date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2017/12/26
| 1,664
| 7,151
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a long story. I am a mathematician. A couple of years ago I submitted my paper to one of the best journals in my field. After 8 months of waiting, I finally recieved a response, and it was "A major revision is needed". I looked at the reviewers' comments. They were very positive. The reviewers only pointed out some typos and suggested several little changes to improve the exposition. I thought that it would take me at most a day to revise my paper.
After that, I read the the comments of the editor handling my paper (let's call him Editor D for future references). The editor wrote:
>
> The theory ... developed by the author has been well recognized by the two reviewers. Indeed it is easy to verify that the paper is well written and organized, and that, although not all results are new, there is enough new material worth of publication.
>
>
>
Then I found some additional comments of the Editor-in-Chief in a separate file. These comments shocked me. Here I must say that there exist several approaches to the problem (Problem P) that I studied in my paper. The Editor-in-Chief is the author of one of those approaches (Theory X). In his comments, the Editor-in-Chief wrote that any paper in which Problem 'P' is studied must be based on Theory X, and that I must completely rewrite my paper using Theory X. Furthermore, he wrote that my paper must address a much more general problem that includes Problem P as a simple particular case.
I felt that the comments of the Editor-in-Chief were unreasonable, to say the least. Therefore I withdrew my paper using "Withdraw" button at the website of the journal, and submitted it to another journal, where I, again, recieved two excellent reviews, and the paper was published shortly.
Recently, I came up with an idea about how to solve the more general problem, pointed out to me by the Editor-in-Chief in a very simple manner. I wrote a paper about it, which I am very proud of. In this paper, apart from solving the problem, I also pointed out, as clearly as I could, that Theory X, in fact, cannot be used to solve this problem due to some of its limitations. I decided to submit my new paper to the same journal, since it is one of the best journals in my field, and I had already published (or submitted) papers to other top journal this year. I admit that it was very stupid of me to submit the paper on a similar subject to the same journal. But what's done is done.
After several months of waiting, today I recieved a response, which once again was "A major revision is needed". Once again, the reviewers liked my paper very much. However, this time Editor D wrote in his comments:
>
> By the way, a paper by the same author was processed by me as Associate Editor, with the requirement of a major revision; and then withdrawn and published in a different journal. I would not replicate this experience.
>
>
>
The Editor-in-Chief this time wrote a proper review of my paper which, in fact, was longer than what the reviewers wrote! In his review, apart from defending Theory X, and writing that I am completely wrong about its limitations, he also said that in his opinion I mix too many things up, and I must delete a half of my paper and rewrite the other half.
So, the question is what should I do given the "warning" from Editor D? I feel that deleting a half of my paper would significantly lessen its value. I want to withdraw my paper, but some people write that its unethical to withdraw a paper after peer review, and that the journal (and the publisher, which is very big) can put me into the black list of authors.
**Edit-1**: I would like to thank everybody for the interest in my problem and for the thoughtful comments. I've decided to resubmit my paper without any significant changes, and reply to Editor-in-Chief's comments explaining why I disagree with them. If the paper is rejected, then I will be free to submit it to another journal. If the Editor-in-Chief insists on a major revision, then I will withdraw my paper without a second thought and inform Editor D about the conflict of interests and the reasons behind my decision via email.<issue_comment>username_1: Your question splits into several, which I will try to address separately.
* **Is it ethical to withdraw a paper after peer review?** It depends. Sometimes authors use peer review to improve a paper, withdraw and resubmit to a better journal. Effectively, they exploit reviewers of one journal to improve their paper for another - clearly an unethical approach. Sometimes authors merely disagree with editors' decisions and do not want to make changes as suggested. In this case withdrawal is not unethical, but as <NAME> mentioned it would be nicer if you sent some final version to the editor asking them to accept or reject, instead of withdrawing.
* **Is Editor D right to be concerned?** Yes. Editor's role is to safeguard journal's resources (peers included) and making sure they are used for the best of this journal (and only then for the best of the whole community). As academics we may care about wider benefits first, but editor's role implies some administrative duties, and Editor D is right to be concerned about it.
* **Is Editor-in-Chief right to promote his theory?** No, I don't think so. First of all, I never heard of a Editor-in-Chief be so involved with a particular paper. In my experience, this role assumes leadership, not hands-on-work, so receiving comments from Chief is highly unusual. It is not clear it the comments should be treated simply as comments of another peer reviewer, or if they are more authoritative. This makes the whole situation a bit weird and possibly implies some potential conflict of interests here.
