conveying information. It just means that you are missing another piece of information that pairs with this metric. For this reason, I recommend you remove your comparison to *Science* and *Nature*. It is not so much that this sounds arrogant, but it shows a lack of appreciation for the fact that these latter journals tend to attract high quality papers from across many scientific fields. It is likely that these journals have a higher baseline of submission quality than a conference proceeding, which means that their higher acceptance rate may still reflect a higher quality requirement for publication.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/11
| 1,268
| 5,414
|
<issue_start>username_0: A common interview question is "What is your greatest weakness?". Having done some online research on this, there are lots of articles on how to tackle this with generic job interviews, and the idea is to turn a negative into a positive. Some examples have been: "I'm not great at public speaking, but have been attending evening classes to improve", "I have trouble managing my work-life balance, but have recently been working on a more careful personalised timetable", and "I have not been great with deadlines, but I now give myself a personal deadline of 24 hours in advance".
However, academic interviews are often very specific, and focus on research, publications, collaborations, outreach, teaching etc. What are some examples of how to answer this question well, which are specific to academic interviews (e.g. for a postdoc / lectureship / professorship)?<issue_comment>username_1: **I would answer it as recommended.** The best strategy is probably to admit a real weakness that is relevant to the work (which shows honesty and the ability to be self-critical), but focus on how you are working to improve. There's nothing really academia-specific about this.
Your examples seem largely fine to me, except "I have trouble managing my work-life balance" is too vague and could be interpreted as a very serious issue. So I would avoid that or make it more specific.
I wouldn't spend too much time preparing for this question. Its reputation as a common interview question is greater than the reality. I've never been asked it (at interviews in and out of academia).
It's a poor interview question, really, because it's unlikely to lead to genuine insight on the candidate. Good interviewers don't ask it. Your main task is just to avoid a big mistake. Don't say your biggest weakness is plagiarism or stabbing colleagues in the back, and you'll be fine.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: "What is your greatest weakness?" is a bad interview question. It's in the same category as "If you were an animal, what would you be, and why?", and the classic "Where do you see yourself in five years?".
In my opinion, these type of questions warrant a ~~dry, sarcastic~~ simple answer or just "I don't know". Your interviewer(s) won't learn anything important about you from such questions anyway.
But whatever you do, please don't tell you interviewer(s) things like "I have trouble managing my work-life balance" or "I have not been great with deadlines", even if you plan to try to somehow turn these into positives. I've seen candidates dropped for less. As a student (at the very least) you've had many years to learn how to manage your work-life balance and how to deal with deadlines, and you really have no excuse as to why you can't yet do these things at a sufficiently good level.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I have been asked this question in interviews and have asked it during interviews. I actually think the question is pretty informative for academic positions. When I am reviewing a CV prior to an interview, I have thoughts about the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate. The CV provides information about areas the candidate is going to need to work on to get a promotion to the next level (e.g., a tenure track position or tenure).
It is a bad sign if the candidate answers with an area that is either unimportant for the job (e.g., publication record for a teaching position) or not an obvious weakness. This suggests to me that the candidate does not understand the position they are applying for and what needs to be done to get a promotion. Further, it makes me worried that if they do not see something as a weakness, that they will be less willing to accept criticism regarding it.
If a candidate simply blows off the answer (e.g., *I am really bad at golf*), then the interviewer learns that the candidate does not want to critically assess their strength and weaknesses. Again this is a bad sign.
If the candidate answers with a weakness, this is a good sign. The best, however, is if a candidate and can answer with a strength and talk about how this strength can be used to address a weakness. For example, a candidate with a strong funding record and a weak publication record might answer with *my greatest weakness is my success obtaining funding which has slowed my publication rate*. For a teaching oriented position, a candidate with a strong publication record but limited teaching might answer with *my greatest weakness was succumbing to pressure by my supervisor to publish and ignoring my desire to teach*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I have been asked this in an interview for a lectureship in pure mathematics. At the time I was quite junior so I just said that I didn't much have much administrative experience. They then just moved on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I think you should interpret it as: *Name a personal weakness related to the position you are applying to*.
The point is to see (a) whether you have insight into your relative strengths and weaknesses, and (b) whether you have a plan of using your strengths to get around those weaknesses.
It's normal and expected that you will do (and enjoy) some parts of your job better than others, and you need to reassure the hiring committee that you won't get stuck on the parts that aren't your favorite.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/11
| 685
| 2,807
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am considering trying to publish in an established Elsevier journal. I like the idea of having free available science.
As there is no fundings in my project for golden open Access, I researched a bit on the Elsevier page. The journal [Remote Sensing of Environment](https://www.elsevier.com/journals/remote-sensing-of-environment/0034-4257/guide-for-authors) has an Embargo period of 24 months. Yet Elseviers [sharing section](https://www.elsevier.com/about/company-information/policies/sharing) states different optoins for self distribtution.
I can share the preprint anywhere and any time. The preprint is the version which I submitted in the first round. No questions here.
The interesting part for me is the second: If I get accepted, I can share my accepted manuscript
**Immediately** on a non-commercial personal homepage. This manuscript contains all the improvements I included during the review. But not the publishers layout. I am just not sure what counts as a personal homepage. Does my ResearchGate profile also count as such? I work within an open source project. Does the software homepage count as such? It is non commercial due to the open source nature, but not private. Can this manuscript be uploaded on my EU project homepage? The third point is demanded by my project.
Coming also to another point. I am able to write in Latex and I found one time the Elsevier template on a Latex template page. I am pretty sure that with that template, I can produce from the Look And Feel a quite professional PDF. Yet the same page states, that the "accepted manuscript should not be added to or enhanced in any way to appear more like, or to substitute for, the published journal article." So I cannot produce something nice formatted, well designed? I would do so anyway, as I always preformat every journal submission. Of course there is also other nice templates which I could use. But then it is a substitute for the published article right?<issue_comment>username_1: [Here's the guidance](http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/issn/0034-4257/) on the SHERPA/RoMEO website which is the best guide out there for issues like this.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It seems to me that the substance of this question is whether things such as Researchgate profiles count as a "non-commercial personal homepage". My instinct is no, but ultimately this will only be known for sure if a court rules on it. Whether that ever happens will depend on whether Elsevier (or others) decide to try to enforce this rule against individuals.
The practical reality right now is that people *are* sharing papers this way, and to the best of my knowledge they are not being sued. Whether you wish to do the same is of course your choice.
And yes, it's a bit of a mess.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/11
| 375
| 1,633
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have an idea that I would like to publish. However, the idea is so simple that basically everyone in the field could reproduce the experiment that shows its benefit within a day or so.
What can I do to ensure that my idea is not stolen during the review process by a reviewer, for example?
If the reviewer holds back my paper and publishes it himself somewhere else, is there something I can do to prevent this?<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming the journals you publish in allow it, you can submit your work to a preprint archive such as ArXiv.org. You can also put it up on a personal website.
Even if someone tries to scoop you, if you work is ever published, the date it was submitted for review should appear in the final article, giving your work precedence on any other. As for your concerns about reviewers stealing your work, there is not much else you can do besides the above. The peer review system is based on good faith, and hopefully you end up with ethical reviewers.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First off, I would not worry too much about someone stealing your ideas. A peer reviewed paper has already been seen by you, your advisor, the editor of the journal/conference and at least 1 other reviewer (probably more). If a reviewer was to steal your idea, it would be trivially easy to prove he/she stole it - simply show the email from the thief where he/she reviewed it.
You should keep every submission, review (accepted and rejected), and editor note for papers you write. Most researchers I know already do this (usually via email folders).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/11
| 919
| 3,785
|
<issue_start>username_0: **[Long]**
I have been working in a very well known university in India. I am a faculty member in the department of Computer Science. My appointment to the university is somewhat temporary given the condition I have to finish my PhD within *x*-years (Please ignore *x* for the time). If I can not finish my PhD within this duration, I have to leave the job and/or PhD.
Given the following conditions, you could see that it is difficult.
1. This is one of the premier and oldest university in India which is very well known for its quality teaching.
2. The university also expects top quality research for acceptance of the PhD thesis.
3. All the faculties of the same level as mine, are one of the back-bone of the department(s) of the university.
4. All the faculties must contribute towards institutional development in addition to quality teaching and research/PhD.
I can understand that this is a good sign that we can learn teaching/research with time. However, for me it seems very tough. I have been planning for a full-time PhD somewhere abroad with a stipend. However, I am tensed about future opportunities post PhD.
I understand that PhD students are given some amount of teaching load as a part of stipend policy. But, this academic teaching load is really incomparable and is too high.
Considering above facts, how to manage these two things together?
**[Short]**
Can academic teaching and quality research go hand-in-hand given a time-bound on job?
P.S. I belong to computer science and mathematics community and an independent scholar. Research is my passion.
**[Edits]**
1. There are two different courses (full course) assigned each with a student strength of 100 (approx.).
2. The courses involve labs as well.
3. So, in every 1.5 day, you could assume to have a class for which you need to plan your day properly (such as preparing materials, teaching slides, assignments, lab assignments, surprise tests if any, and few other things)
The point of writing *I have been planning for a full-time PhD somewhere abroad with a stipend.* is to get advises from experienced persons here on Academia.SE on whether should I go for it or not.<issue_comment>username_1: Sure, this is exactly what is expected of tenure track faculty at research intensive universities in the US. It is a lot easier when you have a little teaching experience and a little research experience before diving into the "deep" end, but there is no reason teaching and research cannot go together. In the US a PhD student might be expect to teach a single class in both the fall and spring semesters while a tenure track faculty might be expected to teach 3 classes each semester.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It isn't necessary that being good at one can infer the same in the other. I've noticed quite s few examples of this sort. But, teaching can truly attribute to research and vice versa as long as they are on the same track.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It can, and should. This does not always happen because researchers may have forgotten how hard it was to get the basics right. In a way researcers who publish things a lot should be the best explainers, in theory. In practice some fields do a lot of obfurscation in their papers so they do not know how to put explanations out simply.
In fact teaching helps you as a researcher, sometimes at the expense of students. It makes you much more aware of where your skills are lacking and where you might have hidden misunderstanding. But you can only ever appreciate this if you can accept this fact. Also thinking about the simple explanations works towards making better publications. Having a wall to bounce your ideas against surely can not be bad thing.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/12
| 510
| 2,077
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will travel to a conference at which I will present my work. My funder usually reimburses me for fees of conference registration, travel, and accommodation.
However, since my wife and kids will accompany me, I will book separate travel tickets for them, and a family room, which is usually more expensive than a single one.
I will ask the funder whether/how they would reimburse me for the accommodation.
I guess many other academics around the world travel for work with their partners, friends, or families, and I am wondering how they usually/ideally get fair reimbursement for accommodation shared with other non-funded travellers.<issue_comment>username_1: Usually, you will explain the specifics of your travel and provide some documentation about
* the actual expenses for travelling with your family
* the expenses you would have had, had you travelled alone
You should then be able to make a case for getting reimbursed for the (lower) expenses listed in item #2, even though all your bills show the (higher) expenses from item #1.
*If* there was anything that cost the same, or even less, for the whole family compared to what you would have paid alone, make sure to provide good proof of the hypothetical 1-person-price and you might even get reimbursed some of what was used by the entire family :)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have always eaten these cost differences. My family is small (me and wife), and I always get a room with a king bed anyway. We pay the cost for my wife's flights, the university (maybe through grants) pays for my flights, per diem, and hotel. If there is a rental car required, it doesn't change size, so the university pays that as well.
I don't think that the university would pay the difference for anything I chose to make different for my work travel (extra stops, room for children, etc.), because I think there are either university rules or granting agency rules that prevent it. These are my choices to travel with family, I must make up the differences.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/12
| 2,789
| 10,584
|
<issue_start>username_0: My question is about German academic system, but I would also like to know the situation world-wide.
Any research/educational institution strives (at least in theory) to produce scientific output of **high standards**. This is the motivation to introduce some kind of internal review for all the papers produced there prior to the submission.
One example would be papers produced during the PhD study. Typically they would involve at least one senior author, typically a professor who has a function of a PhD adviser and who also shares an affiliation with the PhD student. This assures that the manuscript adheres to some minimal **quality** standards.
In some cases more stringent procedures are implemented, e.g., **internal reviews** in Max Planck Institutes.
It is quite clear that Professors at the Universities are **independent researches** and therefore do not need to undergo any internal reviews prior to submission ([this post](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62421/a-university-does-not-allow-its-employees-to-use-its-affiliation-on-papers-done) makes me wonder if it is really so). It is, of course, beneficial if they seek for the opinion of colleagues, but not required.
But what is the situation with scientific personal on the intermediate stages of their carrier? *Can a Postdoc/Privat Dozent/Junior Prof. affiliate themselves with the university without being refereed internally by some Prof.?* My guess would be that this is an **individual policy of each university**. However, it needs to follow some general rules which I would like to know. I anticipate following scenarios, partly discussed (in more general terms and not specific to a country) in other posts here:
1) One is free to [publish without an affiliation.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/71503/can-i-publish-without-affiliation) For many reasons it might be not a wise decision. Typically it would signal the editors that the author has some problem with his institution or has no job. This reduces chances of being accepted.
2) The author seeks for an informal internal review, gets the **blessing from a professor** and does not forget to acknowledge him/her. This seems to be an idealistic and not realistic situation: the prof. will most likely be pissed off having to do some job and not being on the authors list.
3) The author offers the “**courtesy authorship**" to the prof. However, this might be problematic if the work in not even remotely within research interests of the boss.
4) **Being a coworker** of the university is sufficient to use this affiliation on the papers. No internal review is required. [This answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/890/rules-for-affiliation-for-student-doing-unpaid-research-in-his-her-free-time) suggests that this might be the case even for undergraduate students, however, I greatly doubt it in the case of german universities.
The answer seems to be clear if some **university equipment** was used in order to produce the work. It is natural in this case that the **head of the department** is [listed as an author](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11151/changing-affiliation-on-publication). My question is mostly about the **theoretical work** that requires maximum a laptop.
In your answers, please, try to address
* each of the aforementioned **nonpermanent positions** (Master/PhD students, Postdocs, Privat Dozents, Junior Prof., [retired](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1294/affiliation-for-a-retiree)),
* discuss cases of **inter-institutional work** (PhD student is not working in the same university as PhD advisor), and
* consider other kinds of intellectual output (such a writing **books**).
* If you think that (3) is the right answer, please, elaborate if it implies **restrictions to write papers, books**, etc. as a sole author for anyone who is not holding a permanent position.
* If you are inclined towards (4), please, provide some **substantiation**.
Here is a little cartoon and a historical remark in order to encourage your response.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4K8x0.gif)
To put my question in a historical perspective: famous Prussian philosopher <NAME> wrote all his works while being associated with the University of Königsberg (MA, 1755; PhD, 1755; Dr. habil., 1770). For instance, in 1749, he published his first philosophical work, "Thoughts on the True Estimation of Living Forces" (written in 1745–47) not even holding a PhD title and possibly unpaid. Does it mean that this and all subsequent works were internally refereed by some professors. What has changed since that time?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> 4) Being a coworker of the university is sufficient to use this affiliation on the papers. No internal review is required. This answer suggests that this might be the case even for undergraduate students, however, I greatly doubt it in the case of german universities.
>
>
>
Assuming sufficient experience to get something published in a quality venue, from what I have seen, this *is* the case at German universities.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Short answer: Technically, option (4) is correct; but option (2) is closer to good scientific practice.
Long answer:
It's not mentioned explicitly in your question, but I assume we're talking about a case where the professor / advisor did not provide any significant contribution to the paper, as otherwise there would be no need to ask. So:
First of all, O.R.Mapper's answer is absolutely correct - there is no obligation for anyone to get consent for publication. I guess they assume that peer-review will ensure quality publications.
However: In your comment to his answer, you write that
>
> I think I was explicitly told that according to the rules of good scientific practice only (3) is possible.
>
>
>
I disagree that good scientific practice means offering authorship to someone who only proof-read the paper, even if he is your boss/advisor. But neither is it good scientific practice to submit anything for publication without discussing your ideas and/or results with anyone. So while (4) is technically correct, a variation of (2) is probably the best option wrt to scientific practice:
>
> 2) The author seeks for an informal internal review, gets the blessing from a professor and does not forget to acknowledge him/her.
>
>
>
Note that this review need not be from a professor, in my experience other PhD students often provided better feedback because they read the draft more thoroughly!
During my time as PhD student, I published several papers without my advisor as co-author, and didn't face any consequences. Of course, that doesn't mean that *your* boss/advisor won't give you a hard time (won't make you face consequences) if you don't add him as an author or at least ask for his consent. But then, this is rather department-specific (if not professor-specific) and may also vary between different fields.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Rule 2 and 4 are not "ideal", they are what I have experienced all the time. The fast majority of professors are humans who take their responsibility as mentor and advisor to their junior collegues and students seriously. (They may not have the resources, time, and/or skill to do it as well as one might like, but that is another story.) The worst thing that would happen to you when you publish without telling your professor is that (s)he is disappointed at not having the opportunity to make your work even beter and thus improve your prospects more.
Having said that, in any groups there are bad apples. I fear that you are in such an abusive situation. This is why I have been unwilling to categorically say that rule 3 never ever ever applies. If you are in such an abusive situation, going against your professor based on advise from an internet forum is probably the worst thing you can do.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Earlier answers to this post are good, present reasonable arguments, however, all of them lack legal rigour. Therefore, I decided to post my own answer to the post. As a basis I am using **Gesetz über die Hochschulen in Baden-Württemberg** (Law on universities in Baden-Württemberg). Similar law exists in all other Lands.
*§3 Freiheit von Wissenschaft und Kunst, Forschung, Lehre und Studium; wissenschaftliche Redlichkeit* (Freedom of science and art, research, teaching and learning; good scientific practice) seems to be relevant. In section 2 we read
>
> Die Freiheit der Forschung umfasst insbesondere die Fragestellung, die
> Grundsätze der Methodik sowie die Bewertung des Forschungsergebnisses
> und seine **Verbreitung**.
>
>
>
which translated in English reads:
>
> The freedom of research includes in particular the formulation of the
> research questions, the principles of the methodology and the
> assessment of the research results and its **dissemination**.
>
>
>
The latter surely can be narrowed to the **publication of results**. So far so good, this excerpt seems to back all the previous answers. What remains to be seen is who is the subject of this declaration. I have only a limited knowledge of Jurisprudence, however, I would argue that this concerns University as a whole, not its particular members. Insofar, we are in the grey zone. Fully clarification can only be reached by the *stare decisis*, i.e., precedent.
I was not able to find any legal cases for any of the categories listed above, i.e. *Postdoc/Privat Dozent/Junior Profs*. However, I found a verdict of the Federal Constitutional Court (Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts) dated by 05.29.1973 [1 BvR 424/71 ua - BVerfGE 3, 79], see also (VGH Kassel, Beschluss vom 12. April 1984, 6 TG 5049/83, juris) that
>
> Er kann aber auch außerhalb seines Fachbereichs forschen.
>
>
>
or in English
>
> He can conduct research outside of his specialist field.
>
>
>
where "he" refers to a **university professor**.
This substantiate my initial guess that this category of scientific stuff indeed possesses the full freedom of conducting the research. For this reason situation as described in [another post](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62421/a-university-does-not-allow-its-employees-to-use-its-affiliation-on-papers-done) here would have never happen in Germany. However, for all other cases, to the best of my knowledge the **question remains unregulated**.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/12
| 609
| 2,516
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I was talking with a professor in my department about potential supervision of my Master's thesis.
The problem is, he holds regular meetings with his research group, but he intends to supervise me separately, so I will be isolated and not have access to group meetings or anything revolving there. Is this a common approach? I did not want to ask this to the professor since he might get offended. Did he politely reject me, but then why did not he give a direct "no" as an answer?
Should I give it a go?<issue_comment>username_1: As far as I can tell, this is probably fine - it is definitely not a "polite rejection" unless you missed a lot of signs that the professor is too busy to work with you.
svavil's question is very relevant: if you are working on a broadly different topic than the rest of the research group, you wouldn't gain as much, and the research group wouldn't gain as much from you being there.
Even if you are close to the research group's topics, some professors will start beginning students off without the rest of the group. This way, early students can benefit from more focused attention, and the group meetings don't have to catch up the new students. I think this approach is more often taken in theoretical/computational science groups. As students move along, they are brought more into contact with the group. [\*caveat = this last is based on my experience in groups that are mostly PhD students, so not sure if Masters research is similar.]
There are two possible ways I could see this being bad (both of which happen, but are not the majority of cases):
1) The professor doesn't actually have time to work with you, and you will have trouble scheduling meetings with him, and making progress.
2) The professor is isolating you because he plans on harassing you, e.g. as mentioned re "independent studies": <http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2016/04/ban_the_independent_study.html>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This sort of event happened to a colleague of mine before. Initially he did feel discomforted, but later realized the practical implications. The intent was not malevolent in any way.
Some professors (especially senior grades) do not encourage outsiders to reside at their team meetings. It's just a protective tradition they follow. According to his conduct, the fact that your are not a recognized member of his research group means that you just can't take part in the research meetings.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/12
| 565
| 2,350
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is a Lecturer in the UK or Europe considered pretty much the same as an Assistant Professor in the US, considering the fact that this Lecturer position involves teaching, research and service?
Do Indian institutions (IIT/IIIT/NIT) consider the experience as a Lecturer in Europe or the UK equivalent to the US for Assistant Professor positions in CS?<issue_comment>username_1: As far as I can tell, this is probably fine - it is definitely not a "polite rejection" unless you missed a lot of signs that the professor is too busy to work with you.
svavil's question is very relevant: if you are working on a broadly different topic than the rest of the research group, you wouldn't gain as much, and the research group wouldn't gain as much from you being there.
Even if you are close to the research group's topics, some professors will start beginning students off without the rest of the group. This way, early students can benefit from more focused attention, and the group meetings don't have to catch up the new students. I think this approach is more often taken in theoretical/computational science groups. As students move along, they are brought more into contact with the group. [\*caveat = this last is based on my experience in groups that are mostly PhD students, so not sure if Masters research is similar.]
There are two possible ways I could see this being bad (both of which happen, but are not the majority of cases):
1) The professor doesn't actually have time to work with you, and you will have trouble scheduling meetings with him, and making progress.
2) The professor is isolating you because he plans on harassing you, e.g. as mentioned re "independent studies": <http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2016/04/ban_the_independent_study.html>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This sort of event happened to a colleague of mine before. Initially he did feel discomforted, but later realized the practical implications. The intent was not malevolent in any way.
Some professors (especially senior grades) do not encourage outsiders to reside at their team meetings. It's just a protective tradition they follow. According to his conduct, the fact that your are not a recognized member of his research group means that you just can't take part in the research meetings.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/13
| 1,708
| 7,445
|
<issue_start>username_0: I supervise a few undergraduates doing independent study and internships in Computer Science. Some of their tasks are to assist me with various back-burner research projects. I can offer them college credit in exchange for their work. However, their labor is difficult to utilize. Their commitment may only be for a few hours a week, they can take a long time to ramp up work, and they sometimes disappear mid-semester. What strategies are out there to make the most of working with this mercurial resource?<issue_comment>username_1: Accept that what you are doing when working with undergraduate researchers is teaching and developing young scientists. Make that mental shift, and your view of productivity changes enormously.
Even the very best undergraduates I've had -- students who now have R1 faculty positions or equivalent -- were time-sinks at first and break-even after a year or two as undergraduates. But increasing productivity is not why I invited them into the lab. What was so cool was to see them turning into independent scientists while in my lab.
I suppose if you really care about productivity rather than developing scientists, assign them very simple tasks: scraping data or building interfaces or whatever. But if you can manage to see productivity as students building skill and confidence in independent research? The sky is the limit.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I've had a lot of undergrads in my lab (physics). Unlike username_1, I'd say that certainly more than half have been net positives to the group's research, and several have been *very* productive. The two most important things, I would say, are:
1. A lot of direct contact and guidance -- not by email, but actual conversation -- either (ideally) from you (the PI) or from graduate students committed to the project and to mentoring someone. Simply being clear about tasks to be done, etc., is insufficient; every new researcher comes in without a good grasp of the motivations of the field, the challenges of exploring something new, etc., and these are only surmounted by talking to people. Several times, I've had great conversations with undergraduates in which I point out that I'm thrilled that their experiment has failed, because now they can better understand what doing science is like, and they can pick themselves up, learn from what happened, and try again, and this is what makes them 'real' researchers.
2. I require a commitment of more than a few hours a week. If people aren't putting this in, we chat about the impossibility of having a meaningful project, and, again, learning how to be a 'real' researcher. Sometimes people drop out (or I ask them to leave) if the motivation to do this isn't there. There's no point in mentoring someone who can't commit real effort, and it doesn't do them or you any favors.
Your question is a great one. Best of luck, and please don't think that mentoring undergrad research should just be a net-negative "service." It does take a lot of work, but it can pay off!
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I'm the undergraduate.
Props to you for offering undergraduate credit. Now, do they get charged tuition? If yes, keep in mind they pay to work for you. The I haven't worked on a project for credit or pay. I've done it for a resume booster. Between classes, work, extracurriculars, and other researcher's schedules, I can't always get things done every week. But **I donate my time when I can.**
Do your students know what they need to do? I worked on a project where I saw the professor exactly once: at the initial meeting. I could ask him questions via email but we were on our own and winging it. We had a manual, but not the required knowledge. When we got into that project I realized he needed circuit design people, and none of us had taken a circuits class. He knew circuits and I think he thought we did too. **Make yourself available to help.** People rarely admit when they struggle with stuff; **are you regularly checking in with them to make sure they're not in over their heads?** This gets critical they work on open-ended research where they don't have a hard deadline and they know someone else will pick up where they left off. They might get lost and figure the next person will figure it out.