**tl;dr: What to do?** I would suggest to publish anything related to this line of research in other journals to avoid deepening the conflict of interest which is already sparkling between you and Editor-in-Chief mentioned.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The basic issue is this:
>
> **The Editor-in-Chief's excessive involvement in your paper represents a serious conflict of interest on the EIC's part.**
>
>
>
The reason it's a conflict of interest is that the editor-in-chief is a proponent of theory X, and wants to force you to rewrite your paper in a way consistent with his "pet" theory. This is entirely inappropriate behavior, because if the paper was written on a different topic, the editor-in-chief likely would not have intervened in such a manner.
Given that essential fact, it is entirely appropriate for you to withdraw your paper and submit elsewhere. At the same time, I would also bring this matter to the attention of the journal's *publisher*, to alert them of an editor-in-chief who is clearly overstepping bounds by inserting themselves into a publication in a highly inappropriate way. (I interpret the editor D's comment to be a warning to the editor-in-chief that he's not happy with the way things are proceeding. Therefore, I would explain to editor D in an email why you feel forced to withdraw the paper again.)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2017/12/27
| 5,587
| 20,266
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have heard many people say they have a PhD in a certain area. For nearly all of my life, I thought a PhD was simply a doctorate, and I didn't know that it had anything to do with philosophy.
There are many doctoral degrees, why are PhD's the most popular doctoral degrees by a long shot?<issue_comment>username_1: *This answer suffered a Major Revision!*
---
A Ph.D. is an academic doctoral degree and have nothing to do with philosophy nowadays.
From Wikipedia:
>
> *In the context of the Doctor of Philosophy and other similarly titled degrees, the term "philosophy" does not refer to the field or academic discipline of philosophy, but is used in a broader sense in accordance with its original Greek meaning, which is "love of wisdom".*
>
>
>
People often refers to an academic doctorate as a Ph.D., even when the official title in their university/country is different of Doctor of Philosophy. The reason beyond its popularity is because a Ph.D. is a title traditionally conceded in countries with anglo-saxonic language and since the common language in the academia is English we often "translate" our titles to the equivalent in English.
I have recently learned with @<NAME> that there are different types of doctorates in the US that give the same legal statute as an academic doctorate, but with different structure and requisites from a doctorate in Science. The example that he used was the Doctor of Arts (D.A.), a title that gives equivalent rights as a Ph.D. in which concerns teaching and research in universities.
My previous misunderstanding was due to the structure of high level education that I am used to in Portugal and Brazil. In both countries Therapists, Physicians, Lawyers and others do not have a doctoral degree. In Portugal a physician have Master's degree in Health Science or a 6 years pre-bologna *licenciatura* degree (undergraduate degree). If a physician/lawyer/therapists wants to have a doctoral degree here they need to engage in a minimum 3 years doctoral course, publish articles and defend an original thesis.
For a historical insight and more complete overview, please read [this article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy) and [this article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctorate).
I'm sorry for the previous wrong answer. I think the question is too wide and depends highly on which country we are talking about. I assumed things about the doctoral degrees on the US that are not true.
Edit: Of course that there are many different ways to refer to an academic doctorate depending on the country the title is emitted. The point is: they are all equivalent. A German Doktorgrad is equivalent to a Ph.D. in the UK and to a Doutoramento/Doutorado in Portugal/Brazil, etc. In the other way researchers would not be able to work across the borders.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In one's early education, especially in more traditional contexts, learning involved *X* being true because the teacher said so. Don't question the teacher; just make sure that you know *X*. It was all about memorization ([rote learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rote_learning)).
This would start to change when a student would reach the highest levels of education, at which point they'd be able to argue and contribute their own understanding. So instead of focusing on rote learning, a student would have to demonstrate their ability to think and engage in [critique](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputation) of their field ([scholasticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholasticism)). This is, successful students would become philosophers of their field rather than simple repositories of memorized facts.
Education's become increasingly [liberal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts_education) with a shift from rote learning toward critical thinking, but there's still a semblance of that early expectation that pre-Ph.D. students are supposed to memorize what's being taught while a Ph.D. would symbolize one's ability to go beyond that.
---
### Historical background
Academics used to be folks who participated in [medieval universities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_university). There was a heavy religious flavoring to academia compared to today's more secular settings, but it was still general academia nonetheless.