Yeah, undergraduates get lazy. If we didn't suck at time management and had the drive almost everyone would graduate in four years, and plenty would graduate in three years. Your researchers 20-nothings surrounded by other 20-nothings. Not a recipe for responsibility. If they ghost on you, send them an email. Don't start with "Why aren't you working?" Start with "How's the project? How are you?" They might be buried or burned-out by the middle of the semester. Cut them some slack. They might be struggling with their classes and the research.
And make sure you got the right undergraduates. That probably sounds stupid, but the project I mentioned—it sounds like I'm ragging on it, but I mostly enjoyed it—I thought the professor brought me on to write the software. He needed people who knew Python, Matlab, and C++. He had his grad student write all the code, and me and the people I worked with did all the hands-on construction. I only wrote some Java code (a language I didn't know, and it took way too long for me to write a dozen lines of working code) and we didn't use it. By the middle of the project I didn't know why I was there.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I've had very productive undergraduates helping my team with software development and data input for research projects.
As others have pointed out already, high productivity is not the main aim of the exercise. Obviously experienced professionals will almost always do the job much more quickly and accurately. I would even advise against focusing on productivity too much as I have seen situations where I had to completely rewrite some of the substandard code some trainees had written in a rush. You can't expect both quality and speed for high level tasks.
If the student can spend only little time on the project, I'd recommend sticking to simpler, narrowly scoped tasks which may be more repetitive and less creative but nevertheless valuable. That still requires preparation in defining the task and describing it very clearly.
Of course some students are more talented or motivated than others but I've realised that the more effort, regular face-to-face communication, early troubleshooting you put into it the better the results and the satisfaction for everyone.
Research projects can appear extremely specialised or even useless, particularly to non-experts eyes. Making sure they understand the whole picture, how your project fits into it and what their contribution helps you achieve is essential in giving them a meaningful and motivating sense of purpose, helping them make the right choices and think more broadly.
Trusting their sense of initiative and their ability to come up with their own solutions can also be rewarding. I've often seen students suggesting more efficient workflows and approaches or being critical about the system they have to work with. One advantage they have over you is that they are very close to what they produce and every scientist knows that this a privileged perspective from which new ideas can emerge. And having new ideas, for academics, is very productive.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/13
| 725
| 3,303
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper on an engineering topic. We have an experimentally validated simpler model.
Questions:
1. The current paper extends the previous model for a more complex problem and explores the area numerically. Is it necessary to always include experimental validation for a numerical model, especially since we have already validated it for a simpler case? Is this enough for publication?
2. Since the primary domain equation, boundary condition and initial condition is the same (what varies between the simpler model and the more complex model is the parameters in the domain equation are more complex), is it necessary to include the boundary condition and initial condition in the paper as well, or can I just refer to the previous paper/include in the appendix? I am trying to reduce the size of the paper, and make it more readable.
3. The simulation methodology is more complex, because of the increased complexity of the domain equation. Does it help if I include the simulation methodology in the paper? Or should I just put it in the appendix?<issue_comment>username_1: Consult the journal you are intending to submit your paper to. Usually they have a set of general guidelines on how they expect you to structure your article. Also look at previously published papers in the same journal.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is it necessary to always include experimental validation for a numerical model?
>
>
>
Typically, yes, this is necessary. When you are going to publish an altered model (e.g., a more complex one), you need to demonstrate how the modifications play out in an experimental setup.
>
> Is it necessary to include the boundary condition and initial condition in the paper as well, or can I just refer to the previous paper/include in the appendix?
>
>
>
You may choose to either refer to your previous paper, or include them in your new paper (or do both). It is perfectly fine to refer to your previous publication, e.g., when you are trying to reduce the paper length, as long as the conditions are identical. However, when you want your new paper to be self-contained, or your previous paper was at a more obscure venue, it might be wise to include them in the new paper.
>
> Does it help if I include the simulation methodology in the paper? Or should I just put it in the appendix?
>
>
>
It is impossible to decide that without knowing the specifics, the journal's policy, and what is usual within your field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As with any scientific experiment, you should include sufficient detail to allow somebody familiar with the field to reproduce your work. Many papers describing numerical modelling fail to do this, but that is the standard that you should aim for.
For most models validation is vital if any trust is to be placed in it, therefore that should also be described. Whether the validation performed on the simple model is still applicable and adequate for the more complex model is a matter for your (and your reviewers') judgement.
If details of the model or its validation are described in another publication, it is fine to refer to that - duplication of the information is not necessary, although a short summary might be appreciated by readers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/13
| 5,059
| 18,619
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Definitions**: Basic science is [research conducted without immediate applications in mind](https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1953/annualreports/ar_1953_sec6.pdf). It is driven by the ["curiosity [...] to expand [humanity's] knowledge, not to create or invent something."](http://www.sjsu.edu/people/fred.prochaska/courses/ScWk170/s0/Basic-vs.-Applied-Research.pdf) Applied science, on the other hand, is conducted to ["solve practical problems of the world, rather than acquire knowledge for knowledge's sake," or to "improve the human condition."](http://www.sjsu.edu/people/fred.prochaska/courses/ScWk170/s0/Basic-vs.-Applied-Research.pdf)
*Edit (as per JeffE's suggestion):* Let us define 'we' as academics, and 'to whom' as questioners ranging from grad students experienced with research, to sponsors familiar with research, and to the general public (friends, family, etc.) in fields outside of research.
**Question:** How can we justify funding for basic research? In other words, how can we justify maintaining the status quo for (or even increasing) the funding of research without immediate applications?
**Why address this question?**
Over the past 10 years internationally, funding in both the public and private sectors for basic research has been decreasing. In 2014, Canada cut funding for basic science in 2014\* to ["**place a new emphasis on applied research**."](http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/funding-changes-usher-in-a-dark-age-for-canadian-science/article22100092/)
Likewise, [Austrian researchers reported in 2011 of a popular opinion in their country](https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/en/2011-5-1/28506086.html) "to [avoid investing] in costly basic research when the results of other countries’ basic research are [...] available without charge."
Finally, a [2014 article in *Nature*](http://www.nature.com/news/put-focus-back-on-basic-research-say-science-unions-1.15817#auth-1) reported of basic funding cuts in favour of "a focus on applied research [...] in Argentina, Canada, Denmark, [France], Italy, Portugal, Russia, Senegal, Serbia, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States."
Outside of shaping policy, addressing this question can inspire graduate students who may be doubting the usefulness of their research, create an informative resource for undergrads considering a career in basic research\*\*, and provide meaningful answers when asked by the general public (friends, family, journalists, etc.).
**Explanatory footnotes:**
\*More precisely, the CIHR (Canadian Institute of Health and Research) reduced funding as Canada's "federal funding body for biomedical research." Another [source by the CAUT](https://www.caut.ca/docs/default-source/education-review/educationreview13-1-en.pdf?sfvrsn=2) (Canadian Association of University Teachers) reported that "**federal support for basic research has slowed significantly over the past six years** [2007-2013]."
\*\*Interestingly, researchers of a [study in *The American Biology Teacher*](http://simplelink.library.utoronto.ca/url.cfm/507540) "designed an activity in which students take part in a mock grant panel [for disbursing funds for grant applications]. The results indicated a **strong tendency toward student funding of applied medical research at the expense of basic research**. Exposure to a few examples of important basic research moderates this tendency."<issue_comment>username_1: I split this answer into three sections by the type of source (peer-reviewed literature, Stack Exchange, and miscellaneous). Each source is followed by a quote and/or a short description.
I also included a **summary of key takeaways at the end**.
The Literature
--------------
<NAME>., <NAME>. and <NAME>. (2005), **The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis: creating coherence among signs and symptoms**. Medical Education, 39: 107–112. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02036.x
This study investigated the relationship between basic science knowledge and skill in diagnosing relevant diseases. The researchers concluded the study by saying that:
>
> [...] the study has shown that, in comparison with students who
> learned conditional probabilities, **students provided with a basic
> science explanation for diagnostic categories were better able to
> accurately diagnose cases after a delay**.
>
>
> A plausible explanation is
> that the basic science information, because of its conceptual
> coherence, was itself more memorable, and that it also provided a
> means to reconstruct the features of individual disease categories
> after the initial symptom lists had been forgotten.
>
>
>
<NAME>. (1993). **Importance of basic research in applied phycology**. Hydrobiologia, 260-261(1), 25-29. doi:10.1007/BF00048999
The section of the abstract below highlights what Magne views as the value of basic research in the applied study of algae (aka phycology).
>
> It is noteworthy that [applied phycology] research **can not avoid the
> use of knowledge obtained by basic research**; applied phycology is
> especially indebted to basic research in adopting biotechnologies
> which are typically coming from basic research.
>
>
>
[<NAME>., & <NAME>. (2010). **Bling my research! A mock grant panel activity illustrating the importance of basic research**. The American Biology Teacher, 72(5), 308+.](http://simplelink.library.utoronto.ca/url.cfm/507540)
In a classroom activity, the researchers demonstrated the importance of basic research to first-year undergrads. In describing their methods, the researchers said:
>
> First, show the class a photograph of a cancer cell
> labeled "GFP." [...] Briefly
> mention the leaps in understanding of cancer cell growth and cell
> division that GFP has made possible. Introduce the students to [...] <NAME>, who [...] was hired to simply investigate why a dried jellyfish glowed
> green when crushed. The resulting manuscript describing GFP **gives no
> hint to the future implications of this protein** (Shimomura et al.,
> 1957), **a discovery for which he would eventually share the Nobel Prize
> in Chemistry in 2008**.
>
>
> Finally, [...] [m]ention the importance of sequencing in understanding
> the evolution of HIV. [...] [I]ntroduce them to a profile of <NAME>,
> <NAME>, and <NAME>, who discovered Taq polymerase during
> basic research investigations. This discovery has **earned billions of
> dollars in royalties** (Fore et al., 2006) **yet was the unintentional
> result of a basic research investigation into life at high
> temperatures** (Chien et al., 1976).
>
>
>
<http://www.sjsu.edu/people/fred.prochaska/courses/ScWk170/s0/Basic-vs.-Applied-Research.pdf>
Dr. <NAME> of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory said:
>
> People cannot foresee the future well enough to predict what's going
> to develop from basic research. If we only did applied research, we
> would still be making better spears.
>
>
>
Stack Exchange
--------------
[Asked by biotech on Biology Stack Exchange: "Why is knowledge of bacterial pathogenesis important?"](https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/30349/why-is-knowledge-of-bacterial-pathogenesis-important)
Chris♦ wrote a brilliant answer in the link above. Below is an excerpt:
>
> The contributions of basic research is the basis for applied research
> and drug design. Without them, this wouldn't work. Besides that it is
> also the curiosity of humans which drives science - without having any
> particular application in mind. These often come much later.
>
>
>
[An answer relevant to this question on Academia Stack Exchange: "How can a researcher improve his contribution to society?"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/4738/how-can-a-researcher-improve-his-contribution-to-society)
User eykanal♦ said:
>
> [T]ry to take to heart that basic research is directly useful to
> society. Almost all modern pharmacology is based on decades of
> fundamental biochemistry and biology research. Materials science is
> based on years of basic chemistry and physics research. Basic math
> research fuels advances in all types of engineering, from signal
> processing to computational work to structural engineering.
>
>
>
In a comment, user Anonymous Mathematician responded:
>
> I think it's important to frame things as eykanal suggests [...]
> message should be "basic research is of great value to society in the
> long run, and here are some other things I do that have shorter-term
> impact", rather than "here are some things I do to make up for the
> fact that my research sounds abstract and useless".
>
>
>
<https://mathoverflow.net/questions/175847/how-does-one-justify-funding-for-mathematics-research>
A sequence of compelling arguments in support of pure mathematics research can be found in the link above on Math Overflow.
Miscellaneous
-------------
<http://www.icsu.org/publications/icsu-position-statements/value-scientific-research/the-value-of-basic-scientific-research-dec-2004>
A statement by the International Council of Science said:
>
> Whilst an exclusive focus on application may have some merit in the
> short-term, there are several reasons why neglecting basic research is
> seriously flawed in the longer-term:
>
>
> 1. Basic and applied science are a continuum. They are inter-dependent.
> The integration of basic and applied research is crucial to
> problem-solving, innovation and product development.
> 2. Skilled scientists with a good understanding of the basic theories and practice [are required for the] successful transfer of scientific
> knowledge.
> 3. Excessive dependency on scientific progress in other countries is
> rarely likely to lead to the resolution of local problems. Countries
> need to be able to generate their own scientific knowledge and adapt
> this to their own local context and needs.
> 4. The practice of science is increasingly international and the
> research agenda is set by those who participate. A country with no
> basic scientific research capacity effectively excludes itself from
> having any real influence on the future directions of science.
>
>
>
[A secondary source by the AAAS on an MIT report (the link to the primary source appears to be broken) states](http://www.aaas.org/news/report-basic-science-research-critical-us-well-being):
>
> "Basic research is often misunderstood, because it often seems to have
> no immediate payoff," the MIT report says. "Yet it was just such
> federally funded research into the fundamental working of cells,
> intensified beginning with the 'War on Cancer' in 1971, that led over
> time to a growing arsenal of sophisticated new anticancer therapies —
> 19 new drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in the
> past two years."
>
>
> It adds, "Do we want similar progress on Alzheimer's, which already
> affects five million Americans, more than any single form of cancer?
> **Then we should expand research in neurobiology, brain chemistry and
> the science of aging**."
>
>
>
[A very similar question to this on Quora asked, "How do you explain the importance of basic/fundamental science to non-scientists?"](https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-explain-the-importance-of-basic-fundamental-science-to-non-scientists)
The most compelling answer to me by <NAME> is quoted below:
>
> I assume someone who needs to have the importance of fundamental
> science explained to them doesn't care much for the "satisfying
> curiosity and thirst for knowledge" aspect of science (which, to me
> anyway, is the dominant one), so I jump straight to practicalities.
>
>
> [...] [Y]ou can't predict the road
> that science will take. Even if you try to only do applied sciences,
> **fundamental research will be needed to develop new tools and
> methodologies, or else you'll just be running around in circles and
> never getting any new developments**.
>
>
>
In extension of Srour's attitude of doing basic research for basic research's sake, I'd like to quote an [interpretation of the views of physicist <NAME> in a review by <NAME> of the University of South Carolina](https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v8n3/toumey.html). Here, Toumey wrote:
>
> The reason for [Feynman] doing science is to satisfy a curiosity about nature. [...] Too few people, he complained, understood "the emotions of awe,
> wonder, delight and love which are evoked upon learning Nature's
> ways…My lament is that a kind of intense beauty that I see given to me
> by science, is seen by so few others" (24 October 1967).
>
>
> In a 1959 television interview, [Feynman said]: "The reason that I do science…is…not the usual
> motivation for helping human beings. The main motivation is the
> curiosity and interest to find out about the world we're in" (pages
> 419-420). He easily conceded, of course, that scientists see the
> consequences of their work, but he adamantly bracketed their
> motivations from the applications of that work which the rest of the
> world experiences.
>
>
>
---
SUMMARY
=======
The following is a bulleted list of key takeaways from the sources above.
* Basic science knowledge is linked to better clinical diagnostic skills (aka diagnosing diseases) (Woods et al., 2005).
* The investigation of "why a dried jellyfish glowed green when crushed" led to the discovery of GFP (green fluorescent protein), which led to "leaps in understanding [cancer]." Furthermore, "a basic research investigation into life at high temperatures" led to advancements in DNA sequencing. This directly led to further understanding of "the evolution of HIV," earning "billions of dollars in royalties" (Leander & Whitton, 2010).
* Basic research is a necessity if we want to meaningfully continue advancements in applied research, especially drug discovery (Chris♦, 2015).
* As stated by Stack Exchange user eykanal♦ (2014), "Basic research is directly useful to society. Almost all modern pharmacology is based on decades of fundamental biochemistry and biology research. Materials science is based on years of basic chemistry and physics research. Basic math research fuels advances in all types of engineering."
* According to the International Council of Science (2004), "Excessive dependency on scientific progress in other countries is rarely likely to lead to the resolution of local problems." Furthermore, "A country with no basic scientific research capacity effectively excludes itself from having any real influence on the future directions of science."
* According to a 2015 MIT report, "Basic research is often misunderstood [...] because it often seems to have no immediate payoff." However, the report contends it has directly led to the development of 19 new anticancer drugs over the past two years.
* The report further says, "Do we want similar progress on Alzheimer's, which already affects five million Americans, more than any single form of cancer? Then we should expand research in neurobiology, brain chemistry and the science of aging."
* Basic research is beautiful. It's both intrinsically emotionally and intellectually stimulating; basic research for the sake of itself is rewarding unto itself.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think a more interesting way of formulating the question is "how can we decide what is the right amount to spend on basic research?". Sometimes scientists seem to argue as if the right amount is something close to infinity, or at least to argue that more is always better, which amounts to the same thing. And that position is clearly absurd.
Any discussion of this question should not only consider the benefits of doing basic research, but also the costs: (a) the money could be spent doing something else, and (b) basic research is only effective if done by the smartest people available, and this deprives other activities of these smart people.
So, I don't know the right answer, but I do get frustrated by answers along the lines of that from @adam.al which spend a lot of time making a very good (indeed irrefutable) case that basic research has real benefits, without really helping to answer the question of whether we are doing too much or too little of it given the other things that we could be doing with the same resources.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Some additional thoughts here (I'm a social scientist, but have worked in science policy, etc.)
1. It might be good to read <NAME>'s Pasteur's Quadrant, which discusses differences between "applied" science, "pure" science, use-inspired science, etc. Stokes suggests that there's not a continuum between pure and applied science--it's a bit more complex. There's a summary of the argument on Wikipedia if that helps.
2. It may be worth pointing out that a lot of work in fundamental science ends up having applications years later that no one really knows about, but that pays big dividends later. One example is research on lasers, particularly shorter-wavelength lasers. Shorter wavelengths: more density on a CD-ROM (which is how we got to Bluray disks). Sort of a mundane example. Another one is the discovery that the Philadelphia genetic translocation was associated with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), and that a class of drugs called tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are effective in suppressing the result of this translocation (the proliferaiton of white blood cells). I'm not expert in the science here, but the book *The Philadelphia Chromosome* by <NAME> tells an excellent story about how a series of serendipitous discoveries, motivated by people working in fundamental science, came together to lead to a very effective treatment for a disease that was once broadly fatal.
This are but two examples, and there may be better ones others could propose.
The decision of where to spend research dollars, and how much, is as much a sociopolitical question as it is an economic question--perhaps more so. The return on investment calculation on basic science is hard to calculate. And there are some values that basic science provides that are not monetizable. Can we prove the economic value of the Hubble Deep Field project, that found some of the youngest and most distant galaxies in the Universe? It's worthwhile posing this question: In an nation with a GDP of about $18 trillion, and assuming the HDF cost $10 billion, is it worth spending 0.05% of the GDP on knowledge for its own sake? I think we could make that argument. ($10 billion, for what it's worth, is more than NSF's annual budget).
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/13
| 382
| 1,752
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the paper that I am writing, I am only showing some results from a more rigorous/full-scale study. So as to highlight the importance of the results in the new paper, I am thinking of including one or two statements which state the full results that we have obtained (not published).
However, I can't include all the results from the full-scale study in this paper, because of size limitations. So is it appropriate to include these one or two sentences which demonstrate the results of the full scale study, but not include any data supporting these sentences in the abstract and summary?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think so. Unless you have another published paper that you can refer to, I wouldn't put anything about the full result in this paper nor its abstract. Since you don't have that paper (yet?), there's no good way to refer to such a result without a way to back it up.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The purpose of the abstract, from the point of view of the audience, is to help people decide whether they want to read the paper or not.
If the extra sentences do not create interest, you have merely wasted space in the abstract.
If the extra sentences do influence someone to read the paper, the situation is much worse. They will be looking for more information. They will expect to find either direct support for the statements, or a reference to another paper discussing them. You will have wasted the time they spend looking for those things, and it often takes longer to be sure that something is missing than to find it if it is there.
If readers learn that your abstracts do not accurately reflect the paper contents, they may be less likely to choose your papers to read.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/14
| 2,225
| 9,153
|
<issue_start>username_0: A couple of months ago I finished my masters in computer science. A few days a go the following happened.
My main supervisor wrote an abstract of results from my thesis. He put me as the first author along with the two others, and himself.Then he sent a group email informing that the abstract is going to be submitted to a conference. In the email he refers to a previous agreement to submit a paper to this conference.
---
I have three issues.
1. I don't *remember* agreeing to submitting the results anywhere. We did talk about trying to publish the results and I was, at the time, very positive to the idea, but I always understood that we were going to "get back to it" at some point.
2. I don't want to work on this any more (Nor do I want want my name put on any thing.). There is a reason I didn't apply for any phd position, despite encouragement. Academia stresses me out. I have a job now and am very pleased with that.
3. His first draft of the abstract was either written to be misleading (over-emphasising a connection to a much cooler subject), or he doesn't understand the context of the results, which makes me feel uncomfortable.
---
I feel pressured to let them write a paper about the results and put my name on it.. but I'm worried they will misrepresent things and do a bad job. I don't want my name on something I didn't actually write.. even if the results are mine.
Am I making a big deal out of nothing? Or should/can I put the breaks on the process?<issue_comment>username_1: Edit: refer to <NAME>'s answer before this one. Use this only as a last resort only when you are confirmed when the intentions of your supervisor is to exploit you.
---
It is up your your wish to publish your research findings. That right does not belong to anyone else. As you are the first author of the manuscript, you would be the first to be blamed for anything misinterpreted or flawed in it. I'm not in favor of having your name in any other order other than the first either.
If you are sure that you are not going to work with the same supervisor/ institution in future, you could actively oppose this act. Try to convince your former advisor that you don't want this to be done. It would be also better to leave a note to the head of the respective department with respect to this regard. If he still persists and if you are aware of the conference to which the paper is submitted, send a formal mail to the conference committee about your refusal to submit your paper.
I don't think your former advisor and his associates would try to publish your work again in future after you show how serious you are about not publishing it. This would risk damaging their reputation. If they try to publish it without your name and knowledge, then you could claim against them for act of plagiarism, noting the fact that your thesis is already published in your university.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: You may be overreacting -- there aren't enough details to say that you aren't. In particular, suggestions that your supervisor is acting unethically are very much not grounded, at least in what you've said. Slinging around such accusations carelessly will only hurt your reputation. (You probably shouldn't care much about that reputation if you really have left the field, but given that you worry about your name being attached to something not up to your standards, I guess you really do care about it.)
I would suggest analyzing this from your supervisor's side. He had a student in whom he probably invested a fair amount of resources, including grant money and time spent training that student. The student ended up producing good research, novel enough to be worthy of publication.
Now the supervisor is certainly aware that the student left the field, but he has an interest in getting the results published. He offers to do (or delegate) the remaining housekeeping in putting together a final manuscript, but wants to give credit where it's due. Unexpectedly, the student comes back with "I'm too busy, and I don't trust anyone else to publish my results."
Sure, you can prohibit a manuscript from being submitted with your name on it, and you can also prohibit having your name removed from something where you were undeniably an author-worthy contributor. But now that means the field is permanently deprived of your research. What was it all for, now that you refuse to let it be shared? Being uncooperative to the point where you censor your research can itself be unethical.
>
> We did talk about trying to publish the results and I was, at the time, very positive to the idea, but I always understood that we were going to "get back to it" at some point.
>
>
>
Well, you never did, so your supervisor is stepping up and doing what needs to be done.
>
> I don't want to work on this any more
>
>
>
Then don't.
>
> His first draft of the abstract was either written to be misleading (over-emphasizing a connection to a much cooler subject), or he doesn't understand the context of the results, which makes me feel uncomfortable.
>
>
>
Dressing things up to get attention is not unusual in academia, nor is it unethical. At worst, if one goes too far, one gets a reputation for having too large an ego. If no lies are being told, then don't worry. If you want to micromanage every sentence of the manuscript, then you have to write it yourself and forbid anyone else from contributing.
>
> I feel pressured to let them write a paper about the results and put my name on it ... I don't want my name on something I didn't actually write
>
>
>
I've seen *a lot* of papers published by more than one author. In a majority of cases, only one person ever did write all those sentences. (Where this isn't true, there tends to be a disruptive change of writing style.) The other authors contributed in other ways. If you were key to getting the results, your name *should* be on the paper, whether or not the manuscript was drafted by you personally.
>
> I'm worried they will misrepresent things and do a bad job
>
>
>
In which case is the world a better place: (1) this research never sees the light of day, or (2) this research is written up in a more grandiose way than your modesty is comfortable with? Those are your only options, and unless this paper is going to be *so* misrepresentative as to be harmful (and how can you know that given that you've only seen an abstract?), you should probably go with (2). Be wary of making the comparison to (3) the paper is magically written the way you would like without any effort on your part. (2) might be worse than (3), but (3) isn't on the table.
---
There really is an easy negotiation here. Ask that whoever writes the manuscript be made first author. That way the research gets published, but everyone understands that the *style* and *tone* and other such soft features of the writing are probably not yours. If your name is on the paper you will be held accountable for its factual correctness, but no one is going to ambush the second author and say "I think *you* personally could have given a better account of how your paper connects with that cool subject."
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Allow me to explain how you are making a big deal out of nothing. Your situation is one of boundaries. Healthy relationships have mutual respect for each person's yes and no.
Saying yes to something you clearly don't want to say yes to will leave you resenting the other person or regretting your decision or both. If this is the result you want, then go along with your main supervisor.