A lot of stuff came from this time. For example, on graduation when you dress up like <NAME>, it's because that's how [these guys used to dress](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Meeting_of_doctors_at_the_university_of_Paris.jpg).
Anyway, so this is where the Bachelor's/Master's/doctorate thing came from:
>
> ### Course of study
>
>
> University studies took six years for a Master of Arts degree (a Bachelor of Arts degree was awarded after completing the third or fourth year). Studies for this were organized by the faculty of arts, where the seven liberal arts were taught: arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music theory, grammar, logic, and rhetoric. All instruction was given in Latin and students were expected to converse in that language. The trivium comprised the three subjects that were taught first: grammar, logic, and rhetoric. These three subjects were the most important of the seven liberal arts for medieval students. The curriculum came also to include the three Aristotelian philosophies: physics, metaphysics and moral philosophy.
>
>
> -["Medieval university"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_university), Wikpiedia [links and citations omitted]
>
>
>
And that stuff was a lot of the rote learning, before one was a proper doctor.
After that, one'd go into the realm of philosophy, becoming a more critical thinker ([scholar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholasticism)):
>
> Once a Master of Arts degree had been conferred, the student could leave the university or pursue further studies in one of the higher faculties, law, medicine, or theology, the last one being the most prestigious. A popular textbook for theological study was called the Sentences (*Quattuor libri sententiarum*) of <NAME>; theology students as well as masters were required to write extensive commentaries on this text as part of their curriculum.[citation needed] Studies in the higher faculties could take up to twelve years for a master's degree or doctorate (initially the two were synonymous), though again a bachelor's and a licentiate's degree could be awarded along the way.
>
>
> -["Medieval university"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_university), Wikpiedia [links and citations omitted]
>
>
>
This system was already established by the time "*science*" started to be recognized in a more modern sense. At that time, it was still just Philosophy, or more specifically "[*username_2ural Philosophy*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/username_2ural_philosophy)".
So, to be a "*doctor of philosophy*" is literally just that - to be a scholar of philosophy who's gone beyond the intro years of rote memorization to the point where they can engage in scholarly critique of their field.
---
### Ph.D.'s as further Master's degrees
In the historical context in which these degrees were named, the human knowledge pool was way, way smaller. It was a drop compared to today's oceans. And so, the prospect of learning much of the human knowledge pool was far more reasonable, if many'd still have regarded it as challenging.
Today, a lot of Ph.D.'s are awarded to students who probably don't quite get the whole philosophy-of-their-field thing. That seems to be a natural consequence of there being a lot more one can learn before reaching the point of critique and abstraction.
So, today, a Ph.D. *can* be something like a fancy Master's degree. For example, one can basically get a Master's in Chemistry, then do a bunch of lab work to test something out, and get a Ph.D. for that (experimental chemistry).
In principle, we might argue that there's some need for revision to the academic credentialing system to better capture its modern reality. And we've actually kinda done that already - as noted in the Wikipedia link above, a Master's and doctorate used to be the same thing; they got more separated in part due to the human knowledge pool growing and more ranks being needed to account for it. But that'd be a different topic.
For the purposes of this question, a Ph.D. got its name in the scholarly days when academics were basically those who learned their field and then engaged in scholarly critique of it. And today, the name's kinda a historical artifact.
---
### Further reading
I found a neat paper that discusses the evolution of doctoral conference since the scholarly days:
* ["*Hora Est!: On Dissertations*"](http://www.ascleiden.nl/Pdf/horaestklein.pdf), 2005.
This document's a look at what scholastics/academics had to do to be recognized as a doctor. And while the title specifies "*On Dissertations*", it notes:
>
> Less than a century ago a dissertation was not always required to obtain a doctorate. Successfully defending a number of theses sufficed. [-page 7]
>
>
>
Other interesting factoids:
* Apparently dissertations used to be more about disputing (critique) points, written up as a [disputation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputation). This contrasts with the modern description of a PhD being about adding to the human knowledge pool.
* It seems like prior academia was far more concerned with religion than modern academia. Early academics seem to have been something like clergy.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: PhDs are more common because PhDs come from all fields and most countries.
To talk in broad strokes (I suggest looking into each of these points, e.g. in wikipedia for more details.)
Lets break our doctorates into 3 kinds:
Research Doctorates
-------------------
These are given for doing research, and intended to train researchers.