Saying no to something you clearly don't want to say yes to will leave you feeling relieved that you didn't do something you didn't want to do. If this is the result you want, then do not go along with your main supervisor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I think [<NAME>'s suggestion](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/75146/11365) of accepting co-authorship but not first authorship is a very good one. But if you *really* don't want the responsibility of authorship, there is a reasonable way to decline without blocking publication.
You presented two options, "let them write a paper about the results and put my name on it" or stop them from publishing. You actually have a third option. If you don't want to co-author the paper (don't want to take responsibility for its contents, etc), whether as first author or any other author position, you can decline authorship and have your contributions recognized in the acknowledgements section instead. (See e.g. [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/19458/11365).)
This approach has several advantages:
* The other people who have invested time and energy in the work can still get a "return on their investment".
* The results will appear in the literature, where other people can build on them.
* You don't have to spend any more time on this if you don't want to - you don't even have to read the draft paper. You don't have to share responsibility for a publication that you're unhappy with.
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/08/14
| 1,413
| 5,479
|
<issue_start>username_0: Do academic peer reviewers receive any salary?
If yes, what is the annual average?<issue_comment>username_1: The vast majority not a cent, of whatever currency (see [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/75163/20058) for exceptions).
Peer reviewers are asked to volunteer, and they volunteer because they know that someone else would have to review their papers too (as Dilworth points out in a comment there can be other motivations too).
Said differently, peer reviewing is a mutual exchange, necessary for science to work (though the peer review system has been sometimes criticized).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think not for journals, but sometimes "token" amounts, really "honorariums", for national-level grants. I've been asked to review/referee some grant proposals from some small countries, with perhaps a few hundred USD offered as token. I don't view it as any serious sort of "salary", certainly not enough to induce me to do a thing I didn't want to do, and I don't imagine the people offering it would think so, either. Rather, I suppose one could have a cultural viewpoint in which making some token offer is a good thing. I can equally-well imagine that making a too-small offer could be construed as an insult... ?!? But much public discourse is sooo insulting already that I don't usually think in those terms. :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: **Do peer reviewers receive any salary?**
In my limited experience (mathematics).
Referees for papers submitted to journals or conferences: no.
Books, perhaps. On one occasion, as reward for reviewing a book proposed to be published, I received a "free book" of my choice from that publisher. On some other occasions, in return for writing for publication a review of a book already published, I received a free copy of the book.
Once for reviewing some proposed mathematical software I got a free copy of it.
Referee of candidates for promotion or tenure: mathematics, no; computer science, yes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It is true that most reviewers (actually, nearly all) do not get paid. It is said to be an altruistic act that would be considered to be prestigious. But, there is a journal that functions differently. It is called [Collabra](http://www.collabra.org/), you could read the [news about it here](http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/01/new-open-access-journal-plans-pay-peer-reviewers). There are others who do this feature too.
There are several concerns on why this should be paid as reviews do devote their precious time for this. The fact that they continue to do so for free is what still makes the publishers feel it is fine not to pay for them. As long as altruistic reviewers (well, in the case of money) exist, journals will continue to function without paying the reviewers.
This is nearly the same question:
[Are there any journals that pay reviewers?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20930/are-there-any-journals-that-pay-reviewers)
The accepted answer that post would list you quite a few journals who pay their reviewers.
If you are concerned about whether reviewers should get paid for this, there are a lot of deep discussions about this issue you might want to take a look at:
* Academia.SE: [Why don't researchers request payment for refereeing?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/68191/why-dont-researchers-request-payment-for-refereeing)
* Quora: [Should reviewers of academic articles be paid?](https://www.quora.com/Should-reviewers-of-academic-articles-be-paid-1)
* ResearchGate: [Should reviewers of scientific papers be paid for their work?](https://www.researchgate.net/post/Should_reviewers_of_scientific_papers_be_paid_for_their_work)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: No, reviewers are not usually paid by the journal. However, there seems to be a company, [Rubriq](http://www.rubriq.com/), which offers paid peer-review services. I don't know who their current clients are, if any.
A couple of years ago Scientific Reports initiated a project where authors could pay for fast-track peer review, guaranteed within two weeks through Rubriq. The editorial board revolted over the decision and threatened to quit. They argued that doing this would create a peer-review market driven by profit, mostly with undesirable effects on the quality of reviews (reviewers are not selected based on their expertise), and that it would create a two-tier system where researchers who can afford this service would have an unfair advantage in publishing. Finally the project was cancelled.
Take a look at the following webpages:
* [Editor quits journal over pay-for-expedited peer-review offer](http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/03/updated-editor-quits-journal-over-pay-expedited-peer-review-offer)
* [Concern raised over payment for fast-track peer review](http://www.nature.com/news/concern-raised-over-payment-for-fast-track-peer-review-1.17204) (Note: Nature is not exactly a neutral source for this)
* <http://www.peerreviewneutrality.org/> is a site created by the editors.
This story illustrates why most researchers would oppose a system where peer-review is paid. There's also the issue of nearly 100-fold greater salaries on some countries than in others, so what would be a reasonable amount to pay for a review? In the end, paid review could likely create incentives which are not at all aligned with the quality of research.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/14
| 1,410
| 5,808
|
<issue_start>username_0: Country: Looking for answers for US/Canada/UK/Germany, ideally Canada.
Subject: bioinformatics
---
I am starting a bioinformatics MSc degree in a biology department of my university (no bioinformatics dept exists).
Until this point, I've talked mostly with grad students pursuing biology degrees. The expectations for bio MSc student have been described to me as *produce data for 1-2 figures*. PhD students are expected to produce good data for an entire paper, i.e. 5-6 figures.
Similarly, what are the expectations for MSc students in bioinformatics?
---
For masters, is it possible to take an open source tool and build on top of it to solve some issue it has?
Basically there is a tool that has two components A and B. Component A is fine as it is but component B is done poorly - so many people can't really use it. Can I take this tool, scrap a part of it and redo it?<issue_comment>username_1: In its core the same expectations apply to all types of masters in all countries.
You need to find a subject of intrest and either contribute with something noone else has tryed before or redo some other persons work from another angle.
It doesn't matter what you choose to work with, as long as the questions you try to answer is of acedemic interest. And likewise there is no final answer to how much data you should produce; it should just be enough to answer the questions you focus your work on - no more, no less.
There is no problem in rebuilding on top of an open source tool. However, if the persons who originally developed the to tool, proved that the tool can do whatever it is supposed to do, the core question cannot just be "can I make this tool better". Instead you could eg. ask the question "by applying desing-principle K to component B, in tool X, can we make more people use tool X?". And your work would then both concentrate on redesigning/rebuilding component X and proving that more people will use it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Hopefully I can help - graduated a similar Master's in EU.
At least here, a PhD student is expected to produce 3-4, not 1 paper, so it is reasonable to expect contributions equivalent to one paper from a Master's student. Of course, time is limiting, so students usually finish the actual paper later on (sometimes even during the PhD), but I would suggest working with that goal (i.e. 1 paper) in mind.
Now, as to what constitutes a paper in this field: improving a tool is fine, as long as you provide proof of the improvement. Proof usually comes from simulation studies, or it could be a demo of application using some publicly available data (I assume your tool is somehow connected to data analysis). In my field, [this](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20208533) might be one of the best known examples - improving the efficiency of a popular tool from *O(n^2)* to *O(n)* is a direct way to Nature Genetics and hundreds of citations.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This may be a tad late, but as someone about 6 weeks off from defending my MSc in Bioinformatics (and having watched a couple of people from my cohort complete), I may be able to give you an idea of what I've seen at my institution (a large multi-hospital research institution in the US).
>
> What are the expectations for MSc students in bioinformatics?
>
>
>
I'm not sure I'll be able to frame the requirements as you have. That said, for the MS, our guidelines state that our thesis project can consist of, and I'm paraphrasing here: a novel implementation of software to an existing problem (i.e. your software improves on existing solutions in some way), a significant improvement to an existing software, or the application of current software to a novel problem. Fortunately, being a large clinical institution, we have no shortage of novel problems to solve.
So, what does that mean regarding the breadth of the project?
* For an MS, we often don't generate our own data but may instead take data that already exists from research done by a lab on campus, a lab at an institution we're collaborating with, or public data sets (e.g. TCGA, ENCODE, ClinVar, Reactome Pathway Database, Uniprot, etc.).
* We'll then mine this data to get at our biological problem of interest, use it as a development set for an algorithm or method, etc. Another approach may be to generate a novel data set by combining multiple data sets in a clever way.
* Keep in mind, there are a number of highly respected bioinformaticians, Atul Butte at UCSF comes to mind, who have launched successful companies by mining public datasets and combining their domain knowledge and experience – there's a lot of public data out there waiting to be transformed into knowledge.
>
> For masters, is it possible to take an open source tool and build on top of it to solve some issue it has?
>
>
>
As you may have guessed by now, I'd venture a yes – provided your improvements enhance its value in a significant way (particularly in terms of reproducibility and validity, but usability matters too) and is already a widely used tool for a specific problem or (ideally) class of problem. That said, whatever improvements you make should target a specific problem and improvements should be measurable in some way.
Regarding figure counts, I wouldn't worry too much about them. For an MSc, they're less relevant given that you probably won't be producing your own data rather than conducting a deep analysis. I've generated hundreds of graphs, tables, etc. throughout the course of my research in an effort to understand the underlying complexity of the data and the problem at hand. Visualization is a necessary and powerful tool. I'll likely include somewhere between 8 and 12 in my final thesis writeup.
Hope this helps.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/14
| 306
| 1,325
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have worked at a processing facility for three years as the head of the shipping department. Last week, when my time with the company came to a close, my supervisor wrote a letter of recommendation and asked me to refer any future employers to him. He assured me that he would give them glowing reviews, etc. I'm very appreciative of his kindness and his generosity, but there are three or four grammatical errors in the letter. Is it unethical to edit those errors? Would it be considered "edgy"? It's nothing but awkwardly placed commas and a single typo.<issue_comment>username_1: Speaking strictly as a matter of ethics, I would have to say no, it would not be unethical so long as you did not change any of the actual words (other than perhaps correcting their spelling) or change the meaning / intent of the letter. I would further add that you may even be saving the person some level of embarrassment.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you should not edit anything. Maybe you do a mistake and change the meaning (or just the font) or someone checks the creation date of the file and sees that it does not fit or something else. You'd submit a manipulated version of a recommendation even if you do it with a good intention.
Rather ask your supervisor to correct it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/15
| 413
| 1,786
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can we use a technique (equations and approach) from a journal paper in one section of our paper if we cite it like this: "Method X has been adopted from [Y], modified, and used in this paper"?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Method X has been adopted from [Y], modified, and used in this paper
>
>
>
I don't see why not. This is acceptable. In fact that is the most common form of citations you tend to see in papers that make an improvement over an existing method.
Just make sure you know ample knowledge of what you cite in this case as you are to make a modification to what is published. It would be best to know well about what *X* really is before you try to modify it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: That is why citations exist. You always rely on other researchers results. That is why science can make progress. You can leave certain fields blackboxed, as others already have robusts methods developed which you can rely on.
I would assume that most scientist take it as an honor, if their method is reused. You just have to make sure to cite your source of knowledge.
If you describe your modification, it is also necessary to give a summary of the original method. State why it does not work in your applied case and describe the solution - your modification.
Try to avoid citations, when the status reaches a point, where the results are common sense. No researcher in our time cites Turing, yet we all use computers. Make sure this common sense though applies also to your research field. A computer science method which is teached in informatics first class might still just be known to informaticians. If you consider this method should be applied more in your non informatics field, cite it to give it visibility.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/15
| 1,034
| 4,570
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have completed experimental research on a novel topic. I was the instigator of the direction of the research and the one to find the results. Then, theoretical work was performed to support my experiments. While the theory confirmed all my work, there was nothing original or new in the theoretical support. I wrote the paper and drafted the manuscript.
The group supervisor wants the theory paper to have the theory researcher as first author. The group leader's arguments is that "there will be two papers, so share the first authorship".
I think this is unfair. Why should I have to share my work just because there will be two papers out of it?!
I am asking for guidance on this. In particular as scientific supervisors, is it fair to put the main researcher as an "et al", just because someone else in the group has not got a paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Generally speaking, it is infeasible for us to judge whether authorship or the order of authors on any given project is "fair", as all of those depend a great deal on discipline and the particularities of any given project.
That being said, from the little text you provide the 1/1 split *does* sound fair. There are two papers coming out of the work, one experimental and the other theoretical. The person who did the experiments first-authors the experimental one, the "theory guy" leads the theory paper. So far, so good, I would say.
You say that there was "nothing new" in the theoretical work. This seems highly unlikely to me, what would even go into the theory paper if that was indeed the case? In general, providing a solid theoretical basis to experimentally observed results *is* a very valuable contribution, that you maybe need to learn to value higher. Sometimes the theoretical methods to achieve this are straight-forward, but this does not diminish their value for your project.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, thank you for not sharing all the details about the subordination within the group. To my opinion, it is largely irrelevant whether you are a bachelor student or a senior postdoc. These facts should not have any influence on the author list.
For your actual question, I have experienced several times that in such "shared" papers, only the first manuscript makes to the publication. So you might end up with a single paper where you are not the first author.
Therefore, *do agree* to share your first place if you believe in the future fruitful long-standing collaboration with these theorists, if you trust their altruism and honesty, if you believe you can harvest more than one paper out of such collaboration (not an unheard thing).
However, do not be afraid to defend your first place. It shows your confidence in your work and determination to pursue further goals in science, and will minimize further occurrences of such "fair offers" in the future.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I kind of agree with previous answers. If there is a second paper with theoretical aspects, the person doing this aspects should be first author. You need to question yourself: "Would you have been able to write the second paper without the second researchers influence?", if yes "How much time would you have needed to do so without him.", "How much time did the second researcher spent on this topic?"
The unfair part is, that you seem to have done already all the writing work. This should in general the main authors duty. Did you also do the literature research to back up the theoretical aspects? Did you summarize in material and methods what has been done without the second researcher?
You wrote that there is no novelty in the theoretical aspects. If this is truely the case, then this paper should be considered anyway unethical, e.g. it should not happen at all. Why to publish trivia, why you care about? It is always easy to say this is trivial, when you got presented the results in a polished form. The underlying model is quite simple to understand. But how many other models you do not think of have been tried out to get to this point?
Anyway, the best thing to do is to communicate. First with the theoretical researcher. He is not your boss, you can presumingly talk more open to him. If you find a solution which satisfies both your desires, go together with him to your boss to back you up. If you do not find an agreement, make sure at least that the writing aspect (you did the work here) is communicated to your boss. You only did that part in the expectation to be first author.
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/08/15
| 1,071
| 4,669
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was a PhD student in a Japanese graduate school until March 2015 when my professor retired. Just before I submitted my thesis and it got rejected by one vote. Indeed there were 30+ voters, of whom only 6 attended my open defense and one of them was a professor who hated my professor. He succeeded in convincing enough people to vote against me. Sadly there are no student council there and the university does not provide any official jury result with the comments about why the thesis got rejected.
Now the situation got worse, some other students of my previous lab also got annoyed by the same professor who now has a majority inside the department. There is also a new rule which forces the candidates to present the thesis to the professors of the department before being able to officially present their thesis to the university. Indeed, the department has to give their agreement before the official submission. Funny thing is that the department where I belonged to is not only controlled by the professor who tries to fail every student who were in my previous lab but also the students are allowed only 30min for the presentation while other departments allow 2h for the same thing. Yes the rules do not forbid that apparently.
Since my departure as a student I could stay in the lab of a professor who was a friend of my previous professor and I published another journal paper. However the department rejected my application because the last paper title was too close to another of my paper and feared a re-submission.
In the meanwhile I was told very lately to write a totally new chapter in my thesis and even later that i would have to get a publication to go with it. I am now waiting for the results of another journal paper to be able to apply again.
**But I am now afraid of applying there again.** If the professors of the department are so biased that they will do anything so my application can't go though to the official application and if i do not have any official way to defend myself to higher authorities what are my chances to succeed now ? Some professors are too proud and scared to admit the situation as their own students could start to suffer from it as well.
My thesis is completely written, I have published as main author 4 journal papers (2 regular issues and 2 short issues) and 5 conference papers. And a potential 5th journal paper.
TLDR:
**Is there a way to not waste all that work and submit my thesis in another university as free candidate or something?**
I am also afraid to not have the time and resources for another publication in a journal, since i am no longer a student, in case a university absolutely need a paper with one of their professors.<issue_comment>username_1: Since you're well published, idea coming to mind is PhD by publication.
Re-purpose as much as you can from your PhD thesis to publish in journals, collections, editions, etc. that would be of an acceptable by a global high-ranking university in your field, and that's the trick done.
Basically, it sounds like your original submission was failed, which is very unique and should reflect poorly on the higher-education institution that failed your submission.
PhD by publication would prove that your research is worth being considered, and you would only need to write an overall introductory paper that demonstrates the significance of your contribution to the field, and how the publications brought together contribute a consistent body of knowledge and expertise to the field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Academic politics, it is said, is the most ruthless of all politics, because so little is at stake.
That is generally true.
But it is not good when the prospects of a young person are destroyed as part of petty mind games.
Since you have already published, you can certainly take your business elsewhere. I do not see how you have any other option at this point.
PhD students being victimised by intramural politics also happens in the West, and the remedy is almost always that they go find a supervisor elsewhere, in a different department or a different uni. But it is unlikely to happen to a candidate who is as far along as you are, because the department gets paid by completion and it would be madness to discard a student who is 100% ready to be processed by the graduation system.
It seems to me (and I could well be racist in this regard but I think not) that Japanese academia is quite vicious and status-based, not to mention overly keen on self-destructive madness. Which means that even as you graduate at a different place, the affair may still haunt you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/15
| 645
| 2,837
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have published two research works in Q1 and Q2 journals, working as a research assistant (co-author). I am wondering whether the published work increases my chances of acceptance for a master's program, if all other factors are good but not exceptional. The two works improved the state-of-the-art in a particular subfield and my involvement in both works was very much in every aspect of the research, from idea development, modeling to writing.
Note: my field is electrical engineering
Edit: To add more substance, would having such publications and research experience make me an equivalent candidate to, say, someone applying with ~4.0 GPA but no research experience? Which usually aims high when applying (for reference, my GPA is 3.7)<issue_comment>username_1: Yes! It shows you have experience with (and are good at) writing and research. It would be even better if you could get a letter of recommendation from someone you worked with on these research works.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: An excellent record (GPA 4.0) is not an evidence for good performance for a master's degree or beyond (PhD). Different qualities are required and assessed. For instance: autonomy ("every aspect of the research"), endurance (to deliver usable results, and during the publication process), cooperative skills (RA, co-author), innovation ("idea development") and additionally this double success in publishing (potentially in English), are very important factors.
I do not believe there is a strict equivalence: you simply cannot count your papers as 2x0.15. For myself, I would spend more time considering your application than the other (I am in Electrical Engineering too), and I do generally advise my colleagues to do the same.
For some persons in charge, the number of papers would suffice. For others, they will read the papers, and judge how good they are; Q1 or Q2 rankings could be biased depending in the subfield.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, it would. The whole point of the admissions process is trying to determine whether or not you have the markers of someone who will be able to do graduate research - having already done research that's resulted in publications is a very strong indicator.
Supplementing that with a strong recommendation letter from those you worked with will help solidify that benefit.
As to the question of GPA, it's really impossible to say for two reasons: There isn't a formula, where "One Paper = 0.15 GPA points" or anything like that. There's not necessarily a score at all. Additionally how each individual program weights the components of an application will vary - for example, my program treated the GPA as something of a "You must be this tall to ride..." criteria, while some others will take it very heavily into account.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/15
| 1,390
| 5,953
|
<issue_start>username_0: Out of 9 applications to graduate schools ranked in the top 25 according to US News, I was accepted to only one PhD program in Electrical Engineering, and just barely (see note below). According to my GPA, GRE scores, letters of recommendation, and previous relevant research/industry experience I thought that I had a much better chance of being accepted to these programs. The only thing that I can see that sets me apart from many of my peers is that my undergraduate alma mater is pretty obscure (barely top 200 R2 university).
Here's some extra information about my application in case something else here sticks out:
Undergraduate Majors - Dual Computer Science & Electrical Engineering
Undergraduate GPA - 3.97
Research/Industry Experience - Two summer internships at NASA resulting in two conference publications. Four years as a professional Electrical Engineer doing R&D for a defense contractor which resulted in two more conference publications.
GRE - 166 Quantitative, 159 Verbal, 5.0 Writing
Maybe these schools are just monumentally difficult to be accepted into? I'm curious if anyone here has some insider insights.
Note: The reason I say just barely is because, after not hearing back from most schools, and being rejected outright from 3, I called the one I was most interested in going to and told them if they still had me on their list of viable candidates and were willing to make me an offer that I would accept. I received an offer letter the next day, two weeks before the deadline. I received rejections from the remaining schools not long thereafter.
*July 2023 Update*: Took nearly 7 years but I successfully defended my dissertation yesterday!<issue_comment>username_1: Congrats on getting accepted!
There are a lot of variables here, so it isn't just where you went to undergrad, but that is definitely something admissions look at. Why wouldn't they? There is likely a correlation with going to a great undergrad, doing well, and then being successful in grad school.
Top schools get the top applicants from around the world. I can't imagine how difficult it is to compare such great applicants in any meaningful way. All else being equal, where the student went for undergrad could very well be the deciding factor. It is also a measurement that certainly anyone reviewing applicants knows a fair amount about.
There is also a lot of info we don't know about you (e.g., what you wrote in your letter, what your letters of rec said, etc.)
Again, congrats on getting admitted!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Excuse my short answer: **absolutely**.
Obviously, a school with a good, or even a great name, will give a candidate a big boost in his/her application. This is a rational decision: the recruiting committee wants to minimize any risks and they don't have much time to delve seriously into the history of each candidate. So if you graduated from a top school with excellent credentials you will have an edge over those with equal credentials but lesser perceived schools.
Good references from **colleagues** of faculty in the department you're applying to, and good ties with your school are also strong factors for admission.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It's simply impossible for two very different schools to offer equivalent classes and equivalent grades. Classes at better schools tend to be much more rigorous and it's harder to get an A at them. So of course if you have applicants with similar classes and GPA from different schools, the one from the stronger school is going to be the stronger applicant. Now this is certainly somewhat unfair for the very best students from weaker schools because they didn't have the opportunity to do better than an A, but it's still sensible behavior on the part of admissions committees to pick someone they know to be strong rather than take a risk on someone who might or might not be strong. It can be very hard for students from weaker schools to quickly adjust to the rigor of graduate classes.
Fortunately, the Ph.D. Is not the final step of one's career. Very strong students from weaker schools often get into a slightly less good graduate school than they deserve, but then they can excel at that school and get a better next job. So long as you get into one good school (which you did!) you'll have the opportunity to excel and prove that you deserved to be accepted at the others.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In my last year in graduate school, I sat on the admissions committee for our program - and realized that there are a wide variety of considerations that go into admissions decisions that have very little to do with what applicants think matters. They included: geographical distribution of students (not just those from the immediate region), whether an applicant was genuinely applying to the Ph.D. (we had a highly regarded, specialized M.A. program, and the last years had seen repeated examples of students claiming to want to get their Ph.Ds but dropping out once they had the coveted M.A.), whether the areas graduate students were planning on focusing on reflected the faculty balance (otherwise, a few faculty would have many Ph.D. students, and many faculty would have few), what kinds of financial aid packages we could offer to how many students, and so forth.
I do remember one case we had that is pertinent to you, though: two students (both women), one of whom was a top performer at a not so good school, the other of whom was a less good performer at a top school. In virtually all other relevant aspects, the two applicants were nearly identical. We opted to offer admission to the former - and not to the latter. So graduating from a "not so good" institution may not have been the relevant factor in your case at all. There are numerous elements to these decisions, many of which you as an applicant don't see and can't control.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/15
| 1,200
| 4,976
|
<issue_start>username_0: Could removing outliers be called cherrypicking data? Because, to run some tests, outliers have to be removed. And they even turn up unexpectedly ruining good data.
I still haven't yet started acquiring data for my project. Still collecting samples. I've heard a senior say that he removes them and I really doubted if such a thing could be done. Also, I've read that ANOVAs work on the assumption that outliers shouldn't be there. (correct me if wrong)<issue_comment>username_1: The questions in your title and body are different in a rather significant way.
In answer to "**Could** removing outliers be called cherrypicking data?": yes, of course it could.
In answer to "**Would** it be called cherrypicking data?", that depends on your justification (and apparent motivation).
To be honest I would generally be very suspicious of any paper which removed data points without a very clear and justifiable reason. It isn't possible to tell whether that's the case for your example, as you haven't given any information on it, and additionally for statistical advice it would be more appropriate to ask this over at [Cross-Validated](https://stats.stackexchange.com/).
There are statistical methods for identifying how much of an outlier a point is ([leverage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leverage_%28statistics%29), for example) but they are not in and of themselves sufficient justification for removing a point.
[edit] thanks for adding more information to your question. Firstly, it's great that you haven't started collecting data yet, and well done for thinking about this at this stage. As @penguin-knight suggests, formulate a protocol for data collection and identifying suspect data *before you start* (a priori). However, do remember that the only defensible reason for removing an outlying data point is because you believe it is inaccurate and reflects a problem with how that sample was generated or quantified.