* Doctorate of Philosophy (PhD)
+ all fields of study, in all countries
* Doctorate of \_\_\_ field
+ Some countries: Austria, Germany, Switzerland and others
+ [Dr-Ing (engineering) etc](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Science#Austria,_Germany,_and_Switzerland)
Higher doctorates
-----------------
* Doctor of Letters (Arts, Humanitites), Doctor of Science etc
+ Field specific doctorate
+ more or less lifetime achievement awards for research.
+ Generally pre-req'd on having a PhD for at least 10 years.
* Dr. habil
+ see [Habilitation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habilitation)
+ Most common (but not restricted to) in Germany, Austria, Swizerland.
+ Requires a PhD equivalent
Obviously there will be less people with any given higher doctorate than PhDs since they are a subset of people who have PhDs with in a given field.
Professional Doctorates
-----------------------
These are doctoral degrees that are required to do a profession.
* Medicine Doctor (MD) i.e. a Doctor of Medicine
+ Every "doctor" in a hospital has at least this.
* Juris Doctor (JD) i,e Doctor of Jurisprudence
+ which in many countries required to be a lawyer
+ by tradition laywers never take the title Dr.
There are a lot of professional doctorate holders.
You've probably seen the thing about PhD holders not using the title Dr on plane tickets because they don't want to be called upon for medical assistance (which they can not provide).
There are probably more PhDs awarded each year than MDs.
But not by a huge margin.
In 2014 the US had 18,078 MDs graduate ([source](https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/total-medical-school-graduates/?currentTimeframe=1&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D))
and 54,070 PhDs; of those only about 40,000 were in science and engineering and of those only a very small portion would be in medical science ([source](https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2016/nsf16300/digest/nsf16300.pdf)).
Also in 2014 the US had 43,832 JDs graduate ([source](https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/statistics/2014_law_graduate_employment_data_042915.authcheckdam.pdf)).
This is as compared to only 14,000 nonscience and engineering PhDs; of which only a small portion of which would be in Law.
I posit that for any field with a professional doctorate (I can only think of MD and JD) there will be an order of magnitude more professional doctorates than PhDs in that field.
The only reason PhD numbers are so high vs professional doctorates, is because they are the same degree no matter the field.
Similarly, the only reason they are high compared to Dr.Ing etc is that those degree are only common in certain countries; *and* are field specific.
And vs Higher doctorates: they are prerequed on PhD, and are field specific.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The title *philosophiae doctor* is a remnant from a time when there were no "degree requirements" for jobs and there was not a myriad of different sub-fields: the title "doctor of philosophy" comes from the Greek *philosophia*, literally "love of wisdom". In other words, doctors of "[philosophy](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philosophy&oldid=815419363#Introduction)" were originally much more "free" in what they could and did contribute to intellectually, which is more of an artifact of how far we've progressed in terms of research between now and then than anything else (cf. [Wikipedia for a good overview of university structure from Medieval times onwards](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Doctor_of_Philosophy&oldid=817234427#History)).
This is shown by the great number of [polymaths](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymath) in the past in relation to now, including but in no way limited to
* Aristotle (384–322 BC),
* Archimedes (c.287–c.212 BC)
* Ptolemy (90–168 AD)
* Jābir ibn Hayyān (Geber) (721–815)
* <NAME>-Andalusi (994–1064)
* <NAME> (1098–1179)
* <NAME> (1404–1472)
* <NAME> (1452–1519)
* Copernicus (1473–1543)
* <NAME> (1480–c.1564)
* Akbar the Great (1542–1605)
* <NAME> (1643–1727)
* <NAME> (1646–1716)
* <NAME> (1706–1790)
* <NAME> (1711–1765)
* <NAME> (1711–1776)
(cf. [<NAME>one's *Intro to Humanities* site](http://www.johnchiappone.com/polymaths.html) for many more)
There are many more people with higher degrees now per capita than there were back then, so there should theoretically be *more* polymaths now, but the state of the art has progressed to a level that staying cutting-edge in many fields at once is now much harder. However, even now, people who earned their PhD in one field can and often do go on to contribute to other fields, thus meaning that the spirit of the *doctor philosophiae* is still alive.
Xkcd made [a comic of a very old joke which illustrates this well](https://xkcd.com/435/), but the joke as I know it repeats "*A* is just applied *B*" until it terminates at something like
1. Mathematics is just applied logic, and
2. logic is just applied **philosophy**.
Being someone with a philosophy-leaning background myself, I'd say the author stopped at mathematics because he's a mathematician (it turns out he's a physicist with a sense of humor good enough to be make fun of himself!).
Origins of the PhD title and its spread
---------------------------------------
The PhD title originated in Germany as a comprehensive title not specific to any field and was popularized by Americans who studied there and brought the title back to the US. [See Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Doctor_of_Philosophy&oldid=817234427#Educational_reforms_in_Germany):
>
> This situation changed in the early 19th century through the educational reforms in Germany, most strongly embodied in the model of the University of Berlin, founded and controlled by the Prussian government in 1810. The arts faculty, which in Germany was labelled the faculty of philosophy, started demanding contributions to research,[15] attested by a dissertation, for the award of their final degree, which was labelled Doctor of Philosophy (abbreviated as Ph.D.)—originally this was just the German equivalent of the Master of Arts degree. Whereas in the Middle Ages the arts faculty had a set curriculum, based upon the trivium and the quadrivium, by the 19th century it had come to house all the courses of study in subjects now commonly referred to as sciences and humanities.[16] Professors across the humanities and sciences focused on their advanced research.[17] Practically all the funding came from the central government, and it could be cut off if the professor was politically unacceptable.[relevant? – discuss][18]
>
>
> These reforms proved extremely successful, and fairly quickly the German universities started attracting foreign students, notably from the United States. The American students would go to Germany to obtain a PhD after having studied for a bachelor's degrees at an American college. So influential was this practice that it was imported to the United States, where in 1861 Yale University started granting the PhD degree to younger students who, after having obtained the bachelor's degree, had completed a prescribed course of graduate study and successfully defended a thesis or dissertation containing original research in science or in the humanities.[19] In Germany, the name of the doctorate was adapted after the philosophy faculty started being split up − e.g. Dr. rer. nat. for doctorates in the faculty of natural sciences − but in most of the English-speaking world the name "Doctor of Philosophy" was retained for research doctorates in all disciplines.
>
>
> The PhD degree and similar awards spread across Europe in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The degree was introduced in France in 1808, replacing diplomas as the highest academic degree; into Russia in 1819, when the Doktor Nauk degree, roughly equivalent to a PhD, gradually started replacing the specialist diploma, roughly equivalent to the MA, as the highest academic degree; and in Italy in 1927, when PhDs gradually started replacing the Laurea as the highest academic degree.[citation needed]
>
>
>
Despite specialist terminal degrees appearing in other countries, this never gained much traction in the US and to a lesser extent in other parts of the Anglosphere. Additionally, in the Anglosphere (especially in the US), the ideal of greater education as being truly comprehensive in this manner seems to remain stronger than in e.g. continental Europe, with the tradition of [liberal arts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts_education) still being very strong there while being relatively uncommon in higher levels of education in continental Europe. This **could** explain how the modern notion of the single title "PhD" as a terminal research degree [seems to have spread from the US](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Doctor_of_Philosophy&oldid=817234427#History_in_the_United_States): Many universities outside the Anglosphere which previously offered terminal degrees other than the PhD are now offering them as a trend of the times and increased internationalization, thus explaining some of the perceived convergence towards the PhD as a single terminal degree even outside of the Anglosphere.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: A Ph.D. refers to an *academic* doctorate. Which means it is awarded upon completing a body of *original research* in recognition of such completion. *Professional* doctorate degrees -- MD, JD, DMD, DDS, DO, DC, Psy. D., Pharm.D (and I am borrowing this list from one of the other answers to this question) -- are awarded in recognition of attaining a high level of professional training in those disciplines.
Incidentally, "philosophy" used to refer to all studies which we call *academic* today. So the title "Philosophy Doctor" stems from those times.
BTW, there is a number of people with double titles MD,Ph.D and DDS,Ph.D. These indicate both academic research credentials and clinical training credentials. Presumably, a Ph.D. (in one of life sciences) could be received without ever seeing a human patient. Whereas an MD is more patient-oriented.
Upvotes: 2
|
2017/12/27
| 295
| 1,232
|
<issue_start>username_0: As stated in the subject, Paper A that cited Paper B is found via GoogleScholar (as is paper B), yet the citation is not counted for Paper B. Can anybody offer some insight into how this can happen or why?
Note that the paper B was properly cited by paper A, via a citation export on one of the popular services.
Is this common? I thank you in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: To determine that A cites B, Google Scholar parses the citation list at the end of paper A. There are a number of things that could go wrong there: bad OCR, use of ligatures in Latex, confusion between papers with the same title, a "references" section that Google does not identify as such...