Secondly, regarding the ANOVA part of your question: one of the assumptions when using an ANOVA is that your residuals are normally distributed. 'Outliers' may indicate that this assumption is incorrect. If this is the case, simply ignoring some points is not the correct way to deal with this. Your simplest options are:
* apply a transform to your data, for example a log-transform. There is a lengthier discussion of transforms and ANOVAs here: <https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/75005/non-normal-data-for-two-way-anova-which-transformation-to-choose>
* use a non-parametric test (which does not rely on the assumption of normally-distributed residuals) - such as the [Mann-Whitney U](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann%E2%80%93Whitney_U_test) test if you are comparing two groups.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: One major pitfall is **going into analyzing the data without an a priori protocol to deal with outliers**. Time to time, tension rises between analysts and investigators on whether a point should be removed or not. Investigator may wish to keep it because it drives the significant result; analyst may be anxious to keep it because, well, it drives the significant result. Much can be avoided if there is a agreed-upon standard.
Anyhow, here are some suggestions (slightly scrabbled):
* Reconcile if it's an instrument or data entry error.
* If it's a plausible value but behaving like an outlier, a few methods exist:
+ Do not bury plausible extreme values in favor of showing the after-trimming data only.
+ Consider reporting with and without it, discuss the differences.
+ Use statistics that are more tolerant to extreme values. For instance: Non-parametric statistics or robust estimation methods.
* Keep all written record about related changes, make sure date, time, person, decision made, etc. are all recorded.
* If correction needs to be made, do not change the raw data. Do so using script/syntax and save that syntax for reference.
* Explain all outlier-related data change in the report/manuscript. Reasons and methods should be provided so that your analysis can be replicated.
* If there isn't a protocol, set one up now before more instances like this came up.
* Do not identify outlier after data analysis results are known. If possible, discuss with your colleagues about the outlier without telling them the hypothesis test results.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Display (somewhere) all the data. Explain why each deleted point is removed; one idea may be "known bad instrument setting," another is "exceeded xx.xx standard deviations" or the like. This allows a critic to decide if you are in error and where but does not allow said critic to claim you desk-drawered unwanted results.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You could simply include all data in a set of results, and then present a second "filtered" result set excluding the outliers. This seems like the most honest and comprehensive way to deal with this.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/15
| 479
| 1,998
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm editing a PhD dissertation and found that the author reused sections of his paper such as Methodology in Chapter 1 and Chapter 4. It seems that his Chapter 1 is a synthesis of the succeeding 3 chapters, so parts from those chapters were just repeated in Chapter 1. Is this acceptable?<issue_comment>username_1: If the student has copied *verbatim* from the Chapter 1, then it is not usual and should not be ignored.
If he/she has used the same methodology in a different way to solve a different flavor of problem, then you should look the methodology once more before commenting (just to make sure).
In such a case, the student should use like the following statements without rewriting the same section.
>
> The methodology employed to solve the problem X in this chapter
> closely follows the methodology which has already been described in
> Chapter 1 *(may be he/she could give a hyperlink, for online purpose)*.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It likely depends on the field, and the norms at your particular institution. It is certainly common for dissertations to summarize portions of themselves (they are often 200-800+ pages, summaries are nice).
Based on your question, I wonder if you are concerned about self-plagiarism. I don't believe that this would rise to the level of self-plagiarism, as you are talking about a single document that is (usually) copyrighted by the author and will be published as a single document.
However, in my opinion, that is sloppy work. A good summary should be written to be concise and information dense, rather than an exact replication of other parts of the document. Instead of replicating, it may make sense for the student to reference the other chapters. For example "See Chapter III, Section [insert section] for a summary of [insert what is being summarized]".
Dissertations are already long enough, I don't believe that students need to draw them out through needless repetition.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/15
| 600
| 2,499
|
<issue_start>username_0: My Master's Thesis title will be something like "*The clinical use of robots for individuals with X disorder*" but I was actually researching perception of individuals with X disorder towards robots in a clinical setting. I needed to explain what is the aim of my research so I indeed wrote about clinical use of robots in X, still the title is too broad.
I have two concerns: **(1)** how bad is the impact of this title on my application for the Doctoral Program, and **(2)** can I somehow overcome this issue in my CV?
I need to add that my Master's Thesis isn't in English and I am not sure how much I can change my original title in the (English) summary. I tried to change my original title, but I couldn't do it and I don't know if I can somehow overcome this situation in my CV.<issue_comment>username_1: If the student has copied *verbatim* from the Chapter 1, then it is not usual and should not be ignored.
If he/she has used the same methodology in a different way to solve a different flavor of problem, then you should look the methodology once more before commenting (just to make sure).
In such a case, the student should use like the following statements without rewriting the same section.
>
> The methodology employed to solve the problem X in this chapter
> closely follows the methodology which has already been described in
> Chapter 1 *(may be he/she could give a hyperlink, for online purpose)*.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It likely depends on the field, and the norms at your particular institution. It is certainly common for dissertations to summarize portions of themselves (they are often 200-800+ pages, summaries are nice).
Based on your question, I wonder if you are concerned about self-plagiarism. I don't believe that this would rise to the level of self-plagiarism, as you are talking about a single document that is (usually) copyrighted by the author and will be published as a single document.
However, in my opinion, that is sloppy work. A good summary should be written to be concise and information dense, rather than an exact replication of other parts of the document. Instead of replicating, it may make sense for the student to reference the other chapters. For example "See Chapter III, Section [insert section] for a summary of [insert what is being summarized]".
Dissertations are already long enough, I don't believe that students need to draw them out through needless repetition.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/16
| 3,808
| 16,105
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a TA teaching a class this fall for the first time. I've taught before, but never this class, and never felt an obligation to tell my students it's my first time teaching a given class. But, being a bit more experienced I thought it might be a good idea this time by perhaps endearing me to my students, being so candid on the first day. Does anyone have similar thoughts on approaching a first-time teaching role?<issue_comment>username_1: Only if you're open to suggestions mid-semester.
Ask for suggestions on a half-sheet of paper about a third-of-the-way through the class. What worked so far? What hasn't?
If the class doesn't go well for whatever reason, and you told students you never taught it before, they will complain about you behind your back, and say you didn't prepare or you shouldn't have taught. They might complain to your advisor or the department head or someone else in the department.
If you don't want feedback, don't tell them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: **Recommend not on the first day.**
I'm actually in exactly this situation for the fall term, so I was prepping myself mentally for just this issue. In my experience, expressing any uncertainty about the course on the first day prompts almost instantaneous pleading/negotiation/argumentation over any and all stated procedures (parameters for assignments, grading, due dates, etc., etc.)
Now, this is partly influenced by the fact that I work at an urban community college where the student maturity level can be quite low for certain courses. If you work at a more high-powered institution then the environment might be different. But I still think it best to be authoritative at the start, gauge the environment on subsequent days, and then if you feel comfortable admitting the situation and/or asking for feedback later on, you'll be more confident about doing so.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I believe this is depending to the situation, more exactly the class you're in front of: imagine you're teaching in a class where the students don't care about your class, they just want to sabotage everything you say and do (a typical secondary school), then I would advise you not to say this at all, otherwise they will just use this information against you. (I've been teaching in such a class years ago, I needed to teach MS-Access and the day before my first lesson I didn't even know that MS-Access was about relational databases, I never told my students, they never found it out and I didn't have big problems teaching that class).
However if you are teaching in a motivated environment, there the situation can be just the opposite: when I was studying I went to Spanish evening school and after three lessons, the teacher was replaced due to pregnancy complications. Those complications were so unexpected that the school was not prepared for it, and they have found a Spanish student to take over the class. That student almost knew no Dutch (I'm living in the northern part of Belgium), in fact we knew more Spanish than this student knew Dutch :-)
It was a complete disaster at first: the half of the class just stopped because of the difficult situation.
However the other half of the class persisted: the student improved her Dutch and the remaining class members heavily improved their Spanish (which is exactly the intention of a Spanish evening course :-) )
So, in conclusion, I'd advise you the following: at first, don't mention to the class that you've never given this course before. Once you've established a reasonable relationship and you know whether or not the class is of good faith (don't be naïve!) you might consider sharing this information with the class.
Good luck
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I've been in this situation from both sides, and would say an **emphatic "no" to telling students you've never done this before.**
We know that the reality is that faculty are often thrust into a class without tons of experience at teaching it, but to the students, *you're the expert*. Starting off the class by essentially saying "I'm not an expert" will leave your students wondering what they're doing there. You shouldn't lie, of course, but it's important to the classroom environment that you show confidence in your ability. It's perfectly possible to learn from the class and be open to student feedback without proclaiming your lack of experience.
When I was in undergrad I had a summer course where the graduate student teaching it started off by telling us that it was her first time teaching. I felt bad for her, because she wasn't really great at it, but opening the class that way was like blood in the water to a classroom full of 19 year olds. Every fault was highlighted, every difficult exam was her fault, every difficult topic must have been difficult because she didn't know what she was doing. It made the experience worse for her and for the students, when it really didn't need to be that way.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: **I cautiously suggest you do mention it right away, based upon my own experiences as a student.**
During my days as a student, I attended various classes in which lecturers would start out saying that they were teaching the class, or a part of it, for the first time. From my point of view back then, this seemed quite positive in several respects:
* First of all, it made the lecturer seem inherently sympathic:
+ The announcement was a signal they were not lecturers of the kind that would talk only about lecture contents and nothing else.
+ Moreover, it was a signal they were not of the I'm-god-you're-nothing type1, but indeed even allowed students a glimpse "behind the curtain".
* Second, it created opportunities to modify the teaching according to the students' needs. While otherwise, students might be too shy to ask for changes in the focus or presentation of certain topics, or think that it's all set in stone, the early explicit announcement that it's the first time the lecturer is teaching the class made clear that suggestions for changes were very welcome.
* Third, in hindsight, when I started giving my first classes as a TA, it was good to remember the seemingly well-prepared and professional lecturers who taught classes for the first time, too.
Now, of course, much of this can just as well be achieved by simply pointing out willingness to accept suggestions, but it just seems somewhat more "convincing" if you know the actual backstory for why suggestions are so welcome. Therefore, personally, I would usually freely tell students in my classes when I'm new in the particular class or topic. I did not notice any negative effects, but then, I was often in touch with very motivated students who may have caught more of my attention than the couple of disinterested ones to whom the announcement removed the last straw to paying any attention. For the motivated students, I felt it helped bridge the distance to them to some extent.
1: Thankfully, I only met *very* few professors or otherwise who held this stance towards students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: My advice: It's fine to mention this point if you want to; however, if you have a good teaching attitude then it's not terribly important either way.
Putting myself in the students' shoes, if I have a first-time teacher who is
1. Interested in his subject,
2. Knowledgeable in his subject,
3. Actually knows how to *use* the subject, and
4. Is *interested* in relaying the subject to me so that I can grasp it effectively and use it also,
I won't care in the slightest how many years or days he has been teaching. I will also learn whatever he has to teach like a shot.
Inversely, if I have an experienced professor who has been teaching for twenty years who is some combination of
1. Overbearing,
2. Stresses his own personal importance simply because he knows the subject,
3. Belittles his students or regards them as inferior because they don't know the subject,
4. Insists that his students must "record" (memorize) the fixed data he teaches without questioning it,
I will not actually learn anything from that teacher—and I certainly won't care how many years of "experience" he has. (And if I learn the subject at all it will be in spite of, not because of, the "teacher.")
So I would put the importance where it lies: on good teaching *approach* and *attitude*, not the "number of years of experience." Experience is only important if it results in competence. The test of a teacher is not how many years he has worked, but how many of his students have been successful in *using* the subject he has taught.
---
**tl; dr:** Be candid with your students, then do a good job *teaching* with maximal effectiveness and no one should care how long or short a time you have been teaching for.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: From the student side of things - I had a math professor with her masters and a CS professor with his PhD.
In both cases it was their first time teaching, and in both cases there were several problems that I had in their classes. However, being able to talk to the professors about my problems as well as realizing that they were *also* learning how to teach the particular course made things better. The fact that they were willing to adjust a few things - some of the policies they had that were unfair, or some of the assignments to clarify things.
Of course, I would guess that most of your students just don't care, or will try to wheedle easier coursework out of you. They'll probably do that regardless of how new you are at teaching but suggesting that you're new at teaching that subject *may* give them the (in)correct idea that you're more likely to cave to their desires.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Short answer: No. Don't tell them. Yet. But, this is not universal advice. Later on, do.
Whether it is a good idea to do now depends on your abilities.
As a person who has taught several classes, for educational institutions and also professional training (technology/security, for government/military), I was very skeptical at first. However, now that I'm confident, I'm not worried about saying such a thing.
Even if students lose faith in me in the first ten minutes, they will figure out soon (in the first twenty minutes hopefully, or the first forty minutes if I'm slow) that I know material very well... better than the vast majority of them (often 100% of them). In the rare case that a student knew some material better than me, they really knew the material very well (and taking the course was more of a general requirement than a really useful learning experience for them), and they recognized that I was sharing a lot of useful details that many people lacked. So, even if they had expertise, they still recognized mine and respected me.
If I found myself teaching something that I didn't know that well, I think I would be a bit more cautious. However, I enjoy sharing expertise that I have, so I gravitate towards situations where I do have mastery and can teach the material very well. So, in that case, I don't worry about it.
Another example is if I am new at a location. I have no problem admitting to that. I know that I might make a silly mistake based on my lack of knowledge about a location. However, people will see that I know the important things that I need to know. I know they will see that, so I am confident that they will quickly gain confidence in me. Therefore, I don't worry about that aspect.
Note that when I'm referring to my abilities, I'm not referring to just subject matter. I also know that I can teach, and share knowledge very effectively.
If you're feeling uncertain, I would suggest you portray yourself as positively as you can honestly do so. Once you give some information, you won't be able to retract it from that group of students. But, once you know you're doing well, and you know (without any doubt) that you will definitely do well for the rest of the class, then feel free to open up. Students will appreciate the honesty of the tacit admission that they don't get from some other instructors.
Since your situation sounds like you're concerned about what they think, don't unnecessarily volunteer things that you know could be used against you (even if the details might only be used against you in their minds). However, once your situation changes, you may wish to re-consider.
Well, I did. It worked well for me. As is the case for many scenarios, your results may vary.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: No, don't tell. It never occurred to me to do so.
I was a PhD graduate student in chemistry at the U of Chicago. I was a volunteer TA/Lab instructor/proctor for undergraduate chemistry. The first session I set the hook by teaching my section how to study the material, how to study for the exams, and how take an exam. I also made liberal use of pop quizzes during the quarter.
My students were bright and motivated, so no problems there. I would open the lab on Saturdays for four hours so they could catch up and I could do some one-on-one tutoring as needed. (I also brought my own bookwork.)
My payback: The section consistently had the highest test scores in the class.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_10: More a personal anecdote than an answer - perhaps useful.
I'm a mathematician. When in the 1980's the better students at my state school wanted computer science more than they wanted mathematics and there was no computer science department I started learning computer science by teaching my way through the curriculum one course at a time.
I usually announced that at the beginning of the class. The better students were intrigued; I think some of the weaker ones wanted to write the Governor saying the school should provide instructors who knew the material.
I think on the whole the students were pleased that I was learning along with them. In time I worked my way up to some graduate courses and software consulting before returning mostly to my first love, mathematics.
Final note. On my first exam in the sophomore assembly language course one student got an A and I got only an A- because his answer to one question was much better than mine. He went on to a distinguished career in software; we're still friends.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: If you feel you are a strong teacher in general, my answer is undoubtedly **yes, mention it**. Why? Honesty makes our lives much easier.
Imagine students ask you things that are not clear to you yet because you simply don't have the experience. There are always little subtleties like "is this special technique of computing this special type of integral required in the tests" -- you don't know, it's likely not in the syllabus, but your more experienced colleagues do know, because there's an agreement that the special thing never appears in the test.
What are you going to answer? Saying *"it's not going to be there"* is plain wrong because you don't know. Saying *"it can be there"* can make you lose your reputation very quickly if the students' friends are told in a parallel session that it's not going to be there and it really does not appear in the tests. Saying *"I don't know"* raises concerns about your qualities. The only thing you can say is *"I don't know because I teach it the first time, I'll tell you in the next session"*.
And you can surely come up with other situations like this. The point is that **it should be clear you're no worse a teacher because you teach it the first time**. So tell your students it's the first time you teach the subject, and make your teacher job well.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: There certainly is a point in getting the students to know you. Make a good story of your personal experience as it stands, and as it leads up to you standing here, before them in the very moment. Don't dwell on things you you never did; that doesn't make a good story, and it is very difficult to present without making it sound as an excuse.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/16
| 539
| 2,218
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper to an applied-mathematics journal in May 2015, and the first round review took a bit more than seven months. I only received one referee report (there would usually be two), which was generally positive. I submitted the revised draft in mid January 2016, and it is “under review” ever since.
I inquired about the status about four months ago and only got a reply from the journal staff, basically saying that my message has been forwarded to the handling editor (nothing from the handling editor though). I am wondering if it is OK to inquire again? How long should I wait before I make an inquiry on a paper status (without being too pesty).
The journal states that its target processing time from submission to final publication is eight to nine months, and it typically gives reviewers two months.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I inquired the status about 4 months ago and only got a reply from the journal staff, basically saying that my message has been forwarded to the handling editor ...
>
>
>
is telling me that the journal has not forgotten about your manuscript. They are still processing it.
As you are well aware of, reputable math/applied math journals turn around time are very long in general. I have read on this site that two years is not unheard of. Please see [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/13604/546) for example.
If you are anxious to know the status of your manuscript, I think sending another inquiry is okay since last time you inquired about its status is four months ago. I don't think the inquiry is too pesty. They'll understand.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: While I agree that math/applied math journal turnaround times are usually long, it seems to me that the editor might need to be nudged from time to time. My experience(although I'm from a different field) is that as long as your email is polite and courteous, there's no harm in sending inquiries to the editor from time to time. This might make the editor sit up and take notice and maybe send reminders to the reviewer. I would suggest sending reminders every two months. Else, your paper might lie forgotten under piles of new ones.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/16
| 770
| 3,132
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose I meet a scholar at my university or some other institute, who is a famous person known for his or her work. and I ask questions related to the subject I am working on, and I get some answers or other useful information. Ethically, can I cite this meeting in my paper or not? (Provided I do tell the person that I am working on something related, etc.)<issue_comment>username_1: Strictly speaking, yes. The APA style, among others, does have instructions on how to cite private conversations (see <https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/11/> for an example), but in practice I've never seen it been used in psychology (or natural science) papers. This is probably because a personal conversation cannot be easily verified, which makes such citations less useful. One thing you can do is to track down the relevant papers and thank your colleague in the acknowledgement section.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If at all possible, follow username_1's advice and cite the relevant papers.
If this isn't possible (e.g. a scientist told you about an unpublished observation in their group, like, "Oh yes, we often saw that, but never got around to writing it up."), citing a "personal communication" is appropriate.
HOWEVER, if you do this, the person you are citing should know about it! I would send them a copy of your draft before you submit it. This avoids circumstances where 1) you misunderstood them, and they didn't say what you thought they did, or 2) they thought they were speaking "off the record," and don't want to be cited in support of this point, or 3) you are "spoiling" their result by announcing it before they publish.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, it is possible, and I have done this once or twice. As others have said, it is better to cite a published document if possible, but (Smith, pers. comm.) is sometimes acceptable: typically if it's for a minor point that referees are unlikely to dispute, or for a minor detail of published work that didn't make it into the published version.
Examples:
* "Liu and Smith (2006) used 15mm glass culture tubes for their samples (Liu, pers. comm.)"
* "Environmental managers report that farmers in this region generally do not trust models (Freeman, pers. comm.) so we took a participatory modelling approach to increase trust and transparency, following the advice of Jones (2011)."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: **Yes - but don't use that as a crutch for taking sole credit for a result that's not entirely your own.**
If you're writing a paper in which that is a significant part of the novelty, try to make him/her a co-author; or otherwise coordinate with that person, since you're working on the basis of his/her idea to a great extent. Another option you could offer him/her, if they don't want to be cited, is a thank you note for useful discussion regarding XYZ.
If you're writing something in which the citation is not part of the novelty of the work, it's simpler and more obvious that you just cite a "personal communication" like other answers suggest.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/16
| 176
| 753
|
<issue_start>username_0: We developed a new method to calculate a characteristic value from measurement data. In my thesis I call the existing method 'Original Method'. However, I am not sure how to name our new method. 'Current Method'? 'Present Method'?
Is there an established standard for this?<issue_comment>username_1: The following terms may help.
* Proposed method
* Suggested method
* Our technique
* Algorithm devised
* Intended design
* New procedure
It's not an exhaustive list, but are considered acceptable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If the new method derives directly from an older method X, "Improved X method" is a reasonable option. Otherwise, choose a descriptive name which reflects your new contribution.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/16
| 455
| 2,031
|
<issue_start>username_0: Job applications typically require the applicant to describe their research interests (research statements). Would it be a worry that an applicant's work-in-progress/current interests would inspire similar works from the reviewer's side? If so, is it wise to describe these ideas, or better avoid doing so?<issue_comment>username_1: **Regarding the application letter:**
The aim of an application letter should be an invitation to a job interview. Keep in mind that an employer (within and outside academia) wants you to work on *their* problems.
You could try to spark their interest by stating something like "I have worked (are currently working on) some original solutions for the XYZ problem.", without going into details. When they are interested in the details, they can ask you in the interview.
Try to avoid elaborate descriptions of your current ideas. Not so much to prevent anyone from stealing them, but rather because they tend to distract from the primary goal of an application letter: to get invited for the interview. Just sufficient information to make them curious would be perfect.
**Regarding the application interview and/or research statement:**
When your current work is only partially related to PI's work it is not necessary or desirable to go into the details, and there is little chance of anyone stealing your ideas anyway.
When there is significant overlap, it might be wise to put a preliminary paper online (e.g. on Arxiv). In that way you can claim the ideas to be yours, and freely discuss them.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As far as job applications go, I generally try to be very vague. You want to pique interest without giving away the details - especially if they haven't (yet) paid for them. Never reveal anything in the job application process that isn't publicly available/that you don't want to be stolen. Being able to explain your value without showing everyone what's under the hood is a valuable skill in itself.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/16
| 481
| 2,158
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have found an R Package written up that does exactly what is required but cannot figure out a bug that has presented itself. I have gone through the code and source code for the function and cannot figure out the problem. The authors' emails were included in the documentation. Is it inappropriate to email the creators to ask if the bug has occurred before or if I have any faults in my arguments?<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming that the documentation does not explicitly tell you not to email the maintainers about bugs, and assuming that there's not a forum, bug-tracker, etc. for the package, then I think it would be perfectly reasonable to contact one of them via the email address they provide in the documentation.
If they provide no other means of reporting bugs in the package, then I don't think they'd have any justification for taking offence at being contacted at an address they provide alongside the package.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I assume they want to put out a good product.
I email technical book authors when I find errors. The programmers include their emails for a reason, one is to let them know you found a problem.
Try to reproduce the error, screenshot it, attach the screenshot, add the script you ran, and add a short paragraph about what happened.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Why else would they put their email there, if not so that people can email them about bugs?
Of course you can email them. There is no protocol, besides the typical bug report conventions:
* Short and to the point
* Subject line clearly indicates it's a bug in so-and-so package
* Gives steps to reproduce bug, also provides a minimal example if possible
* Says exactly which version, platform, etc. you found the bug on
However, often people are busy, and may not have time to answer your email. It may be months before you get a reply, or you might never get it. You would have better luck on a forum or site like StackOverflow, where other users who have found workarounds might go. If the package author cares about supporting users, he will be checking these sites anyway.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/16
| 1,681
| 7,139
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently I received a rejection to my submission of an article to a journal. Despite three positive reviews, an additional reviewer wrote a short response with an example to claim that a proof in my paper was wrong. The editor claimed to "carefully" check the example and for this reason rejected my paper (no resubmission).
Now, this example is not a counterexample, which I can show with a single sentence (it doesn't satisfy the property I assumed in my theorem). So what should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: When a paper is rejected, do not argue about it. Submit to another journal.
If the paper is really good, it is the loss of the rejecting journal.
The loss to you of publishing in a less-important journal is minuscule compared to the aggravation you suffer by arguing and worrying about a rejection.
If (over time) you become known to editors as an argumentative submitter, it will only count against you.
I remember many years ago, the professor in the office next to mine was an editor on a major journal. He once remarked that the most unpleasant part of that duty was arguments received from authors of rejected papers.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Ok—Your paper was rejected because a reviewer made a mistake. I'll use my powers of Bayesian Induction to guess the editor just defaults to this reviewer, and there's not academic fraud issue. Everyone in academia has a drawer in their desk of decent papers that didn't get published just because.
You already emailed your advisor. You took the first step. That's good. I hope you didn't imply the editor's against you, but if you did, so be it.
Here's what you should you do now:
1. Go into the bathroom, take a deep breath, look in the mirror, and say: "this is going to be OK." Good papers get initially rejected for stupid reasons all the time.
2. Show the statement of the theorem, the purported counterexample, and your one-sentence refutation to your advisor or another colleague and get their reaction, to check whether you might have misunderstood the issue.
3. Did the editor communicate directly with you? How did they communicate with you? If it was by email, write an email back. Write a three-sentence email about why the reviewer's counterexample isn't a counterexample. Show your proposed email to your advisor for feedback before sending it to the editor.
4. You will wait to get a yes-no answer.
5. If you still get rejected, submit the paper to another journal.
6. If all else fails, put the paper up on arxiv and try to present it at a conference.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Don’t get involved in the arguments, as the chances are that you will have him as a reviewer again. Next time he may just reject you without any good reason, as a personal grudge can develop between you and him. If you really want to publish, send it to another journal.
One of my acquaintances had his paper published after it was previously rejected by several journals, and guess what, the paper was accepted in a much better journal than all those which rejected it.
Carry on. Don’t lose hope. It works like this.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: When you are writing a paper, your task is not to prove something. It is to communicate to others that you have proven it. If you make some theoretical mistake in your paper, that's your problem and you should correct it. If you write a paper which does not communicate your results well enough and misleads your readers to false conclusions, this is also your mistake, and it is your job to correct it.
And yes, writing is hard. We love to jot down our train of thought in the way which makes most sense to us, and then we expect that others will understand. In reality, a good paper tailors its writing to the readers. The best authors design their text as a track for the reader's train of thoughts, knowing the possible junctions of misunderstanding and gently leading the reader away from them.
The average author, and sometimes even the best author, cannot write a perfect text from scratch. Readers will misunderstand things every now and then. And a reviewer is a very thorough reader. If your reviewer misunderstands something in your paper, then it is likely that a large swath of later readers (who don't try to follow your text anywhere as closely) will misunderstand it in the same way. This is a major flaw in your paper, and has to be fixed. Luckily, such fixes are very easy with a bit of thought.
In your case, the problem is obviously that the assumption you made was not salient at the time the reader reached your proof. You have to change that. For example, in the place where you list your assumptions, add a sentence or two discussing why the assumption was made and what are its consequences. It will force the reader to think about the assumption and notice it, and keep it in mind for the rest of the paper. Should he think of his counterexample later, he will notice himself that it is not a counterexample, as long as it is obvious how it hurts the assumption. If it is not obvious, it is a good idea to discuss (somewhere after the proof) how examples of this type are not counterexamples, because there is a twist which makes them hurt your assumption.
After the paper has been corrected in this way, you can decide whether to resubmit to the same journal (point out to the editor that it was a misunderstanding and you have made changes to the text to clarify the point) or to another venue.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I'll make two practical suggestion:
1. It is unlikely the editor would be willing to entertain the possibility of accepting your paper anyway, for a combination of several factors:
* lack of time: academics are mostly super-busy always.
* feeling it's beyond what his/her duty entails - considering how s/he is typically doing it without being paid
* conceit: some people are too high and mighty to be bothered with correcting such mistakes
* apathy: some people do not feel guilty for letting something like that standnow, this doesn't mean you shouldn't *try* appealing to the editor, like @JackStClaire suggests, but expect failure with high probability.
2. Get people in your field to glance at your paper and the review, without having told them there's something wrong with the review. Or - tell them something like "I'm worried about what happens in the case of XYZ, what do you think?" - if they are not able to come out and say "oh, that's not a counter-example, it doesn't meet the preconditions" - that means you should probably have explained *within the paper itself* why that would not be counter-example. Yes, maybe it seems stupid and obvious to you; but apparently it doesn't to other people
but **most importantly**:
3. Remember how unfair this has been to you, in case you end up being an editor or a reviewer yourself. When you are in that position, make a vow to be extra careful in your work and to accept appeals of reviews and considering them on the merits.
... and that goes for all you readers of this Academia.SX page as well!
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/08/16
| 410
| 1,848
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just received the reviews of a paper I submitted. The paper was reviewed by three anonymous reviewers, two of the reviews provided valuable insight suggestions and comments. However, the third reviewer just copied text from the paper. Should I care about what the third reviewer did?<issue_comment>username_1: Why should you care? One function of a referee's report is to explain to the editor what the paper is about.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: As you've described it, this sounds rather odd. Reviewers are under no obligation to accept a paper to review, so to accept one and then submit what sounds from your description like a complete cop-out is strange behaviour. It's also a bit odd for the editor to send you completely uninformative comments. It's possible that they genuinely did write a review, but that the text has been copied mistakenly, either by the reviewer or by the editor. It might therefore be worth sending a brief email to the editor to enquire about this review. Something along the lines of: "Thank you for consideration of our paper. In the copy that I received one of the reviews does not contain any comments, only text from our paper. I just wanted to double-check that the correct version has been sent through, in order to make sure that I can respond effectively to all of the reviewers." Be very polite, and make sure you phrase it as a request for clarification, rather than a complaint.
If it turns out it was their genuine review, you are of course allowed to care - it's a bit frustrating if one of the reviewers has not fulfilled their role properly. But it's not a big deal, and there's not much that you can or should do about it. Some journals only get comments from two reviewers anyway, so just think of it that way and ignore the third.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2016/08/16
| 1,058
| 4,436
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a researcher, and I want to scrape a website (specifically, TripAdvisor) to collect data in order to use it for a research project. However, in reading the website's [terms & conditions](https://www.tripadvisor.com/pages/terms.html), I found that the company prohibits the user from:
>
> ...copy any content or information of this Website using any robot,
> spider, scraper or other automated means or any manual process for any
> purpose without our express written permission.
>
>
> -- Prohibited activities, bullet (ii)
>
>
>
As such, I want to contact the company to ask for permission. I've had a difficult time finding any information on how to contact the company in order to ask for permission to use data. That said, my question is, **when making these sorts of requests to companies, what is the best way to ensure that I am contacting the right department/person?**<issue_comment>username_1: I finally find help on ResearchGate.com. One researcher provided me some email addresses that he founds on [this page](http://elliott.org/company-contacts/tripadvisor/) and suggested that I email a request to the CEO (<NAME>) asking for permission. I've emailed him a request, and I'm waiting his response. Hope this can help anyone in future.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Firstly, recognize that they probably placed that ToS there for some or all of the following reasons:
1. They want a legal basis for suing someone who tries to steal stuff from their site.
2. They want a legal basis for suing some idiot programmer who brings down their site because of a poorly programmed bot he wrote "for a project".
3. Their lawyer told them to put these ToS up because he saw them on some other large site and thought they looked good there.
4. ...?
You likely fall in the second category (and maybe the fourth, I don't know what other things they're protecting themselves from). To that extent, you have to convince them that you aren't an idiot who will run amok on their servers. If you're aligned with a well-known university then maybe you'll have more luck, but even then it'll be a stretch... this is a for-profit company, not a research institution. Even if you can convince them that you're not a total idiot, they still have very little reason to want to grant you this permission. Your pet project will gain them nothing, and may in fact demonstrate something bad about their site that they don't want public. The "I'll share my findings" argument really doesn't go very far... companies have their own interests, governed by many things, including politics, agendas, egos, and what have you. Your powerpoint presentation that may be done in a year or two that will probably be too technical for a business VP to understand anyways won't give them any business value.
The point of all the preceding words is just to convince you that you have quite the uphill battle here.
All that said, I would just start calling every "contact us" number I can get my hands on. Definitely start with the numbers on the "Contact Us" page. Don't be afraid to send a written letter! For phone calls, I like the phrase <NAME> used in his comment: "I have a weird question."
Success is easy to determine. Check your mail... do you have a letter (written or electronic) from the TripAdvisor legal team permitting you to perform the research? If no, then you haven't succeeded yet. Keep trying! Perseverance will be key here.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would suggest 2 things.
1) contact other academic researchers who got this data previously (you mention in the comments this has happened) and ask how they did it. This is really your best bet and the only thing that has ever really worked for me.
2) Use LinkedIn to figure out who is likely to handle such a request. For TA it could be someone in their legal department or in their machine learning group, perhaps. You can at least get the sense here of what the departments are. I have used this method in the past to get responses to my requests, although they were "no".
Also I will note that I once had permission from a company to scrape data and then the company did not shut me down, my university did because it thought I was a "hacker from China". Then both legal departments got involved and took the data back. So try to get a dataset directly from the company, not permission to scrape.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/16
| 1,066
| 4,428
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Background**: I started a PhD in a CS-oriented field about 8 months ago, after completing my masters. At the very start, I was given a lot of duties besides my PhD project, such as responsibility for several of our servers, various software and hardware, user accounts, etc. I also serve as a TA to different courses every semester. After all that, I estimate that in terms of time, 15% of the working week is maybe left for research work. In my project I work alone (this is nice), but my project as well is more ambitious than that of other people, as already confirmed by my advisor and colleagues.
**Problem**: I started a PhD with the hopes to research an issue at depth and gain expertise in that field, now I find I don't actually have time to seriously devote myself to research activity. I was apparently hired to be some kind of an "assistant", but not one that should be called "research assistant". On top of all, I'm paid much lower than what I could earn out in the open, or what I should be paid given the amount of hours extra I put in. I am really demotivated because I entered the PhD with different intentions. FYI, I have no desire to continue in academia as a career, neither do I need the "Dr." title to be more marketable or for ego purposes or whatever - the only reason was fun of the kind I get very little.
**Question**: I can't decide if it's worth it to stay, I also don't want to be spoiled and foolish. I won't take your word as command, but would be nice to just get honest 3rd party opinions, or sharing if you're dealing with the same situation.
**EDIT**: thanks all for sharing thoughts and giving some advice. I marked as "answer" the comment with the most subcomments. I already talked to other PhD students and it seems most don't have it as tough as me. I guess with all these tasks eventually the quality of my research will suffer, and I will talk to my advisor about this particular point, as I believe this should be a concern for him as well.<issue_comment>username_1: Everyone in academic CS gets below market pay. It sounds like they made you a department IT guy, and I've never heard of that, but it may not be too unusual.
You might be burned out, they overwork you. You can:
1) talk to your advisor about all this. Maybe they can lighten the load. TAing and being an assistant sounds like too much.
2) take some time off. Go into industry for a year. It sounds like you want to do that anyway. Departments have a process for being on-leave. Make some money, get a hobby, don't think about your research for at least three months. Then decide if you want to go back and finish your PhD.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are a few things that you ought to know before you make your decision to stay our leave.
Nearly every grad student I know of have been through the thought you are thinking about now.
Actually, the fact that you're being paid at all means that you're above half the population out there.
If you really believe you got the toughest research project, then look again. There were many grad students who said exactly the same thing before they realized they are wrong (myself included).
You may request for your burden to be reduced, although there is no guarantee your request will be granted.
Make sure you hear the experience of others both in and out of your institution. Once you're rid of the *"why me!?"* complex, make your decision.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The thing is the TA letter which clearly mentions your responsibilities. If your supervisor ask you to do something, it's often nice to do it for him out of respect. From my personal experience as a TA in computer science PhD.
If anyone else asks you, you can deny them or better ask them to please communicate via your supervisor. In that case they will never use that communication channel and even if they do, supervisor will not allow you to carry out the work.
TAs are paid less (as in my case) but if you compare that all your tuition fee and other fees are also waived then it's more than enough.
Refusing unrelated work will not effect your PhD, what's in your thesis is what you did. And you cannot justify that you didn't do well because you were busy in other IT works.
So finish it, give time if someone ask for work just say you have a meeting to prepare, deadlines and busy in that.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/16
| 1,273
| 5,243
|
<issue_start>username_0: Last semester I chose 12 credits, but the department said it can only pay for 9 credits, i.e. I have to pay for the extra 3 credits by myself.
No one ever told me about such rules before. I thought the tuition fees for phd students are just a fiction/imaginary/symbolic number. Is there anyone who have heard things like this?
I think it is ridiculous to ask a phd student to pay. Because phd is kind of a job, I have heard employees getting very low salary, but never heard of an employee PAYING her company.<issue_comment>username_1: The primary focus of doing a PhD is research. Typically (at least in the US, in the engineering departments I am familiar with), any tuition/fees for courses you take in support of your research or to fulfill degree requirements that are paid for by the university are capped at a certain number of credit hours.
If a student wishes to sink more of their time into coursework (beyond that which is paid for by the institution) than on their research, then, **yes**, it is the student's responsibility to pay for it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, this doesn't sound too unusual. It's certainly pretty common to have restrictions on the number of courses that grad students can take. Some schools might make you pay for any extras, and at others they might not let you do it at all.
This may be a result of the university's internal budgeting: tuition is charged by the credit, and the student's tuition waiver is limited to a certain dollar amount. This helps the institution keep some control over the "cost" of supporting a graduate student. The tuition fees may be fictitious to the student (up to a point), but I assure you that to the departments within the university whose budgets are affected, those dollar amounts are very real.
I'd also interpret this as a warning that you are taking more classes than the standard load, which may not be a good idea. It's very common for PhD students to take on more work than they end up being able to handle, and the results are often not pretty; sometimes this sort of thing starts a spiral that ends with the student dropping out of the program. So I'd suggest caution before trying to push through the restriction: it might be a blessing in disguise.
Note that PhD students generally exist in sort of a gray area between "student" and "employee", and so your analogy of an employee paying her company is not really apt. Some academic cultures put them closer to one side than the other, but as you're finding, it's often necessary to balance aspects of both.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In a very short answer. Yes it's normal.
From my personal experience, two of my friends are given 70% tuition fee waved off and rest they have to pay.
PhD is like a job, not exactly a job. So also expect that once the funding is finished you won't get paid for stipend also.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: First, this sort of thing is *normal*. For certain institutions, the minimum credit courses are covered within the stipend/scholarship/fellowship provided by the institution. Extra courses or certain special courses would require extra payment.
>
> No one ever told me about such rules before.
>
>
>
It is your duty to read the PhD regulations and guidelines followed in your institution. You shouldn't be waiting to be told these things.
>
> PhD is kind of a job
>
>
>
Well, not really. It is thought to be somewhere between a job and a course. But, some get paid and some don't. This is really a misconception.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In the US, yes, almost all programs require tuition and other fees.
In some cases, the student doesn't pay these out of pocket. Instead, the department may pay for them, or they may come out of grant money, and from the student's perspective these will be "waived". However, from the school accountant's perspective they are indeed real fees charged to real entities and paid with real money.
This is considered part of the student's financial support package. Not every school, and not every program, offers the same financial support, so many PhD students do indeed pay fees, sometimes very substantial ones. It may even be that the student receives a salary, and then has to pay tuition out of this salary (although given how silly this is, it tends to be rare).
>
> PhD is kind of a job
>
>
>
In the US, no. It is a studentship, where the student pays the school to train him, not the other way around. The income (or at least lack of expenses) happens by way of financial aid from the institution.
In my humble opinion, this is a very unrealistic mindset, and no serious program would expect students to work for free (or worse, pay to work). However, clearly the establishment is not of this opinion: In many fields, it is in fact considered normal for PhD students to work without pay, and sometimes even being forced to take on loans or side jobs to afford tuition. I suppose they must be getting enough applicants anyways... The point is, in the US, there is no rule saying you won't have to pay fees - this happens to be an excellent thing to discuss during interviews or other stages of the application.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/16
| 1,045
| 4,531
|
<issue_start>username_0: My school and my department has a lot of undergraduate students from China. When I took this instructor's class, he routinely
1. pressured the foreign students to answer questions about their home country that they weren't comfortable answering. (This is a math department; his questions weren't relevant to the course.)
2. pressured the foreign students to quickly answer when they struggled to either understand him or respond in English.
3. sneered when they answered one his questions wrong, no matter how strange the question was.
4. didn't accept "I don't know" from Chinese students.
He never did this to any of the domestic students. This was a topic of discussion among the American students before his class—we all noticed it. Several Chinese students dropped his class because of the way he treated them, but they didn't complain because that isn't considered kosher in China. (He actually said, "I don't understand why 'A' students are dropping," after a very talented Chinese student withdrew from this class.)
I can't point to any one thing he said or did that clearly crosses the line—I would have reported him to the dean's office and the department chair if he had—but he came up to it too many times for me to be comfortable with his behavior. I liked the guy in the beginning of the course, but I was sick of the way he treated my Chinese friends by the end.
**To summarize: I feel this adjunct's behavior towards Chinese students borders on harassment, but isn't *obviously* harassment. Should I do anything? What?**
To clarify—this class already ended, but I'm told he still keeps up this crappy behavior. And the Chinese students actually come from mainland China.<issue_comment>username_1: Your university almost certainly has an office devoted to considering situations of racial harassment and discrimination. If the behavior is in general towards international students rather than just Chinese ones, this is usually also explicitly prohibited as "national origin" rather than race. You should Google your university name along with the phrases "civil rights office" or "discrimination." Usually you can make a report to them, often anonymously, and in theory you ought to be protected from retaliation.
Note that from what you've said here, I would be surprised if serious action was taken against the professor -- his actions were bad but no single action crosses the line, you say, and behavior like this is sadly common. However, it may result in a reprimand (which can, after all, change behavior if he feels pressured). In addition, I would encourage you to make this report so that, if his behavior ever escalates, there will be a case history. So often I read stories about harassment cases in academia where the defense is something like "well this was just one offense" and it seems it almost never is in reality; just the first one reported. If you say something, then the next person who says something (and may have a more serious complaint) is more likely to be believed.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Most universities provide anonymous teaching evaluations for professors at the end of the course -- that is, the students are given forms to evaluate the course, the teaching, etc. In my experience, these forms are taken very seriously by the various Deans offices. It's expected that there will be a certain level of disgruntled complaining, but if multiple people in the same course complain about race-based harassment, it's likely to get a response; whether a serious talk with the professor, or removing him from teaching duties.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Do foreign students at your university get proper orientation about such matters? E. g., something like "in this place you don't have to endure such and such treatment even from a professor, you can go to such and such office with your complains, we take it seriously"? And if not, maybe you should raise this issue rather than counter-attack a particular instructor (or, well, you can do both). May seem obvious to you, not to them. As Russian I do understand this "complaining isn't kosher" mentality, but there may be more to it than just old habits dying hard. We tried complaining at our university, the only thing we learned is that no action is ever taken on those complains, so why bother? Never been to China, but I suspect things are same there, if not worse. Are things different at your university? Do foreign students know about that?
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/17
| 889
| 4,065
|
<issue_start>username_0: If one graduate at a developing country which lack highly ranked professors, how much weight should be expected to be given from Oxford University to recommendation letters for a Dphil? Do they weight it as much as letters of students with famous letters from famous professors? Are students with letters from famous professors preferred or they just access the content?<issue_comment>username_1: Well from my personal experience, I worked in an office where we were sending students to world top ten universities from Pakistan. We sent some to Stanford USA, and Oxford UK beside others. What I saw was that indeed weight is given if you are from a reputable university or not in a bad one at least. And that most of the weight is given to grades but most important is the research proposal that you write and your personal statement.
Also, a letter of recommendation not only states about you, but also the writing expresses the professor himself, how good he writes it.
Then if there is some research that has to be related to a developing country, then they will prefer you, especially if it's related to your country or like wise.
I myself got a scholarship in a good university under top 100, though lot of my friends with excellent grades didn't succeed. So keep trying is the key.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I doubt there are any statistics to support this, so this is my opinion plus some limited experience in selecting applicants to graduate programs. A famous professor's letter is likely to have somewhat more weight, but not purely because they are famous; more because the fact that they are famous implies that they have more experience judging people. If someone who has mentored two students says "This is the best student I have ever had", their ranking has less weight than the same claim from someone who has mentored two hundred.
On the other hand, a strong recommendation from someone who knows the applicant well will have *much* more weight than a vague and impersonal recommendation from someone who clearly doesn't know the person as an individual. Remember that committees already have much information about the applicant as a student -- grades, C.V., courses taken, extracurricular activities should all be present in the application elsewhere. A recommendation that merely says, for example, "This student received a good grade in my course" is useless; we already can see that, it's redundant information.
A useful recommendation letter adds *new* information that the committee can't get elsewhere. A student may have received an "A" because they are slow, but diligent; or they may be brilliant but lazy. The student has published a paper -- Did they perform a technical but unimaginative role, or did they conceive of the idea and push it to a conclusion? The outcome will look the same on the other documentation, but the recommendation letter can tell the committee what actually happened. Similarly, committees look to recommendation letters to try to understand the applicants' personalities. Are they cooperative, argumentative, shy, stubborn, agreeable? There is wide latitude for personalities in graduate studies, but there are certainly some people who are unlikely to do well because of their personality, and a recommendation letter can help flag those who are likely to be great fits.
If that new information comes from a famous person who has had the opportunity to compare to many other students, so much the better. If it comes from an obscure person, it is still far more useful than a mere recitation of the same information that's already present in the CV; and it's far more useful than unhelpful information, no matter how famous the person.
(I have seen cases where applicants included personal recommendations from senators and in one case the US president. These letters not only did not help, they reduced the ranking of the applicants, because they were inappropriate and reflected poorly on the applicants' judgement and understanding of the field.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/17
| 224
| 958
|
<issue_start>username_0: I Submitted a paper 2 months ago, the current status is "With Editor" and the status date of the manuscript (from With Editor to With Editor!) has been changed twice. What does it mean?<issue_comment>username_1: I would not deduce anything from this. Most likely the system changes the date whenever the editor accesses the article (or the editor does not use the system in the way it was intended).
Also, it happens that the state is not accurate (e.g., in reality, the paper is already with the reviewers), but there is no way to know that.
Anyway, many journals have a processing time span that is much longer than two months. If after some time the state is still "with editor", you might politely contact the editor to inquire about the process.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This probably means the assigned editor changed. This can happen if, e.g., the first assigned editor declines to handle the paper.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/17
| 2,872
| 11,979
|
<issue_start>username_0: Would it be rude to email a famous professor asking for a recommendation letter to Dphil, if I had published in a high or moderately high ranking journal in her/his field and just have letters from foreign unknown professors?
The professor does not know me apart from the published paper. *Information about whether the professor knows the paper, or knows me due to the paper, might be edited in later.* I was thinking to add my grades (the lowest is an A-), curriculum, and send to professors that work in my subject (it is a very small field). But if it is rude doing this, I don't think it could improve my case.<issue_comment>username_1: The benefit of recommendation letters is that they give insight into abilities that are not reflected in the rest of your application. Your grades and your publication are already in your application. A professor who doesn't know anything else about you has nothing to write that will help you.
To directly answer your question: it comes across more naïve/inexperienced than rude, but either way I do not see how it will help your case.
P.S. This answer assumes that the professor is *not* already familiar with your work before your email. To be more specific, I'm imagining you sending unsolicited emails to a bunch of the biggest names in your field (selected purely because they are "famous"), who have not previously heard of you or your work (as far as you know), asking them to write a recommendation letter for you entirely on the basis of your having published a paper in a journal.
If the professor is already familiar with your work (e.g. has cited it, or has had an email correspondence with you about it), then I agree with [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/75342/11365) that his/her letter can potentially be helpful. Similarly, I think [username_6](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/75347/11365) offers some useful advice about attempting this in a more nuanced - and potentially more effective - way.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: Adding on to @username_1's answer, most professors tend to only write recommendations if they know the candidate for some time or worked/researched with them for a certain *minimum* period of time. There are also very few institutions who may require LoR's from people whom you are known to for at least *X* amount of time. Even if not, an LoR which is just a repeat of the résumé may not so serve your purpose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Such a letter wouldn't help you.
Since the professor doesn't know you, the best possible outcome would be for them to give very generic praise of you. Chances are the admissions committee will swiftly disregard this letter.
If you look into what makes a good recommendation letter, you will find that it's not so much the prestige of the professor, but how closely they worked with you, and whether they give specific examples of your good qualities. Occasionally you might get situations where a famous professor is so famous, that merely their good word is enough to get you in - but this seems to be the exception rather than the rule. It is also very awkward to write a letter for someone you don't know well.
I would think about finding a more suitable recommender. Granted, if you have not only published, but the publication has attracted correspondence from major researchers, this sounds like it would give you a huge advantage over other applicants - and in principle one could write "I don't know this person but I've read their paper, which is very good - here are all the things this person did right in this paper". It still sounds like a stretch to me. Perhaps talk about the paper a lot in your statement of purpose, and hopefully it comes up during the interview.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Let me disagree completely with all the other answers here, that I think have missed a crucial point of your question. In short: *I believe it is a reasonable plan to ask for the letter*.
Here's why:
The OP has published a paper in a high ranking venue. Now, if this venue is really a top place, and the OP thinks that the professor **knows** about the result, which is supposedly a great result, then the fact that the professor **doesn't know personally the OP is a huge advantage**. This is the best recommendation that one can get: someone that doesn't know him/her but have heard of his/her result, based solely on its scientific merit!
P.S. do not add your grades. Ask for a reference based solely on the result, and explain your contribution if you're a coauthor.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: **No**
If I was part of the admissions board, and received a letter of recommendation saying essentially "I don't know them personally, but this paper they wrote is great", this is what I would be thinking:
>
> You are applying to a place where you believe no-one is capable of evaluating your paper on its own merits, so you need to get someone else to look at it and explain its quality to them. In that case, why are you even applying? It's clear that there is nothing you can learn from them. After all, if they are not even competent enough to evaluate your previous paper, how are they going to be able to evaluate any future work?
>
>
>
I wouldn't dismiss you out of hand for it, but it would definitely count strongly against you - someone who thinks they already know more than the professor is not someone I would want to be teaching, and is almost certainly going to be causing problems throughout their course - potentially even legal trouble, if they start making accusations of discrimination when the professors give them anything less than full marks.
If you think your paper is very good, and should be considered, then include it with your application. Otherwise the best case you could hope for is being damned by faint praise; the worst is something like I describe above.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: While I don't really like adding answers to questions that have too many already, I also think it's a little hard to cut through the arguing any other way.
1. It's not rude to ask for a letter of recommendation. Ever. (I mean, if you do it rudely, then yes, but the bare fact of asking isn't). It might be unlikely to succeed, or unrealistic in some cases, but it's not rude.
2. You should try to ascertain whether this is a normal thing to do in your field. In my field (mathematics), it borders on inconceivable that an undergrad would carry out and publish truly impressive work without an established researcher in the field supervising them and able to write a detailed letter about it. Maybe there are some other fields where that can be the case, though I can't say I know what they would be (perhaps some of the other answerers are). Similarly, JeffE's advice to try to create a dossier of the level that might be appropriate for a faculty position sounds completely preposterous to me, but I suppose it must not be in computer science.