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Firstly, congratulations on your first citation! Similarly, my first paper had problems with Google Scholar, such as Google Scholar not finding it and when it did, it combined the citations with a few other papers. It eventually resolved itself about 6 months later (as others said).
So just be patient! Google Scholar will find it in time - I have found various papers citing my works but Google Scholar has not picked it up yet (though it is usually pretty good).
Upvotes: 1
|
2017/12/27
| 678
| 2,778
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a former student employee, I was fairly ignorant of labor laws in general. But now as I am applying to graduate programs, given the increased demands and duties of graduate students: teaching, research, etc. I wonder if US labor laws still apply to student labor in general.
Given anecdotal stories of overstressed graduate students working well beyond a ‘planned’ 40 work week on a stipend that when calculated on a per hour basis may equate to less than minimum wage; and the types of work that students do: laboratory research, fieldwork, custodial, food service, etc. Surely there are protections in place to prevent abuse and overworking students of all types.<issue_comment>username_1: In the way you are describing, i.e. salary per hour, I do not think labor laws apply. Standard workweek for grad students doing research is 50-60 hours presence in the lab.For most (engineering) stipends I'm aware of this would be slightly above minimum wage. If one were working more hours or had less stipend and fell below that quota, I doubt nothing would ever be done about it in a reasonable amount of time. It is even difficult for grad students to form a union to address these issues.
I would also add a lot of what grad students do when they are present is also not work, if I had an experiment running and went to the gym for 2 h, I was present on campus for those two hours but not really working. Same goes for facebook, watching netflix, joining clubs, taking language courses for fun, etc, lots of things grad students do to pass the long hours.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Graduate students fall into a gray area with respect to American labor law, because they are a bit of a hybrid between students and employees. At least for the first year or two, they are usually mostly taking classes, and doing some research, but the balance shifts more toward research in later years.
As for the number of hours worked:
>
> Research ideas don't wait until you punch in in the morning.
>
>
>
The expected workload completely depends on the culture of the lab. I knew of groups in my old department where there really were no "expected schedules," and other groups where the expectation was about 80 hours per week!
That said, graduate students in my department worked a wide variety of different schedules. Some were night owls, who showed up around 10 or 11 at night, and stayed until 8 in the morning. Others were punctually showing up around 9 am and sticking around to 5 or 5:30 in the evening—and everything else imaginable.
Personally, there were days when I worked from 8:00 to 6:00 or so; other days around deadlines I might work until midnight; still other days I'd take a half-day or so.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2017/12/27
| 442
| 1,662
|
<issue_start>username_0: Does everyone who is doing a PhD has to dabble in philosophy to a certain extent?
The question is irrespective of the field of research.<issue_comment>username_1: **No**. In fact, the vast majority of PhDs do not study philosophy in any reasonable sense.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No. This is a misinterpretation of what “Ph.D.” means. The full title of the degree is *Philosophiae doctor*, technically a doctor “of philosophy.” However, this does not mean "philosophy" in the modern sense, but rather someone who pursues knowledge (“lover of wisdom”—the source of "philosophy"), not necessarily someone who studies philosophy.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on what is your definition of philosophy.
In my view philosophy is a discussion of 5 elements 1) Yourself 2) The nature 3) God 4) Life 5) Death
If we go by above definition P.hd is studying on at least one aspect. If one can study and understand all above aspects then he is a philosopher.
To answer your question. No most of the phd students don’t study philosophy.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: From the Greek, "philosophy" literally means the "love of wisdom". If we define philosophy as a study that encompasses knowledge, language, and reason, then everything we study touches upon philosophy. So in this particular sense, the answer to your question is "yes".
However, for the vast majority of PhDs (other than in philosophy, theology, and other related fields) there is no requirement to take any philosophy courses or even to know how to spell Plato. So, in this particular sense, the answer to your question is "no".
Upvotes: 1
|
2017/12/27
| 1,057
| 4,536
|
<issue_start>username_0: Let us assume that a postdoc is applying for a tenure-track faculty position in computer science in an English- or German-speaking country. After submitting the application, the postdoc contacted certain faculty members of the target institution and gave them a heads-up about the application. Now, **you** are one of the contacted members. You work in the same field, but know nothing about the candidate; you have not cited his/her papers or vice versa, you've never chatted with him/her, and no senior person has spoken in his/her favor or against him/her. What is your usual approach towards the candidate's request for attention? Here are some possibilities:
1. That's spam. You don't know the sender and don't have time to care; you move the letter to the trash bin and stay neutral.