3. Whenever you ask someone for a letter of recommendation, think about what you are hoping the person will say, and whether they are placed well to say it. So, I would only consider asking for a person to write a letter based purely on having read my research if I knew they were familiar with it, and could place it in a context that is not obvious to the people reading the letter. It can be very valuable to have a letter saying essentially "this paper is actually really important. here is why." I've read such letters, I've written such letters. But the paper has to be really important (in the view of the author) for such a letter to work. I suspect a lot of the argument here is based around whether the answerer really thinks this is an impressive publication or not (which we are all guessing about).
So, if I were you, I would ask some of your professors whether they really think this potential letter writer will be impressed by the publication. If they think maybe yes, then you can email her/him, and say:
*Dear Prof. X,*
*I'm a student at the University of Y and am applying to graduate schools in country Z (or maybe be more specific) in underwater basket weaving, with a focus on the use of hemp. Prof. W thought you might be interested in this publication of mine, since it relates to your work on macramae at the bottom of the Mariana Trench. I was wondering if you thought you could write a strong recommendation for me on the basis of this publication. Thank you very much for your time.*
*Sincerely,*
*<NAME>*
Asking someone if they think they are able to write a strong letter for you is good way of leaving them an easy out, and not getting a terrible letter since someone finds it easier to write a terrible letter than to say no (it happens). I would almost certainly reject such a request since I really wouldn't feel like I could write a strong letter. But if the publication really is that good, maybe someone will feel like they can.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_7: The point to a letter of recommendation is that it is a recommendation. If they don't know you, then what is their basis for recommending you? If they're straightforward and honest, they can't. Therefore, the request is basically asking someone to lie. Yes, that is rude.
Hence, I favor the first sentence of [username_2](http://academia.stackexchange.com/a/75333/30772)'s answer.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: A recommendation is about a person. A review is about a piece of work. Such a professor may review your work, but he is in no position to give a recommendation, since he does not KNOW YOU. I would not give a recommendation to someone I did not know, and in fact, would probably write back telling such a person that his request is not appropriate, exactly for this reason.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I agree with username_4 and JeffE: letters of recommendation from people who just know you via your reputation "is pure gold" (@JeffE).
A friend of mine is applying for an [O-1 visa](https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-workers/o-1-visa-individuals-extraordinary-ability-or-achievement). Apart from papers and citations, press coverage etc, a crucial part of the application is 7 - 10 letters of recommendation.
Her employer is hiring a lawyer to help her on the process. Here is their suggestion to have a strong application: 3 letters from academic colleagues (including PhD advisor etc), 3 letters from industry, and **2 letters from people who just knows her via reputation** (papers etc).
Applying for an O-1 visa is not the same as applying for a PhD (but a lot more difficult IMHO), but I think the way profiles are evaluated is similar. And I believe the lawyer know what they are doing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: On one hand, I wouldn't "ask a famous professor who doesn't know me personally for a recommendation letter." On the other hand, your idea of asking a famous professor in your field to endorse you, based on your work in a high ranking journal, is a very good one.
The "bridge" solution is to get to know the famous professor personally. Since you have published in the same field as him, there must be plenty of people that you know that he also knows. (The editors of the journal for starters.) Find out which of your acquaintances is in this category and ask at least one of them for a personal introduction, or at least a letter/email of introduction. If all else fails, you might manufacture your own introduction by emailing him on his work in your common field, and perhaps asking him to comment on yours.
The likelihood is that you will get a good letter of recommendation. But the tactics in the above paragraph were to "take the temperature." There's a small chance that he disagrees with your approach or (less likely) sees you as a threat. You want to guard against that small chance of getting an unsuitable recommender.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/17
| 1,327
| 5,675
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in engineering and I was warned by a colleague years ago that I should not cite materials on arXiv because they are not peer reviewed. Although it was never clear to me what peer reviewed meant because the papers on there seemed to be well maintained and the ones I have came across has been theoretically sound. Academia stackexchange certainly didn't help in relieving some of those anxieties with people asking if they are "[ruined](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26820/can-posting-to-arxiv-ruin-your-reputation)" for posting on arXiv.
One can understand my point of view better by considering that in engineering there are well established conferences and list of papers published through those conferences (although not all high quality). Browsing through a list of citations published by engineers, there is a definitive lack of "arXiv" related papers. This is exacerbated by the fact that arXiv papers seem to be less applied and more theoretical, "mathy", so they are largely hidden from view for the typical engineer.
But from my recent experiences, it seems that a few fairly notable researchers in my field have extensive track record of publishing materials on arXiv. People such as <NAME> who works in nonlinear dynamical systems and <NAME>. I have hypothesized in the past that very well established researchers are submitting papers on arXiv instead of science journals because they would like a wider audience, and undergraduate researchers are submitting on arXiv because there is no other venue for them. But of course I am not sure if that is indeed the case.
Now I am currently reading some material published on arXiv by someone who I am not very familiar with. I am still not 100% confident on the "quality" of the paper i.e. scientific accuracy of theoretical and experimental results. But I believe that I would be more open to using materials on arXiv in the future if I can understand the motivation behind submitting to arXiv i.e. whether if they are just low quality papers without any other place that accepts them.
Can someone please offer a break down of some the reasons why one would publish to arXiv?<issue_comment>username_1: The major use case of arXiv is for disseminating manuscripts that you *also* publish in a journal or conference. By posting a preprint on arXiv, people can find your research, build on it, cite it, and give you feedback on it *immediately*, while at the same time the same work goes through the (sometimes slow) peer review process. Some of these papers will fall out of the peer review pipeline at some point, and only appear on arXiv, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are less useful, important, or sound.
To give a specific example, in the last year or so I have been working in an area so new that *most* of the relevant research is still only available on arXiv. I expect these papers will eventually appear in journals too, but the slow peer review process means that the latest journal issues do not represent the state of the art for this particular topic. Conferences have a quicker peer review cycle and are more current, but most only publish relatively short papers.
arXiv is also useful for work that is in a format not suited for a conference or journal (e.g. a thesis), or for extended versions of papers that are published somewhere else.
I would caution against rules like "I should not cite materials on arXiv because they are not peer reviewed." Peer review does not guarantee sound, high quality research, nor is the inverse true. You should critically evaluate each paper, peer reviewed or not, on its individual merits. (Also see [this related question on Math Overflow](https://mathoverflow.net/questions/41141/should-i-not-cite-an-arxiv-org-paper).)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The most important thing is to know if peer-reviewed journals in your field will accept to publish your article if it has previously been published on arXiv.
In my field, chemistry, the answer is no, so publishing on arXiv has never been an option. Note though that some publishers allow an accepted paper to be published on arXiv, but that is after it has been accepted.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Part of your question seems to be "Why do some researchers submit to arXiv while others don't"?
A point not yet mentioned: arXiv only covers a few specific subject areas. It's the very first line on the home page:
>
> Open access to 1,175,314 e-prints in **Physics, Mathematics, Computer Science, Quantitative Biology, Quantitative Finance and Statistics**
>
>
>
Since engineering isn't on that list, that would be an excellent reason for most engineering researchers not to post their work to arXiv.
The "notable researchers in your field" who you mention as being prolific arXiv posters are, in some sense, not really in your field. Strogatz is a mathematician and Baez is a mathematical physicist. Both those fields are covered by arXiv, so it makes sense that they would use it.
Now it's entirely possible that although you think of your field as engineering, some of your papers might contain "enough" physics or mathematics to be on-topic for the corresponding sections of arXiv. But you might have to think about it first.
It should also be strongly emphasized that these people are not submitting to arXiv **instead of** peer-reviewed journals, but **in addition to**. This is perfectly acceptable by the standards of most journals in mathematics and physics. There are plenty of peer-reviewed outlets for their work and they're using them. Just look at their CVs.
Upvotes: 4
|
2016/08/17
| 523
| 2,352
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some time ago, I worked as a teaching assistant in a college. That college had an online form for collecting student feedback. After the end of the year, they sent me an official letter with my final "teaching grade" and the verbal feedback, both of which are very good.
Now, I am near the end of my Ph.D. and I am working on my CV. Should I include this feedback? I thought of including it in the end, after the "recommendations" section, since these are officially-documented recommendations from past students. Is this a good idea?<issue_comment>username_1: If you are applying for a job where teaching experience is relevant (e.g., post-doc, assistant professor), you might include it in your CV.
Instead of putting it in the recommendation section, I would put it in the professional experience (or similar section). Something like: "Responsible for teaching instruction XYZ in semester ABC, student feedback: very good".
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is becoming more and more normal to include a so-called 'pedagogical portfolio' along with your scientific CV. This is due to the fact that many positions actually require a substantial amount of teaching, and one has (chokingly, I know!) found out that experienced teachers are often better teachers.
A ped. portfolio would include:
* Summary of teaching experience
* Experience developing teaching (teaching plans, course plans etc.)
* Experience developing teaching material
* Student feedback
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm sure conventions vary, but I know at my university in Australia, when going for promotion, it is important to show a contribution to teaching. However, they specifically suggest avoiding listing individual student comments. The argument is that any academic can find at least a few students who have said something nice about them at some point.
So in summary, I think that official student rated quality of teaching scores are useful, particularly if the scoring is understood by the people reading your CV. My main point would be that selectively taking individual comments is probably not that helpful.
Better means of demonstrating an achievements in teaching include: initiatives in developing content, quality of teaching scores, teaching responsibilities, teaching awards, etc.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/17
| 491
| 1,769
|
<issue_start>username_0: How am I supposed to provide US Universities during my application process a GPA if there is no official way to convert a 1.6 (German grade) to US GPA ?
I have tried to find a ressource but every website sais something else and there is no official conversion table.
Do the admission offices calculate it anyways on their own (based on transcripts) or how does it work?<issue_comment>username_1: You can always call the school to find out. I'm sure you won't be the first foreign student to have applied. That said, it looks like Wikipedia has a pretty good page on how to convert, and your score should be somewhere in the 3.75 range or so.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_grading_in_Germany>
You'll have to go course by course to find the right number. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm an American who got my MSc in Germany so I've had to do this both ways. It's a pain. I know for employment in the US (if I use my MSc to try and get a job etc), the US Department of Education requires you to hire a company to do this. It typically costs a few hundred dollars and I suspect you'll have to do this at some point anyway to get into a US school. There is a list of companies "recognized" by the Department of Education available on [this page] (<https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/edlite-visitus-forrecog.html>).
I also found this chart on [this page](https://welcometogermerica.com/2015/07/american-to-german-grade-conversion.html). It's less official and you'll probably need an official transcript evaluation anyway, but here's a quick one:
[German to US Grades](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HcCax.png)
**So your 1.6 would be about (slightly higher than) a 3.6.**
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/17
| 1,086
| 4,709
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm planning to attend a prestigious conference in computer science. The registration fees are very high (~150$ per day). I'm presenting as well, but on a co-located event directly after the main conference.
I don't know whether my university will fund my registration fee for the whole conference. They will most certainly fund the fee for the little event where I'm presenting. In case they don't fund the whole conference, *is it acceptable to show up to the conference without being registered?* (Of course, I wouldn't have the conference meals with the other participants on the days I'm not registered.)<issue_comment>username_1: No, it is not acceptable.
You can of course email the organisers and ask if you can participate without paying, but do not be surprised if they say no.
(Please note that conference registration fees cover lots of things besides the lunch. Among others, conference registration fees may cover the rent of the hall in which you are sitting, and expenses related to the speaker who is giving the talk. Conference organisers are definitely not expecting random people to come there without registering, unless they explicitly advertise this possibility.)
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Yes, it is possible**, and even students and postdocs in top (and rich) schools do this sometimes. However, your question is unclear, since you asked whether it is "OK". But it is not clear **OK by which standards**? Moral? Legal? Is it normative? Is it widely acceptable?
You can see by <NAME>'s answer that some academics does not see this as "acceptable", i.e., they perceive this behavior as a morally bad behavior. Some people, me included, have a different value system, and they perceive this as mildly okay, but it is unclear whether the latter group of people is marginal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Aside from conference and registration. The hotel rent their hall for functions and most of the time its per head payment which include all the charges. Since they have to issue you card to wear during conference to identify you as paid participant.
So to avoid being refused entry and feeling bad infront of others just go present at your slot and enjoy what is offered on the day you are legally paid for.
Request can be made but if lot of students do this it can raise concerns for management and organizers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: People are discussing whether its OK or not. I'd rather respond in context of career impact. The risk is that the people who invited you would think of you as a "*[schnorrer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schnorrer)*", and your future invitations may dry up.
Also, many conferences employ professional conference organizers. If there is a chunk of unpaid attendees, you may impact the relationship between the community holding the conference and the paid organizer, making it a little more difficult for that conference to be held in the future.
If you can pay for one day, do it, and be thankful that the conference had a mechanism that allowed you to do so.
Sometimes, though, if the event is internal to YOUR university, organizers make accommodations for local faculty and students to attend at discount or no cost. Good local attendance can enhance the reputation of a department. If this applies in this case, you should talk to the conference organizer.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: **Tl;dr:** You should ask your mentor what the particular policy and culture at the conference you are attending is.
---
At least in the humanities and social sciences, it depends.
A. There are many conferences where registration is heavily monitored and you cannot audit sessions for free. These tend to be conferences that rely on registration fees to pay for their hotel/facility costs or the running costs of the sponsoring organizations.
B. There are conferences that would prefer it if people registered/paid, but otherwise do not enforce registration to attend sessions.
C. And then there are some conferences that are entirely paid through internal and external grants and not conference registration fees, so they are entirely open to the public (although some sessions and meals may be restricted).
D. Finally, there are also some communities of scholars that think that type A conferences are morally bankrupt, and so actively encourage their students to "borrow" their name tag / registration badges (which leads to all hilarity during the after-panel social interactions): "I always imagined you as ..... um... older... [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Goodall).... um.... congrats on your transition?."
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/08/18
| 439
| 1,900
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm applying for study in a particular area of math.
To keep matters short , I was an undergraduate that took the graduate version of a particular class and ended up with a B+ . I had never taken any class on the topic before this.
The department received several complaints about the professor in the course and other professors in the department even acknowledged that the distribution of the grades was quite terrible , not expected for a graduate course.
Since the grade is in a class that is in my proposed area of study , should I mention it at all in PhD admissions? My supervisor and other professors in the department said they would mention that the class in question was terrible but I'm not sure if I should talk about it myself.
I feel kind of strange not addressing the fact that my proposed area is the only course which I didn't do great in. For some context every other grade I've ever received are great so there is no pattern of doing bad or anything.<issue_comment>username_1: If you could get the distribution of all marks from all students in that class,from the secretary of study, for the semester you took the exam, you could mention that. But a not A is not a reason not to be admitted in a phd course.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: A B+ is not a bad grade for an undergrad in a grad course. I suspect that it will not raise red flags in an admissions process. The discussion on "complaints" or "the class was terrible" has no place in your application package, especially coming from you, and it would make the applicant come off as a whiner. You took a course, you got a grade. Done.
If admissions slots were limited, and I had to make an otherwise equal choice between two students, I'd opt for the one that looks more mature, and complaining in your application package about a course does not make one appear mature.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/18
| 664
| 2,788
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have received a Japanese government scholarship for research and masters degree. While I originally thought it would be easy to get in touch with a professor after having received the scholarship, it's proven to be more difficult than I expected.
Do you have any suggestions?<issue_comment>username_1: Usually, your contact person at the Japanese government scholarship office should be able to help connect you with faculty at relevant (and eligible) institutions.
Alternately, your university may have a sister-school relationship with a Japanese university. Your study-abroad office should know their counterparts in Japan and they can help arrange introductions.
Finally, you might want to find scholars who are active abroad. I would see if your national association in your discipline has a searchable directory of foreign scholars. You could then search for members in Japan and use that to contact potential candidates.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I received such a MEXT research student scholarship from October 2012 to March 2014. (In my case, I'd already made contact with a Japanese professor who I wanted to study with).
There's several things to consider in terms of how to contact people.
1. You need to search Japanese university websites in your field. This is going to be nearly impossible if you don't have any Japanese fluency.
2. Then you're going to want to find researchers who you could imagine working with presumably you'd narrow it in terms of both research interest and their ability to use languages you can use (e.g., English).
3. Write them a letter explaining you are receiving a scholarship from the Monkasho (文部科学省) and would like to study in their university, starting from being a *kenkyuusei* (研究生).
4. See who responds.
As a basic rule, you are more likely to get a response from professors at universities that are used to hosting international students with MEXT scholarships. This will mean national universities like: Tokyo University, Kyoto University, Tohoku University, Kyuusyuu University, Hokkaido University, Nagoya University, Hitotsubashi, etc. and well-known private universities like Waseda, ICU, Keio, Aoyama.
More minor schools (prefectural or city ones) will probably not be super familiar with the procedures and would require strong support and interest from the advisor -- who doesn't get much time or money to help work on this (and it's quite the administrative hassle).
---
Separately, Japan is a place where knowing people is more than half the battle so it's hard to build connections from scratch. Instead, you're hoping that at least one person will respond and either be open to hosting your or know someone who is that they are willing to forward your e-mail to.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/18
| 676
| 2,992
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been collaborating on a project with a researcher in another field (I am being vague on purpose here in case they read this), which so far has pretty much gone nowhere. I've done a few preliminary calculations, though, and they want to publish them - I suspect they are under pressure to up their publication count.
I don't think that what we've done so far is worth publishing; there is nothing actually wrong, but I don't think there is anything new or interesting. I could imagine developing this into something useful, but it is not a high priority for me, and this collaboration does not seem to be working out, so I don't think pushing to hold off on publication would do more than draw things out.
The possible paper is in a field which I haven't worked in previously, but which I could see myself coming back to in the future (it is interesting to me, it is related to my main field, and I've picked up a fair amount about it by osmosis). I'm worried that if I approach other people in that field in the future (and I would need collaborators to get started effectively) the one thing of mine that they will see will be this paper, which will reflect poorly on me (in a way I would like to think is not accurate).
Should I decline authorship of this paper?<issue_comment>username_1: So long as there's nothing wrong with the *quality* of the work, I'd let the person in the field make the decision about it's worthiness for publication. Often, what's humdrum in one field is new and exciting in another. I've seen people making livings moving routine info from one area to another.
When seeking collaborators in the future, my opinion is that having published a solid, if not exciting, piece of work in the field will be more advantageous than having published nothing.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think you should read it carefully and if you do not detect anything you do not agree to keep being an author. It happened to me that I did some works and people did not put me in the authors and I felt very bitter after. So I would be grateful if I had more publications, for positions, grants, etc.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If the work is in early stages but indicates that its going to be exciting in coming future. You can change the paper to review paper + your early experiment or analysis/ tests.
Once done you can then in your next paper extend it to be more elaborate according to your novel idea. In this case people reading will understand that the work is in starting phase and you have strong knowledge ( depends how clear is your review of related work ) and then what you have proposed and what it can be.
Quality comes with better ideas and writing skills. I have seen people with excellent writing skills presenting their poor work in a very scientic way, and also with poor writing skills presenting novel ideas as something worthless. So emphasize on writing and quality both.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/18
| 567
| 2,277
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently meet someone attended a US school still using the quarter system.
Most of the country uses semesters, and I've heard several theories as to why, the most popular being that the semester system is easier for university to administrate. I've also heard it is so the university breaks will line up better with K-12 school break schedule.
No one has ever explained to me why semesters or more efficient, or more family friendly. I only know 1 person educated with the quarter system in the last 10 years. **Is there a reason most US universities adopted semesters?**<issue_comment>username_1: I'll let someone else address why schools ended up on semesters rather than quarters, but I'd note that there are some benefits to being on the "standard" academic calendar, whichever it happens to be:
* Many internship programs are built around the standard academic calendar.
* This is particularly extreme for law schools, where the internship experience is both very important and very structured. Even schools on the quarter system run their law schools on the semester system.
* Similarly, there are many one semester thematic programs that faculty might want to attend. Spring semester programs typically overlap two quarters, meaning participants from quarter system schools have to either cut their participation short or arrange to be away from teaching for two thirds of the year instead of half.
So once it was clear that the semester system was predominating, other schools had incentives to hop on board even if the mildly preferred quarters on their own merits.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are arguments in favor of both semesters and quarters, but these seem to be inconclusive. (In the U.S.:) In fact, in the 1960s and early 1970s, many places were on semesters... but there was a fad of switching to quarters, so many switched. Then, in the 1990s, there was a fad to switch (yes, "back") to semesters.
So it does *not* seem to be that it was eventually discovered that semesters are better. Nor that quarters are better. Plausibly semesters are easier to administer, since there're fewer registration events per year.
On the other hand, students seem to like the shorter "marches"...
Upvotes: 3
|
2016/08/18
| 1,987
| 8,425
|
<issue_start>username_0: After reading some the posts here about graduate admissions for PhD/masters in mathematics in different countries, it seems like the requirements are quite a lot higher than what I have in my country. Just for clarification, in my university (the Open University of Israel), there's no undergraduate research besides one undergraduate seminar. I've never heard of anyone from my university writing a paper in mathematics while attending the Open University of Israel. I've already read the ways to stand out in admissions on this site, and for me, research cannot be one of them.
In addition, since my school is an online school, none of my recommendations will be personal, and none of my teachers writing the recommendations are well known in their field, since they all only teach and don't do any research. I suppose that in this sense my university is the equivalent of an American community college.
Therefore, based on my readings here, the best ways for me to stand out for graduate admissions are on the Cover Letter (which I need to write), GPA (currently around 88% average, when the average for mathematics in my university is around 65%), and TOEFL/GRE (TOEFL, I may not need to do, since I'm a native English speaker, and the GRE's I still need to decide if I want to do, since I'm not yet sure that I want to apply in the United States). In addition, I'm graduating in a year and a half, so until then, I'm planning to fly to different universities around the world once every six months to meet with the graduate math program coordinators (I've already met with the coordinator for the math program at Bonn University and I've set up a meeting at Trinity College Dublin already) to get information and to also start making connections.
Given these specific circumstances that cannot be changed (graduating without a single paper from an unrated university, with weak recommendations), are there any other creative or unusual ways (which I will really need), besides improving the GPA, getting excellent GRE grades, and working on a great cover letter to stand out in graduate admissions for universities in the United States, Europe, and Canada? If I can't get accepted after graduation to a university abroad, my alternate plan is to do a masters here in Israel, and then do a PhD abroad.<issue_comment>username_1: The first task is to figure out why you want to seek/acquire a PhD in math, since the normal point of a PhD is to equip you to do research. If your answer is that you want to do research, but you haven't had an opportunity then the problem transforms to "How can I do research and communicate that successfully?" We live in a golden age of information, there is a tremendous amount of problems and work in-progrees that are freely available on the internet. Pick something you are interested in and start publicly blogging about your ideas, your accomplishments, your dead-ends. Communicate with other people in the world who are working on similar problems. As you gain some accomplishments and receive positive feedback solicit suggestions for what Universities and professors are working in that problem area.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: You seem to have a bit of a nest egg to spend on this. I suggest that rather than spending it on the travel plans you outlined, you use it to finance a three to six month period in a place where you can be involved in undergraduate research. Of course, you would need to do some legwork before going.
The trips you have planned seem unnecessary to me. If you want to meet with a graduate math program coordinator abroad, set up a Skype or phone meeting.
I don't know the panorama in Israel, so I can't rule it out as a possible place for a research project.
My proposal would give you valuable experience and hopefully a strong recommendation letter. If you're very lucky, you might co-author a publication (but please don't assume a priori that this will be the case).
A second suggestion: get involved in something that combines community service and math. (This may take some creativity.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: tl;dr
Get a MSc from a top Israeli university first. It will practically ensure that you will get accepted to just about any PhD program that you want to. And a math MSc from a top Israeli uni is a pretty good thing to have. (edit see below)
---
I'm an Israeli currently studying outside of Israel, so I might give you a more relevant perspective on the issue. Although I'm in earth sciences, and not math, I think you will find this useful.
I am having a hard time understanding some of your circumstances. You claim that you will graduate in a year and a half. Assuming you are studying full-time, you are only halfway through and it may be too early to start thinking about your PhD, let alone fly to institutions in the world and meet with them (unless you happen to be there as a tourist).
You are correct that graduating from the Israeli Open University is hardly beneficial in terms of reputation and prestige. It is also close to impossible to get meaningful and honest recommendation letters. I do not know how much people trust GPA scores from a distance learning institution, and this may also hurt your chances. Unfortunately, as hardly any research is done at OU, I doubt that you will find a research partner to work on a publication. Even if your numbers are right, the fact that you do not study in a university where you have day-to-day interaction with other students and senior stuff is not going to help the admissions committees to choose you over other candidates.
Instead of thinking about PhD research abroad, I suggest you start with a MSc degree back home in Israel. There are several reasons for that:
1. Math degrees in Israeli universities have excellent reputation (particularly Tel Aviv, HUJI and Technion). This alone might boost your chances.
2. You are still an undergrad, halfway through. You have not been exposed to research yet. If you were in a physical university, you might be exposed to research around you, which is something. Yet you don't even have that. You do not know if research is what you want to do. Who knows, you might get offered a job and leave academia. Going for MSc will be your "introduction" to research and will give you a chance to get your desired publication, if you wish to pursue this further.
3. Starting a PhD program with MSc background will make you a much better student. I can sometimes see the difference between PhD students with and without prior MSc experience in the institution I am currently at.
4. Admission committees, in general, look favourably upon applicants with proved research experience in the form of MSc.
I will give you an example from my own experience. Having graduated my BSc with a research component, I was eligible for PhD studies abroad without having to get MSc. However, I did study for MSc in Israel, mostly for the reasons above. It made getting accepted to my institution of choice much easier, I had more than one publication by the time I applied for the PhD, it gave me a different perspective on what research is and what is it that I want to do, or more importantly, do not want to do.
---
**EDIT**
OP mentioned that conducting research in Israel is not possible due to personal reasons. I don't see how this sits with OP's idea of taking MSc research in Israel, but here are two more ideas:
1. Go for a one year Honours degree in countries that have it (for example, UK or Australia). This is something that's usually done straight after BSc and is one year of research.
2. Go for MSc in a country where doing this is common as a precursor to PhD research (continental Europe mostly, also Israel btw).
These two are very expensive solutions because you can't usually get funded or a scholarship for this, unlike doing PhD research. I would personally go for number two from the list above.
Again, getting straight to PhD after finishing your BSc in the Open University is almost impossible. If you do get it, it's probably in a low ranked institution and that might not be the best thing for your career. Regardless of whether you are accepted or not, I still think that you should have some kind of research experience before going for a PhD, particularly as you're done your education so far in a research-free environment.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/08/18
| 1,628
| 6,945
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've always wanted to study abroad simply because I believe knowledge expands a person's world view. However, I've not been able to find a program that I can fit into.
I had my undergraduate degree in Economics, which I really didn't find interesting, I enjoyed and can still recall after five year topics from my Psychology electives simply because they were more practical. Although I found Game theory quite interesting.
I've been programming for over a decade now and work full time as a software developer and despite living in a low wage country, am quite comfortable.
However, I would like to pursue an advanced degree. I tried reaching out to Computer Science departments in the US, Canada and Europe but most keep referring to my first degree. I would like to find out if there are fields that combine my interest.<issue_comment>username_1: The first task is to figure out why you want to seek/acquire a PhD in math, since the normal point of a PhD is to equip you to do research. If your answer is that you want to do research, but you haven't had an opportunity then the problem transforms to "How can I do research and communicate that successfully?" We live in a golden age of information, there is a tremendous amount of problems and work in-progrees that are freely available on the internet. Pick something you are interested in and start publicly blogging about your ideas, your accomplishments, your dead-ends. Communicate with other people in the world who are working on similar problems. As you gain some accomplishments and receive positive feedback solicit suggestions for what Universities and professors are working in that problem area.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: You seem to have a bit of a nest egg to spend on this. I suggest that rather than spending it on the travel plans you outlined, you use it to finance a three to six month period in a place where you can be involved in undergraduate research. Of course, you would need to do some legwork before going.
The trips you have planned seem unnecessary to me. If you want to meet with a graduate math program coordinator abroad, set up a Skype or phone meeting.
I don't know the panorama in Israel, so I can't rule it out as a possible place for a research project.
My proposal would give you valuable experience and hopefully a strong recommendation letter. If you're very lucky, you might co-author a publication (but please don't assume a priori that this will be the case).
A second suggestion: get involved in something that combines community service and math. (This may take some creativity.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: tl;dr
Get a MSc from a top Israeli university first. It will practically ensure that you will get accepted to just about any PhD program that you want to. And a math MSc from a top Israeli uni is a pretty good thing to have. (edit see below)
---
I'm an Israeli currently studying outside of Israel, so I might give you a more relevant perspective on the issue. Although I'm in earth sciences, and not math, I think you will find this useful.
I am having a hard time understanding some of your circumstances. You claim that you will graduate in a year and a half. Assuming you are studying full-time, you are only halfway through and it may be too early to start thinking about your PhD, let alone fly to institutions in the world and meet with them (unless you happen to be there as a tourist).
You are correct that graduating from the Israeli Open University is hardly beneficial in terms of reputation and prestige. It is also close to impossible to get meaningful and honest recommendation letters. I do not know how much people trust GPA scores from a distance learning institution, and this may also hurt your chances. Unfortunately, as hardly any research is done at OU, I doubt that you will find a research partner to work on a publication. Even if your numbers are right, the fact that you do not study in a university where you have day-to-day interaction with other students and senior stuff is not going to help the admissions committees to choose you over other candidates.
Instead of thinking about PhD research abroad, I suggest you start with a MSc degree back home in Israel. There are several reasons for that:
1. Math degrees in Israeli universities have excellent reputation (particularly Tel Aviv, HUJI and Technion). This alone might boost your chances.
2. You are still an undergrad, halfway through. You have not been exposed to research yet. If you were in a physical university, you might be exposed to research around you, which is something. Yet you don't even have that. You do not know if research is what you want to do. Who knows, you might get offered a job and leave academia. Going for MSc will be your "introduction" to research and will give you a chance to get your desired publication, if you wish to pursue this further.
3. Starting a PhD program with MSc background will make you a much better student. I can sometimes see the difference between PhD students with and without prior MSc experience in the institution I am currently at.
4. Admission committees, in general, look favourably upon applicants with proved research experience in the form of MSc.
I will give you an example from my own experience. Having graduated my BSc with a research component, I was eligible for PhD studies abroad without having to get MSc. However, I did study for MSc in Israel, mostly for the reasons above. It made getting accepted to my institution of choice much easier, I had more than one publication by the time I applied for the PhD, it gave me a different perspective on what research is and what is it that I want to do, or more importantly, do not want to do.
---
**EDIT**
OP mentioned that conducting research in Israel is not possible due to personal reasons. I don't see how this sits with OP's idea of taking MSc research in Israel, but here are two more ideas:
1. Go for a one year Honours degree in countries that have it (for example, UK or Australia). This is something that's usually done straight after BSc and is one year of research.
2. Go for MSc in a country where doing this is common as a precursor to PhD research (continental Europe mostly, also Israel btw).
These two are very expensive solutions because you can't usually get funded or a scholarship for this, unlike doing PhD research. I would personally go for number two from the list above.
Again, getting straight to PhD after finishing your BSc in the Open University is almost impossible. If you do get it, it's probably in a low ranked institution and that might not be the best thing for your career. Regardless of whether you are accepted or not, I still think that you should have some kind of research experience before going for a PhD, particularly as you're done your education so far in a research-free environment.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2016/08/19
| 2,239
| 9,513
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a 2nd year PhD student in Germany. I am working on computational mechanics. It is on modeling the mechanical behavior of a composite coating. My background is metallurgical engineering. When I had started with the research, I was very interested in the field. It's a field which was a hot research area a decade back, but now it's not.
As time went by, l have grown unsure of the implications of my research. I feel that my research is wasteful as I would never be able to publish in top journals like *Nature* and *Science*. As my research area does not belong to a hot field. I feel that I should have researched a bit more about the research area before coming for PhD. I think I made a poor decision.
All these concerns make me distracted and unenthusiastic about my work. I feel that even if I graduate, I won't be able get any good academic positions.
Are these concerns common among PhD students?<issue_comment>username_1: From your question it seems that the only reason you chose computational mechanics was because it was "hot", and you are now regretting your decision because the field is no longer "hot" and thus it's hard to publish in high-impact journals. This is the wrong approach, not just because it's impossible to predict what topic will be "hot" when you enter the job market. More importantly, as a general principle, you should choose a research topic that you are really passionate about. Since doing a PhD is a long, hard, tedious, and sometimes frustrating experience, you will be miserable if you do not actually love your research. What matters at this point to you is not whether such dissatisfaction is common; rather, you should carefully reconsider your decision to enter the field in the first place and reevaluate your values and priorities. Such introspection will help you decide your next step. Depending on which stage you are in your PhD career, switching to an entirely different field might be the best choice.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: My take on this: yes your feelings are normal, but **Hotness is overrated** (by definition).
Researchers who are only passionate about "hot" topics are, many times, not good researchers scientifically, and professionally. The reason is that "hotness" is not intrinsic to the scientific subject you research, rather an external, almost *purely social* phenomenon. Hence, people who are after "hotness" have passion to "succeed socially" more than to seek truth and do research.
I use to stay away from hot topics. They also tend to diminish after a couple of years, and then you have to jump on the next wagon.
**Remark & reservations**: The above it is an ideal simplification of the matter, but still should be helpful to understand my argument.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Before you do anything drastic, like talking yourself out of finishing, **be certain that you're not just having a version of a typical reaction to the length and difficulty of the work.** Granted my field is different than yours, but **there's not a single member of my cohort** that hasn't go through multiple periods of feeling like their research sucks and they'll never finish. This happens despite being told by others who would know that the research is interesting, including classmates, conference attendees and advisers.
Are you currently stuck on something difficult or tedious? Were you excited when things were going well? Did you recently have to discard a bunch of work and follow a different track? **In other words, could there be a different root cause that has led you to come up with a better excuse than "this is too hard" to stop working?**
Only you can really know if you should legitimately consider leaving your PhD program, because there are just way too many factors for anyone else to get it right. There may be lots of justifications, even including a legitimate *"I just don't want to do this anymore"*, but *"because this field isn't as hot as it once was"* doesn't seem to me like a very good reason.
If every econ PhD such as myself bailed on research we didn't think would get published in the QJE, AER or Econometrica, there wouldn't be very many economists (queue self-deprecating joke about there being too many economists).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: PhD work is one of the most difficult tasks to undertake and the choice of subject for one's thesis even more so. When I started, I wasn't so much interested in "hot" topics in my field of Cybernetics, rather, what problems could be solved. This way, one could circumnavigate the publication process and get quality contributions into the public space. That said, Nature and Science are widely-read journals but also look toward others that have high impact factors, a good metric to see what is being worked on in the community. However, there is one caveat: "hot" topics would have begun to be noticed in the past. When you have noticed this, it is probably too late to get involved--unless you get lucky. What, I think, happens oftentimes with quality contributions to the state-of-the-art in academia is that they are not highly cited but because of the implications of the problem being solved, such papers are pioneering and you must wait a sufficient amount of time, generate follow-up work, and exercise patience in the field. Bottom-line, if you don't love the topic you are researching, it will only make the process harder.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I recall working with medical doctors during my Phd who always labelled topics "hot" or "not-hot", which is simply crazy from a scientific point of view but very logically for the one seeking glory and fame. Their aim with their research was to "do something hot" so they could get ontop of all the other ambitious medical doctors in their race to become head of a medical department at a high ranking hospital. They all failed. Unfortuneately science is complicated matters and the likelikhood is that when you achieve glory and fame both your youth and beauty have vanished. Alternatively, a carrier as pop star might seem as a quicker and more secure way of hitting main-stream fame.
A second note about classifying "hot" is always about finding those inventions who are reported in high ranking journals. However, these findings often represents years of hard work of groups of scientists and when finally solved the authors gets credited by others for having found the explanations or proven the theories. At that very instance - that topic is only "hot" in that particular article and chasing "hot" is like chasing the rain-bow.
My advice is to be genuinely interested in the topic you are working on and solve the problems you encounter, report the discrepances you notice or formulate theories to combine results.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Having done my PhD in germany as well, I can say that there is a lot of flexibility. And being unsure at the end of first/second year is kind of normal. This is not the topic you will be working on for the rest of your life. And PhD is just to show that you can work in a scientific manner. Computational mechanics you can apply to other fields as well. Also it should have direct applications in the automotive industry. Hotness of a subject is definitely subjective and surely not the right way as others have pointed out.
But if it is something you cannot definitely do it, then go ahead and change your subject NOW. Life is too long and two years don't really matter.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: Yes, it's normal. I would be shocked if there was ever a grad student in the history of grad school who did not at one point hate their job. I'd be shocked because it would be living proof that aliens exist and walk among us.
Of course, if you want to be tenured professor at Harvard (or, say, <NAME> - let me not be chauvinistic) and thrice Nobel laureate, it sucks to not have a hot topic. Although, consider how a topic becomes "hot" in the first place: A very talented scientist makes a fascinating discovery, and everyone wants to get a piece of the action. Fields are not "hot". Good research makes them hot.
Even if it does turn out as bad as you think, there is more to a PhD than being an academic rockstar and publishing the "next big paper". If you can finish your PhD, it proves that:
* You were disciplined enough to go through several years of independent hard work
* You could manage your time and the direction of your project effectively
* You are an expert in that field (even if your original research is unexciting, it doesn't mean that you don't have very good knowledge of existing research)
* You are smart, capable, have good critical thinking skills and so on
These may seem like boring, second rate consolation prizes, but if you think about it in perspective, there are very few people in the general population that can boast having such qualities on par with a PhD holder, let alone combine all of them. These are all very valuable things outside academia, much more valuable than what you happened to publish. Even many hirers of of professors and post-docs understand that where you published in grad school is not necessarily indicative of your *potential* as a scientist - for instance, rigor alone is not very important for *Nature* (they care about impact), but in a postdoc candidate, you might be more interested in looking at the *quality* of the work, not the relevance of the results.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/19
| 306
| 1,188
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it acceptable or appropriate to use fonts, i.e bold, italic, in an email to an academic in order to do emphasise or organise the text ?
or would it be perceived as offensive ?<issue_comment>username_1: I think this cartoon answers best your question
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4BRlc.gif)
In summary, unless absolutely necessary, use a plain text. I you feel you need to organise your text it means your email already too long. If it is a draft of the paper, use an attachment.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Unless you go full crackpot (multiple colors, fonts, all-caps in places) I don't think it's offensive.
And I occasionally italicize a word for emphasis, but only in a long and carefully written email to collaborators where we are discussing science.
I just looked through a few hundred emails that I've received, and I found that
* faculty almost never use bold or italic
* graduate students do it occasionally, especially when emailing about bureaucratic subject matter increases
* administrators do it a lot
Draw your own conclusions.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/19
| 621
| 2,716
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was recently admitted in a PhD program, I haven't started any research yet and Intended to keep my full day job and try do a research while working.
I think my bosses are unaware of this for now but the thing is that I would like to brag about me doing a PhD by posting on Facebook and LinkedIn.
Doing a research will probably put some additional pressure on me and from a certain moment on, I will probably have some duties at the University which might obligate me to spend some time on campus. That will affect to some degree when I'm able to work an probably my performance.
Would it be safe for me to post and update profiles on Social and Professional Networks and do I need to officially inform my bosses first?
**PS**. My Job is something of a embedded programmer and the future research will be about image analysis and pattern recognition. I think the job I do and the research are not directly related but after all there are embedded devices running vision algorithms. I also think that my boss could agree to a more flexible working time.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Of course you should!
>
>
>
Certain duties such as a committee meeting would require you to ask for a leave permission from your company. If you break it then, you'd be in trouble. In certain institutions, it is mandatory to provide an NoC (no objection certificate) from your company as part of the PhD admission process. You should've done it before, but the earlier you inform him, the better.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If the boss finds out later that you hide the whole scenario from him, he might get angry and if the boss sends a letter to the university that you're not allowed to study while working because their working schedule is not flexible enough, then you're doomed ;), you will just kicked out from the university or the university will ask you to prove that you'll be having free hours to study while working, so, you better inform your boss about the scenario.
P.S: To the people who ask if the university working for the boss: No, but, every university has a minimum study hours (self study hours apart from standard lectures which are held at the university) that should be spent by the student, if that requirement cannot be fulfilled by the student, his course becomes invalid, so, I just pointed out a major possibility, if the boss sends a letter, that the company doesn't allow him spare time to study (strict work schedule) then the university has the proof that he can't spend minimum compulsory self study time and then the student will be kicked out. Studying part time doesn't mean that you don't have to put minimum effort towards studies.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/08/19
| 533
| 1,986
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can anybody please provide me link from where I can subscribe to alerts for international conferences, seminar, workshop etc or postdoc positions ? This could be very useful for me as I generally miss important conferences/seminars/workshops.<issue_comment>username_1: Just google for research conference websites you will get lot of them.
I personally use Www. edas.info it sorts all the conferences according to your need e.g area, date wise, region etc
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are plenty of such services, for instance:
* <http://www.allconferences.com/>
* <https://www.conferencealert.com/>
* <https://www.worldconferencealerts.com/>
* <https://conferencealerts.co.in/>
* <http://allconferencealert.net/>
* <https://conferencenext.com/>
* [Europe Conference](https://conferenceineurope.net/)
and I am sure you can find many more. I tend to be cautious with those, and trust a little more those maintained by individual, universities and academic associations. If they do not have mailing lists, you can subscribe to services of [website content changes](http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/detect-website-change-notification/).
As for post-docs positions, they might be much less centralized.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There are several sources I get information from:
1. **Mailing list**: See if you can find a mailing list specific to your area. Ask your advisor and colleagues about them.
2. Friends and colleagues in the field.
3. **Word of mouth at other conferences**: Ask participants about their favorite conferences & workshops.
4. **Invitation emails** of various kinds.
5. The academic sub-twitterverse
6. Wiki CFP: <http://www.wikicfp.com/cfp/>
Note that there are many conference/workshops that are not worth going to. And some of them are right out **scams**. I've read a number of horror stories about them (e.g. <https://scholarlyoa.com/tag/predatory-conferences/>). I suggest you choose carefully.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/19
| 1,023
| 4,234
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a new academic staff, I received an iPad from my department. I have never owned nor used an iPad before, so it is still in the box for the past week or so. I am a bit reluctant to open it, as I am not sure if it would be useful, and I have actually been thinking of returning it to the department. But to be sure I won't regret it, is there anything particularly good about an iPad that it would be nice for an academic staff to have it?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think that an iPad does anything magically different for academic personell than for anybody else. Some of my colleagues review papers on them, some use them as a very small laptop while travelling, and (I presume) most just use it to read the news, play games, or slack off otherwise while in the train or plane.
*In summary - if you have no idea what you would use it for then you probably don't need it.*
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Whether a tool works for you or not depends on your work style, so general recommendations are difficult.
However, you can use it for example
* to read digital articles. There are some literature management tools that work well with iOS devices, and you can read any PDF with readers like GoodReader. With the later you can, for example, [highlight text and export the highlighted text (and any notes) via eMail](http://www.organizingcreativity.com/2013/07/reading-digitally-videos/).
* You can also directly access your files if you use, e.g., Dropbox (can be helpful in meetings).
* There are also apps available for classroom management, if you do a lot of teaching.
* You can use it for presentations (Keynote on iOS is okay).
* It's nice if you travel to conferences (for emails and the like).
In short, there are many uses, but it depends on your work style. Question I'd have would be how your colleagues use the iPad (if it's an department wide thing). Also: That's a nice problem to have. :-)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: ZotPad in combination with Zotero and Dropbox is useful to keep track of all articles you've read.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: An iPad connects to HDMI, so you don't need to bring your laptop to class (for slides).
With an added keyboard, and access to a remote server, you can work seamlessly from everywhere (on whatever OS you prefer). If you live in Europe you probably have, at least, 3g mobile access everywhere. Depending on your circumstances, this might even eliminate your need for a regular laptop.
A decade or more ago, everyone had papers everywhere. Then we started the paper less office, and an iPad works well here. Save all documents in some online drive, and you have access everywhere. Put the iPad next to your desktop keyboard, and you will never have to print anything ever (mostly).
The iPad is a decent, but not perfect, replacement for taking notes on paper. Snap a picture, and start chopping away.
There are many great apps you could use, for instance for people in math there's an app that converts hand written equations to fully valid LaTeX. You can easily sketch concepts and forward by mail.
Of course all of these apply to other tablets equally.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It's fantastic for projecting slides while being easy to carry around. Just put a lecture into a slideshow app, plug it into the projector, and put it down. Control with a remote as needed. No need to fiddle with getting it to mirror the screen.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I use a tablet (not an iPad) for reading articles when traveling, having copies of articles and open-source books available, and generally having all my course documents stored there for easy access at any time.
A new use has come in the last year: I may have a particular slide on the overhead, and students working exercises based on that slide while I circulate and give personal feedback. I have my tablet with me, both to (a) check the answer, and more importantly (b) have the same slideshow available to flip back to any prior topic if an individual student doesn't remember or was previously absent.
And finally: All my role-playing books for when I master events at gaming conventions.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/19
| 258
| 1,062
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just discovered some mistake after the online publication? There are two mistakes- instead of figure S4A (supplementary figure), it says Figure S3A at two places. It's very embarrassing, should I write to the editor about this?<issue_comment>username_1: You should inform your coauthors, use this opportunity to search for other misprints and finally write to the editor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This sort of typographical error should be handled with a "Correction". You'd say something like "In the article such-and-such (citation) the text on line x, page y should read "Figure 4A" instead of "Figure 3A". The online text has been corrected."
The details of how that's done depends on the journal, so you should discuss with the editor.
It's quite common to have to issue corrections, it's not a big deal, and aside from being a minor embarrassment an occasional Correction doesn't reflect on you in any way. I suppose if it were a regular thing it might get noticed, but this should not be a big deal.
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/19
| 835
| 3,405
|
<issue_start>username_0: What shall I do with a student who self-plagiarized large parts of one of his previous work (for another class and another professor) for my own assignment (without stating it)?
Is it fair, considering he obviously chose to work on the same topic but without telling me that it was the case? I guess it happens all the time among students, to "recycle" like this...
Best<issue_comment>username_1: My own opinion is that from the standpoint of generating grades, you either deal with plagiarism officially, or not at all. If you don't intend on adjusting grades, you might simply tell the student that this is wrong. If you do plan on issuing penalty, check with your school's academic honest policy, both to make sure that this self plagiarism is well described (it is in mine), and for what your next actions need to be.
You might use this as a cue to beef up the academic honesty sections of your syllabi to include this issue, so it is entirely unambiguous in the future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This issue has undoubtedly come up before, and your university probably has an explicit policy in place for how to deal with it. For example, [Harvard's policy](http://static.fas.harvard.edu/registrar/ugrad_handbook/current/chapter2/academic_dishonesty.html) says:
>
> It is the expectation of every course that all work submitted to it will have been done solely for that course. If the same or similar work is to be submitted to any other course, 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 during the same term, the prior written permission of all instructors involved must be obtained. A student who submits the same or similar work to more than one course without such prior permission is subject to disciplinary action, and ordinarily will be required to withdraw from the College.
>
>
>
Similarly, [Yale's policy](http://catalog.yale.edu/undergraduate-regulations/policies/definitions-plagiarism-cheating/) says:
>
> Students may not submit the same paper, or substantially the same paper, in more than one course. If topics for two courses coincide, a student must have written permission from both instructors before either combining work on two papers or revising an earlier paper for submission to a new course.
>
>
>
In particular, you should not improvise a response, unless you find out for sure that there is definitely no official policy (strange but possible). If there is a policy, then it will specify what the rules are and how they should be enforced.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It depends on what school you are at, and what the reality is.
It is possible that your school might have a policy on it, but never enforce it.
Talk with other faculty like you what they do. Talk to the chair. Don't email them, talk to them.
I say this with caution after reading that a lot of part-time (adjunct) faculty catch students with major plagiarism, and the school doesn't want to do anything about it.
So, before you do anything official, check unofficially.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: If the school offers courses with so much overlap and let's students select them in a way that minimises the time&effort required to graduate you should really be blaming the school and not the students.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/19
| 1,227
| 5,110
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am going to finish the 2nd year of my PhD and have been working in a field which is not the major research area of my PI. He promised there will be industrial involvement and collaboration with other professors so I agreed to work on this field, thought I have only a little bit background in the area. However all of these promises have just not been fulfilled (I did try to find collaborators myself as well). As nobody in my group is working in this field and my PI is not particularly knowledgeable about it, I feel isolated and helpless. Meanwhile, I am attracted to a field in which my PI is an expert, and several of my colleagues actively work on it.
I have mentioned this problem to my PI and he agreed I can get trained about the field which I am interested in, while continuing to work on the field I originally worked on. Recently I have found my 2-year results within my original field of study are invalid, and there are fundamental errors in it.
After learning the new field in which my group is much more active and becoming knowledgeable on it, I really feel passionate and motivated about this. It is a more difficult field but I am determined to spend time on it. As I am halfway into my PhD, **how should I convince my supervisor that I should switch my research field to an area in which our group is more active and knowledgeable, while abandoning my initial field completely? I am not trying to avoid solving the problem I faced in my initial field and would not like my PI to feel that is the case.** I just think working on my initial field here in my group is pointless as nobody is knowledgeable on it, nobody knows what I am doing so nobody is able to give me genuine comments, and most importantly, **I am not enthusiastic about it**. However I know my supervisor would like to develop this field as it is more commercially viable. I need to admit I am not genius in this field and can't just work on my own without any proper supervision.
Any opinion is welcome.
PS: I would not like to change my supervisor. This would be the last resort.<issue_comment>username_1: My own opinion is that from the standpoint of generating grades, you either deal with plagiarism officially, or not at all. If you don't intend on adjusting grades, you might simply tell the student that this is wrong. If you do plan on issuing penalty, check with your school's academic honest policy, both to make sure that this self plagiarism is well described (it is in mine), and for what your next actions need to be.
You might use this as a cue to beef up the academic honesty sections of your syllabi to include this issue, so it is entirely unambiguous in the future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This issue has undoubtedly come up before, and your university probably has an explicit policy in place for how to deal with it. For example, [Harvard's policy](http://static.fas.harvard.edu/registrar/ugrad_handbook/current/chapter2/academic_dishonesty.html) says:
>
> It is the expectation of every course that all work submitted to it will have been done solely for that course. If the same or similar work is to be submitted to any other course, 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 during the same term, the prior written permission of all instructors involved must be obtained. A student who submits the same or similar work to more than one course without such prior permission is subject to disciplinary action, and ordinarily will be required to withdraw from the College.
>
>
>
Similarly, [Yale's policy](http://catalog.yale.edu/undergraduate-regulations/policies/definitions-plagiarism-cheating/) says:
>
> Students may not submit the same paper, or substantially the same paper, in more than one course. If topics for two courses coincide, a student must have written permission from both instructors before either combining work on two papers or revising an earlier paper for submission to a new course.
>
>
>
In particular, you should not improvise a response, unless you find out for sure that there is definitely no official policy (strange but possible). If there is a policy, then it will specify what the rules are and how they should be enforced.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It depends on what school you are at, and what the reality is.