2. The applicant seems to be too weak, arrogant, or in despair so that he/she has to speak for himself (instead of his advisor); you decide to vote against him/her.
3. The applicant's area is near to yours; you decide to take a look at his/her application to find out whether a future collaboration is deemed possible.
4. You copy-and-paste a boilerplate standard answer. (E.g. "Your research and teaching statements as well as your CV are very impressive! Unfortunately, I'm only very marginally involved into the hiring process. If the hiring committee asks me, I'll bring their attention to your application.") You really don't wish to be influenced but get kudos in case the candidate gets the job.
5. ... (your experience goes here) ...
(An aside: this question is different from [How is the applicant's bringing attention to his/her own application viewed if you know little about him/her?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/101229/) : there, you know *something*, though little, about the candidate.)<issue_comment>username_1: My take is that it may not help, but it won't hurt. We get these emails all the time, so you contacting faculty members is not unheard of or out of the ordinary. I don't see it as a "desperation move".
The reality -- understood by all who make hiring decisions -- is that a candidate may be good but will in many cases be ignored if nobody in a department knows the person or has close connections to one of the letter writers. That's because departments get dozens or hundreds of applications for each position, and people -- for better or worse -- need to sift through them to whittle things down to a manageable number of candidates. It is just a true fact that it sometimes takes an unsolicited email for someone to actually take a close look at a file. There is no stigma attached with sending such email -- though there is also no guarantee that anyone will take the time to actually look at your file in great detail.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want to send such an email, you could contact someone in the department with whom you have some special affinity, and personalize the note. Aim to interest this person in not just you, but the specific sub-field you and that person share an interest in. Make it a friendly letter. After you draft it, read it over, imagining receiving it ten years from now. In this letter, you can mention names of people you and that person both know. To do this well, you will have to spend some time looking over the faculty and postdocs at the target department to choose a person with shared interests, and then looking over the chosen person's CV to get a feel for their research interests, how yours would complement and reinforce theirs, what people you might know in common. That last one makes it easier for that person to contact a common acquaintance for their impressions of you. Once you understand what the person's research program has been and what direction this person is going in now, you'll be in a better position to let him or her know what strikes you as exciting about what they're doing. You can send a reprint or a preprint if you have something that relates.
I'm not exactly answering your question, I'm suggesting a way of doing what you have in mind, that would maximize its effectiveness.
But this type of networking can also be done over time, at conferences and in response to your reading, prior to the application process.
At the application stage, the best use of your time might be to contact the people you have networked with over time, to let them know where you're applying, so they can put in a good word for you if they know someone at one of those departments.
Upvotes: 2
|
2017/12/28
| 1,036
| 4,443
|
<issue_start>username_0: Sometimes you need to find out *quickly* whether one of your papers has cited a particular researcher given only the name of that researcher. Is there a tool for that? Assume you have used the bibtex format so far to manage your references, but your bibtex files contain much more than what you've actually cited. You have no Zotero or Mendely and don't want to mess with them unless really necessary. You have your own webpage with lots of paper copies, and you have profiles at Google Scholar, ResearcherId, and Orcid.
Google Scholar and ResearcherID can tell you who cites you. As opposed to that, you wish to determine whether you cite someone else (or not). To start with, a binary answer (yes/no) would do. You would like to run such a query several times, one researcher at a time. Ideally, the query would give you some (or even all) of your papers which cite the given researcher, but it's not a must.
Surely you can do that by putting all your texts together, converting them all to text or html, and then searching there. This is tedious and error-prone, though. Is there any online (or offline) service for that, perhaps? The database in which the search is done must be a (possibly large) underapproximation of the papers you have written so far.<issue_comment>username_1: If you really want to search all the articles that you have written, then you shouldn't depend on an external service like Google Scholar or Web of Science to do that for you: you should assemble it yourself. Such indexes would only include the subset of your published articles that meet their indexing criteria. Moreover, I don't think that either of these services guarantee that they index the full text of all your articles that they index (they might have many, but probably not all).
So, there are at least two ways you could search your personal collection of your own articles:
* I recommend that you add the full citations with the full text (PDF or word processor document) of all your articles to a reference manager like [Zotero](https://www.zotero.org) or [Mendeley](https://www.mendeley.com). Then you should assemble all your articles in one folder or collection, and then search the name of the authors you are seeking within that folder only. I recommend this solution because there are benefits to assembling your own articles into one folder beyond just this one assignment of identifying authors whom you have cited.