It is possible that your school might have a policy on it, but never enforce it.
Talk with other faculty like you what they do. Talk to the chair. Don't email them, talk to them.
I say this with caution after reading that a lot of part-time (adjunct) faculty catch students with major plagiarism, and the school doesn't want to do anything about it.
So, before you do anything official, check unofficially.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: If the school offers courses with so much overlap and let's students select them in a way that minimises the time&effort required to graduate you should really be blaming the school and not the students.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/19
| 955
| 3,999
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a pure math (geometry/topology-oriented) PhD student at a top-level American university. I recently got interested in machine learning and read the recent papers. Unfortunately, machine learning will never need the mathematics I'm currently studying. There are some branches of machine learning which require some sophisticated mathematics, but I'm interested only in the mainstream of ML (as well as the pure math topics I'm currently studying), which requires only the basic knowledge of mathematics. I'm interested in neither something like application of algebraic topology to ML, nor industry after graduation.
It seems that most pure math PhD students and professors aren't interested in such unrelated subjects. If I will do research on ML with EECS students or professors, I suppose I will be considered as unproductive.
I was wondering if you would give me an advice me, so that I can continue studying the both subjects without having to be worried?<issue_comment>username_1: My own opinion is that from the standpoint of generating grades, you either deal with plagiarism officially, or not at all. If you don't intend on adjusting grades, you might simply tell the student that this is wrong. If you do plan on issuing penalty, check with your school's academic honest policy, both to make sure that this self plagiarism is well described (it is in mine), and for what your next actions need to be.
You might use this as a cue to beef up the academic honesty sections of your syllabi to include this issue, so it is entirely unambiguous in the future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This issue has undoubtedly come up before, and your university probably has an explicit policy in place for how to deal with it. For example, [Harvard's policy](http://static.fas.harvard.edu/registrar/ugrad_handbook/current/chapter2/academic_dishonesty.html) says:
>
> It is the expectation of every course that all work submitted to it will have been done solely for that course. If the same or similar work is to be submitted to any other course, 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 during the same term, the prior written permission of all instructors involved must be obtained. A student who submits the same or similar work to more than one course without such prior permission is subject to disciplinary action, and ordinarily will be required to withdraw from the College.
>
>
>
Similarly, [Yale's policy](http://catalog.yale.edu/undergraduate-regulations/policies/definitions-plagiarism-cheating/) says:
>
> Students may not submit the same paper, or substantially the same paper, in more than one course. If topics for two courses coincide, a student must have written permission from both instructors before either combining work on two papers or revising an earlier paper for submission to a new course.
>
>
>
In particular, you should not improvise a response, unless you find out for sure that there is definitely no official policy (strange but possible). If there is a policy, then it will specify what the rules are and how they should be enforced.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It depends on what school you are at, and what the reality is.
It is possible that your school might have a policy on it, but never enforce it.
Talk with other faculty like you what they do. Talk to the chair. Don't email them, talk to them.
I say this with caution after reading that a lot of part-time (adjunct) faculty catch students with major plagiarism, and the school doesn't want to do anything about it.
So, before you do anything official, check unofficially.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: If the school offers courses with so much overlap and let's students select them in a way that minimises the time&effort required to graduate you should really be blaming the school and not the students.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/19
| 2,683
| 11,021
|
<issue_start>username_0: ### Background
A year ago I gave up on my (first attempt at getting a) PhD because I could not stand the needed time management. I am a mosaic autist but I do live with it without major issues. My only apparent problem is that I get emotional very quickly at anything that goes differently than planned, i.e. I do not like surprises and I recover (emotionally) very slowly from surprises.
Do not get me wrong, I have been often praised for my talks and seminars. I have worked in industry for years and I can live independently alright. The only thing that I always need to do is to plan things in advance, and plan them extremely thorough. I need to admit that questions and answer sessions after a talk are pretty difficult, but I can manage with enough preparation.
I gave up at my first attempt at getting a PhD after a year in. After that time I got so emotionally distressed I could not continue. This happened dues to simple disorganization of the environment I was in, for example:
* I needed to change office three times during that period;
* switched (university) email systems two times;
* all courses for the PhDs were announced with only two days of antecedence;
* courses were canceled with hours of antecedence if there were not enough people attending;
* reports were not scheduled, my supervisor literally popped in my office and asked for a report within a week (not once, a couple of times);
* some (internal) talks were to be prepared on an short (a day or two) notice.
(By "courses" I mean small lectures available to the PhD students as *Learning to use the Library* or *Statistical Methods*, and yes they were mandatory)
I understand that a PhD is a training exercise, where one learns to do research. Therefore learning different things, performing talks and writing reports are things that I definitely need to learn over the course of the PhD. I just could not perform any of it with a decent performance because my mind was distressed with things appearing and changing too fast.
I did raise the fact that I need a more stable environment with my supervisor and with the administration. Yet, the only answers I got were along the lines of: *If every other PhD student can deal with this you can deal with it too*.
I gave up just before my 1 year report. I really wanted to write there:
>
> I did almost no research work because you did not allow me a moment of breathing to do any actual work!
>
>
>
(Of course, I did not write that)
---
### The Question
A year has passed since I gave up on my PhD. Recently a friend of mine which does a PhD in a different institution showed me a programme topic that I would love to work in (a very similar topic to my original PhD).
My question is. Is it common for PhD programmes to be disorganized and everchanging? It is very likely that I will find an unstable environment in the new institution?
My original institution (which I explicitly omit the name here) was within the top 100 of several world rankings. And my (possible) new institution is way below in these rankings. I need to admit that I do not believe in these rankings, but, nevertheless, I am very afraid that my previous endeavor may repeat itself.
This all happens in the UK, in the field of computer security.
---
Career note: I am not planning to follow an academic career. In the field of computer security it is common to get to a PhD and then work in research labs that perform bug hunting and security analysis. Labs that are not part of academic institutions in any way. It is true that a PhD is not strictly necessary for such positions but it is very common (some 70% of people working in computer security labs do have a PhD), and I would like to advance in that career path.<issue_comment>username_1: My question is. Is it common for PhD programmes to be disorganized and everchanging?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not as much "disorganized" as much as dynamic, changing, and "academic". The world of academia is very focused on academia. To an average person, it may seem disorganized. I've experienced that getting faculty together is like herding cats.
It is very likely that I will find an unstable environment in the new institution?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It will be "academic". Here's an example. As I was doing my graduate thesis paper, I'd submit it, and the advisor would want a word change, for example from "huge" to "gigantic". I argued with the advisor and another faculty that this wasn't editing or helping just being nit-picky. The other faculty told me to just do it, as getting done is just a series of flaming hoops to jump through. So, I make the change. Next draft wants me to change "gigantic" to "huge". Grr... So, I went through a process like that for a couple of months.
"shall I try a second time?"
----------------------------
"Do or do not, there is no try." This seems fitting. Since a PhD is a long-term commitment, takes a lot of patience, costs a lot of money and takes a lot of time during the term, it is not to be undertaken by an answer on the internet. It is your decision.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I understand that a PhD is a training exercise, where one learns to do research.
>
>
>
In a way, your misunderstanding is that you think that doing a PhD is strictly training you *how to do research*. I think it is more accurate to say that a PhD *trains you to be an academic* - and dealing with this kind of "instability" is part of that, the same as learning to do university teaching, dealing with the administration, networking, presenting at conferences, and all the other things professors do.
As for whether you are likely to see the same issues again in your new PhD, I think they break down into two categories:
>
> I needed to change office three times during that period,
> switched (university) email systems two times,
> all courses for the PhDs were announced with only two days of antecedence,
> courses were canceled with hours of antecedence if there were not enough people attending.
>
>
>
I am sure that many, if not most, universities are better run than that, and I feel you have a good chance of not experiencing that in another university. Even better, since you know somebody in your new PhD programme, you can ask her or him whether any or all of the above examples also happen there.
More problematic are the latter items on the list:
>
> reports were not scheduled, my supervisor literally popped in my office and asked for a report within a week (not once, a couple of times),
> some (internal) talks were to be prepared on an short (a day or two) notice.
>
>
>
This is exactly how, in my experience, the vast majority of research groups are organized, and if something like an ad hoc report to your supervisor, which is in the grand scheme of things rather trivial, stresses you emotionally, I fear that you will indeed not be very happy in academia.
Let me give you some examples from my own PhD:
* Close to all my thesis meetings were ad hoc. The usual pattern was that I was getting coffee (the machine was next to my advisor's office), and my advisor would "incidentally" come out of his office and ask me how my thesis is coming along. I think I had 3 scheduled meetings with my advisor during my entire PhD.
* On multiple occasions during my PhD I was at conferences, and my advisor figured out that he could not be in a side meeting that he promised his input for and sent me instead, often with less than half a day of advance notice and no preparation except for a pat on the back. In one or two cases, he even forgot to tell the other meeting participants that he would not be coming, meaning my first order of business was telling them who the heck I am and what I was doing there.
* My PhD advisor once went to a project review meeting, for which I prepared (parts of) the material for him. Despite asking for it I never heard feedback, so I assumed it would be ok. The night before the meeting, 17:00, when he looked at the material the first time, he discovered that it was not at all what he expected, and I ended up redoing large parts in an all-nighter.
Unfortunately this will also not really change once you rise to higher levels of seniority - I am now a senior postdoc with my own research group to lead, and my work life still consists of plenty of surprises that need to happen *right now*. Some examples:
* On the ~ third day of my current job, I was asked to fill in the next day for a lecture unit in a topic I had 0 expertise in because the head of the department had to leave to an urgent meeting.
* I am currently working on a very important personal grant application that is due in a month. I loudly proclaimed to everybody that cared to listen that I *really* wanted to focus on this in the next month. Despite, I have been asked to lead an audit for a multi-million dollar software project, been taken to multiple surprise meetings for a transfer project that my department is running, and have been asked to give a one-hour talk next week in a high-profile event that my department is organizing.
(of course, all of the above are exceptions rather than the rule - most days I get to work and do exactly what I planned to do this day; however, I got the gist from you that these kind of unexpected workloads could ruin your concentration for more time than what they actually take)
So, to answer your titular question:
>
> shall I try a second time?
>
>
>
If you have found an industry job that does not lead to this kind of emotional stress, I would suggest you think long and hard before leaving it. I will be personally very surprised if you find academia to your liking, based on what you described.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: What is your motivation to do a PhD? I guess the only thing you really need a PhD for is an academic career. Otherwise with computer security I don't see how you would benefit having a PhD to the point that it would offset investing all that time and patience.
Furthermore, there are no guarantees that a program that looks fairly structured on the outside and in the current moment won't also turn into a complete mess.
In the end however this is up to you: you need to think of the trade-off in terms of time, salary, stability, and any other factors that influence your satisfaction at the workplace.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: It is probably a cultural thing. In the Netherlands where I study, everything has to be planned months in advance. I have monthly status meetings with my promotors scheduled year in advance and I have a weekly meetings with my supervisor every week at the same day and time. Courses, lectures or some mini talks/seminars are also usually planned cca 6 to 12 months in advance. Even beers with your colleagues has to be put into your agendas first.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/20
| 368
| 1,603
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am non-US citizen and I want to apply for an academic position in the USA.
At which point do I need to show up a language certificate? For example, together with the job application, or together with the visa application?<issue_comment>username_1: Normally TOEFL is required for admissions in USA. However, you must check the requirements that are required by the University first to secure admission that may or may not include TOEFL beside other tests such as GRE, GRE subject, GAT etc.
Second is the visa requirements, make sure if the TOEFL is required or not for the visa, as in that case, you may get admission but denied visa or vice versa. so get eligibility criteria from different universities, compare them and find out what are the common requirements for all the universities, and then check the visa requirements.
Time of showing language certificate depend on the university, they can ask in advance or later.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Generally, you will never be asked for a language certificate. The people hiring you will determine if your English is good enough by looking at the application materials you submit and by the interviews they conduct with you.
The immigration officer will also talk to you and might be suspicious about your claim to have received a job offer from a university if you can't string together a coherent sentence in English.
As a general cultural matter, the US is comfortable leaving many matters to subjective judgment rather than relying on official bureaucracy and formal rules.
Upvotes: -1
|
2016/08/20
| 324
| 1,326
|
<issue_start>username_0: The code work for my master thesis is copied from a textbook.
Is it legal to copy the entire code from the textbook?
Can I write in my documentation that this project is solely developed by me?
I can mention the author of the textbook in my references.<issue_comment>username_1: You may be a novice but you definitely need to know the rules. You can't own anyone else's work. But yes whatever snippet of code you are using in your master thesis you need to add a reference there. You may find this useful :
<https://integrity.mit.edu/handbook/writing-code>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are in a degree/program where writing code is expected, then you must write code.
However, let's say you are in a physics program, and you are doing something for physics, and it just so happens that you found a piece of code that helps with your research, then maybe you don't need to write it, you can reference it.
For my Master's thesis, I referenced a document that was not publicly available, so I included it as an appendix as reference (with permission of the author). I explicitly stated that it wasn't my work, and just there as reference.
**Ask your advisor.**
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If it doesn’t belong to you, always appropriately cite your source.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/20
| 785
| 3,412
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to use data mining to analyze some websites to understand the impact of the internet on health awareness and health concerns of people in my country. I hope to publish the results in a journal.
When do I need consent from websites owners? I may end up analyzing hundreds of websites.<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, does the information you want to use include reproducing copyrighted material, or just "fair use" quotations, or merely statistics deduced from reading the sites? It seems to me that you would only consider seeking permission in the first case. Then, you'd have to choose a strategy for each site.
Pascal's wager is a good model to follow here. For each website, you can either ask permission or not, and a site owner can help or obstruct: four possibilities.
* You ask permission and the site owner supports your project.
* You ask permission and the site owner says no.
* You scrape without permission, publish, and the site owner doesn't care.
* You scrape without permission, publish, and the site owner gets upset.
Let's use the maximin decision strategy. As I read this, the worst outcome if you do ask (the no) is less bad than the worst outcome if you don't ask (the upset).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> When do I need consent from websites owners?
>
>
>
Under U.S.-like laws - **you need this every time**. In layman's terms, by default, you can look at public site areas and only look, no duplicating or storing, etc. Despite that even your browser does it freely, laws are convoluted here. If in a special agreement published on a site or in some other explicit form is not stated a permission for this usage, you should not do it. There also may be an explicit mark about public domain or a standard open-source license. But, even this public agreement isn't enough for your purposes.
Few of the potential problems:
* Use protected by legal rights data isn't legal. *(may be covered by a public
agreement or a written permission)*
* If you interfering with sites' availability via additional load, this may be a hostile act as well. *(not only an admin's ban, this is a potential legal issue)*
* Even if the site owner allow it, you can break some federal laws -
about personal data collection or something else, this is a question for a licensed lawyer. Also, more information needed for answer from this point of view.
So, yes, the written permission is the only legal way to dig somewhere and even this could be insufficient. People do sometimes their own similar projects without any permissions, maybe, because they think, this is too boring and slow to write some letters and do a legality research. However, you want to publish the results about work with thousands of thousands web pages. So, "cover your back" isn't a meaningless paranoidal phrase in your case. And this is only a few obvious legal concerns, also there're more ethical and technical problems with using web resources in not allowed by their owners ways.
*If you just lightly ping every few seconds for checking availability of some serious sites, some of them just ban your bot after a while. Others log your activity and use the log if this will becomes a problem. I'd personally banned many harmful crawlers and filled a bunch of complains about unclear automatic requests which was loading resources dedicated for clients.*
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/20
| 681
| 2,676
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently close to finishing my first paper in a PhD degree (applied maths). I have a supervisory team of 4 academics, 1 of which is the designated main supervisor.
My problem is that in reality, **all** of my work for this paper has been in collaboration with only one of the supervisors (not the main) who works in a different department. As well as this, they also gave the advice for the direction of the PhD and is also the only person I have meetings with. It seems to be a culture within my environment that all the supervisors are included as co-authors. I'm not comfortable with the idea of other people getting credit for something I have worked hard on or the ethics of it; but at the same time of course I don't want to ostracise myself from the group or harm my future prospects. They did after all get the funding for my position and I have no problem with working with just one supervisor.
Unfortunately I didn't have any conversations about co-authorship before I started the program. Any advise?<issue_comment>username_1: ASK THEM.
Academia is a very 'political' and 'incestuous' environment. If it is common to do that, then in order for you to succeed there, you might should do what they do.
si fueris Rōmae, Rōmānō vīvitō mōre; si fueris alibī, vīvitō sicut ibi (“if you should be in Rome, live in the Roman manner; if you should be elsewhere, live as they do there”); which is attributed to St Ambrose.
If you don't, and they expect it, then you might just piss them off. They may never mention it, but they might take it out on you in ways you could never prove. Retaliation likely won't be something you even see - not getting that scholarship, journal, presentation, etc.
TL;DR - Ask them what to do, then do it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The honest and most practiced answer to say is that you have to put their names. They might not have worked directly but as you said arranged funds for you.
But personally i dont like adding people with no contribuion to work, but believe me they made me suffer and my masters degree was at risk, just for this small mistake.
So for now and for phd, just add them, keep them happy. As they will most probably save your day at the end. How ever keep in mind your future, and as far as you are the main author the gurus in journals and conferences know who has worked and who not.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I think co-authorship is fine for papers you might publish based on your PhD work but the thesis itself should be your sole authorship. You can acknowledge your supervisors' guidance and collaboration on the research of course.
Upvotes: 0
|
2016/08/20
| 591
| 2,375
|
<issue_start>username_0: Would students who drop out before they take any exam be blacklisted by the (prestigious) university?
Especially if those students have shown a resentment and a disagreement with the arrangement of the academic program they're enrolled in.
Or is it normal to be contacted by the university inciting the student to apply again?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Would students who drop out before they take any exam be blacklisted by the (prestigious) university?
>
>
>
No. Students drop out of a class or school frequently. If it was recent - then you are likely still "admitted" and can register next term.
>
> Or is it normal to be contacted by the university inciting the student to apply again?
>
>
>
I'm not sure they'll ask you to come back - they might, but it is up to you do work on getting back in.
I suggest checking your status on-line, or talk to someone in the registrar's office.
While a very prestigious school has a thousand students lined up behind you to take your place, it is likely that if they admitted you in the first place, they'll be happy to keep you. If you do it again, then they might think less of you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Until this moment, I've never heard of anyone "...resenting the arrangement of the academic program they're enrolled in..." That seems...unusual.
People temporarily withdraw from schools for many legitimate reasons very frequently. It's not unusual. They don't have any difficulty returning, for example, the following semester.
In this case, the reason suggested is what concerns me. It suggests there may have been some animosity or "words exchanged" with the wrong people.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: For what its worth I can sympathise OP. If possible, it is a good idea to "try before you buy" -- but if you "try after you buy" and really don't like the result for whatever reason, sometimes you can still get your money back. That is what warranties and exchange policies are all about in the commercial sector. In the service sector, that is of course much harder to do. Keep in mind that if you go back to the programme you left, you could waste a lot of time and money if it's still not a good fit.
My suggestion would be to take what you learned about yourself, and use that to find an arrangement that feels like a better fit.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/21
| 955
| 4,009
|
<issue_start>username_0: There has been plenty of discussion on the basic issue of students [self-plagiarizing from one course to another](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/75461/student-self-plagiarism) as well as academics [self-plagiarizing prior but unpublished material in a later publication](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32190/is-it-self-plagiarism-to-reuse-my-own-unpublished-material), but I was thinking of something slightly different that I haven't seen discussed.
Is it plagiarism for a student to submit material that was written prior to the course start date or otherwise outside of the supervision of the instructor *as long as the material was written outside the aegis of academia*? Most self-plagiarism policies that I've seen, such as [Harvard's](http://static.fas.harvard.edu/registrar/ugrad_handbook/current/chapter2/academic_dishonesty.html), mention that the prior work must have been submitted to *another course* for it to constitute self-plagiarism.
If doing something like that would be ethical, would any of the following further situations be ethical?
1) Submitting prior material that was prepared for a prior class but never submitted/turned in. This could be because the student withdrew from the course before submission, the student was expelled before submission, or the student decided to start over from scratch on the assignment. For example, a student writes a paper on <NAME> for his *Survey of British Literature* course, but then decides that he really would rather do a paper on <NAME> and writes one on her and turns it in instead. Later, the student finds himself enrolled in *Introduction to Science Fiction* and finds himself without a lot of time. Is it ethical for him to patch up his never submitted <NAME>ley paper (e.g. with corresponding corrections to make it meet the expectations of the new course) and turn it in?
2) Submitting prior material that was completed and submitted for a course that the student took an an *unaccredited* university (or a university whose accreditation is not recognized by the student's current institution as legitimate). Since an unaccredited university is, for most intents and purposes in academia, academically equivalent to no university at all (degrees and credits are not recognized, etc.), this would seem to be ethically equivalent to submitting material completed under the supervision of a private tutor.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Short answer: you are not committing self-plagiarsm.
>
>
>
It is self-plagiarism, if you intend to reuse significant portions of your own *published* material without proper attribution.
Looking in to your aspect, your situations do not account to any materials being *published* in any sort. Attribution in here refers to adding a remark to be able to access the original source of the information; in other words, *citing* it. What will you cite if that's the case?
You are publishing a material with the intention to benefit a wider scientific community in addition for receiving credit for doing so. The material itself is not published in any way available to the public nor does the original source have any constraints on its public exposure (check this part with the institution just in case). If all this applies, then by no means are you committing self-plagiarism.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The best approach would be to discuss this with the instructor of the course to see whether it satisfies the requirements of the assignment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In the first case you mentioned, submitting work you have never previously submitted, that is absolutely ok.
In the second case, even if an institution is non-accredited, technically you still submitted the work to be graded, which is tantamount to "publishing" it. Whether you would get caught depends on whether that non-accredited institution submitted your work into the universal database (Turnitin or whatever).
Upvotes: 2
|
2016/08/21
| 472
| 2,059
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a telecommunication graduate (Bachelors holder) and currently getting my master degree"completed one semester" .
I am working on a project and developed a new original idea and constructed multiple algorithms based on it, however my professors could not provide me with a feedback about this new idea since they are not specialists in the field of my work, So I need a feedback from a specialist.
How can send a decent email to professors in another country for getting an answer on whatever my idea is valid and can be published.<issue_comment>username_1: First, assuming that you are in the US, learn to use professional grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and fonts. Starting off with "i m a" will not get any professor's attention. Try using "I am a".
If English is not your primary language, and you must communicate in English, then find someone to help you.
Next, just write up what you need, in detail. Spell it out, like this.
Dear Doctor \_\_\_\_\_\_,
I am a student in \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ and I am working on an idea regarding algorithms. Specifically, \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.
I would like to get your feedback as you are an expert in algorithms. May I stop by your office during office hours?
Thanks in advance,
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As i get from your question. The best approach is to compare your work with existing works. Read latest papers from reputable journals, related to your work. If there is some expert professor try to find his latest publications and see what direction is his work focused on.
Compare your algorithms with latest one in the same field say you are working on collision detection. So read whats the latest approach that has addresed the collission detection, remember collission detection and resolution are two different fields when you come to compare algorithms.
I dont think you should send your final work without publishing it to some one, as it is very easy that your hardwork may be stolen in such case.
Upvotes: 1
|
2016/08/21
| 794
| 3,272
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was asked this question, and did not think it was possible. Is it possible without an integrated degree (i.e., after a bachelor's)? I do not really know. **If so, how?**
I mean for the US, but don't take that as limiting your answer (if from the UK or elsewhere).<issue_comment>username_1: How is it possible to get a masters in 1 year? Simple, sign up for a course which offers a masters degree in 1 year. Perhaps not so simple.
In the UK, we have something called an integrated masters degree offered on many engineering courses. This typically follows a 3 year bachelors degree. The theory being that if you have just spent the last 3 years studying the same subject, you can then simply continue on using that as the foundation to build on to get a masters.
The reason a masters degree, which is not integrated, is usually (again from a UK perspective) 2 years, is that the first year is intended as almost a foundation year to get everyone up to speed with the more specialised skills that they may be missing. For example if you do a BSc in physics, you could then do an MSc in EE, but you wouldn't have the same electronics knowledge that somebody who was coming off a BEng in EE would have. In fact at the Uni I went to, during our third (final) bachelors year, we would frequently share modules with those doing the first year of their MSc for this very reason.
Now it may be possible if you have the relevant skills (e.g. if you have a good bachelors degree in the same subject) to be able to skip a year of a 2 year masters degree, and just do the final year. However this would be very much dependent on finding a Uni which would allow that, and probably also would require some form of aptitude test to ensure that you have the skills to do so. I doubt this would be a common offering though.
Again, this is a very UK centric answer. I'm not familiar with other countries systems. As far as I know, in the US, bachelors degrees are typically more like 4 years because the US education system ends high school at a level more equivalent to the GCSE (or possibly AS) level from a UK perspective. So the first year of Uni in the US is more like an A-level equivalent in the UK.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I can tell if you are from india.. You can join sriit(international institute for technology),hyderabad, india.. Which follows 3 years in india and next two years in which one for bs and another for ms.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Only by careful planning, for someone just starting a B.S., or at latest, early in the second year.
Basically, the mind set has to be that of taking a B.S. and an M.S. in five years. The first year will consist of getting the basic and elective courses out of the way (which is why you need to start planning in that first year). Then take Electrical Engineering or related courses such as Physics in the next three years, followed by one year's worth of master courses.
An actual Master's degree has one year of "foundation" courses and one year of
courses needed to complete the degree. You can fulfill the foundation requirements by careful planning in your last three undergraduate years. Then the final (fifth) year "tops off" the M.S.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|