* Another alternative is to put the full text of all your articles into one folder in your computer and then use a full text search tool to search that folder. I don't have any particular tool to recommend, but I know that [there are a lot of free ones available](https://www.google.fr/search?q=full%20text%20search%20software).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are fine with looking at only Web of Science indexed articles then yes, this is easily possible using Web of Science.
1. Do a "Cited Reference Search" and search for the name of the researcher you are interested in
2. Select the publication of that researcher and hit "Finish Search", you now end up with a list of every paper citing the previously selected papers of that researcher
3. Do a basic author search of your own name, you end up with a list of your own papers.
4. Go to "Search History" and select these two searches and combine the two sets with the "AND" operator.
There's another way to do this using Web of Science. It will take some time and work to set up (depending on how many publications you have) but the process of checking can be automated afterwards. You have to create a list of all papers you cited which includes the author names of the cited papers.
1. Search for your publications on Web of science
2. For each publication open the details, on the right it shows the number of "Cited references", click on that number you end up with a list of papers you cited
3. Export this list to endnote (you have to do this for every page)
4. Eliminate duplicates in Endnote.
You now have an Endnote database with all the publications you cited which can easily be searched for authors.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Tools like [recoll](http://www.lesbonscomptes.com/recoll/) can be used to search a collection of documents for keywords. This will do the job as long as the author's name actually appears in one of your papers. However, it won't catch "et al." citations.
Upvotes: 1
|
2017/12/28
| 277
| 1,156
|
<issue_start>username_0: A professor for my one course didn't calculate an attendance and participation grade into my final grade but it was worth 20 percent in the syllabus.<issue_comment>username_1: I would argue that an instructor has the right to deviate from the syllabus's method *if it does not unfairly penalize any student*.
I had this happen recently when I told a class that the weighting of the final exam was different from how it was calculated on the syllabus. Because the change benefited everyone in the class, except for one student who was right in the middle of a grade range (and was only disadvantaged by about 1 point out of 1000), and therefore was not hurt by the change, I kept the more beneficial weighting.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A syllabus is often considered to be a kind of contract, which the instructor would be violating if they changed the terms without notifying the students. But in the case you're describing it's more likely either you or the instructor made an error in calculating your grade. It's certainly reasonable to ask for an explanation of exactly how your grade was determined.
Upvotes: 0
|
2017/12/28
| 961
| 4,067
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a paper that contains links to documentation that lives as a collection of web pages. I'm looking to host these webpages somewhere such that I can create a direct link to a page from my paper, and such that the website is persistent. This means that I would like to get a DOI or something similar for the website.
Is there a service or other means so that I can accomplish this?<issue_comment>username_1: The **PURL service** (<https://archive.org/services/purl/>) allows you to create a persistent URL (e.g., "<http://purl.org/my-thing>") that redirects to a specified target URL.
You have the flexibility of changing the target URL at any time (e.g., when the target website undergoes a content reorganization or web host migration, breaking the previous URLs).
Also, *partial* PURL redirections are supported, for which you can use one PURL record to handle all resources that share a common location prefix (e.g., "<http://purl.org/my-doc/A>" redirects to "<http://example.com/doc/A>").
If the target website is yours, then you may need to shop around for a suitable web host;
free web hosting services may or may not be sufficient or appropriate, depending on the size and complexity of your website (dependencies on frameworks, databases, etc.), expected traffic, whether you mind serving ads, etc.
If the target website is third party, then you may need to monitor it over time to ensure that your PURL remains valid and accurate.
The PURL service is hosted by the [Internet Archive](https://archive.org/), which IMHO will be around for a long time.
**Wayback Machine** (<https://archive.org/web/>), also hosted by the [Internet Archive](https://archive.org/), is another option, especially if the webpage contents are relatively stable (or immutable).
This service allows you to "capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future".
Other similar webpage archival services include
**Perma.cc** (<https://perma.cc/>) and
**archive.is** (<https://archive.is/>).
These options work best for simple static webpages (text and images);
I recommend testing them carefully to ensure that the archived version of the website is sufficiently accurate and that you do not lose too much functionality.
**figshare** (<https://figshare.com/>) is yet another approach along the lines of open research.
This is a "repository where users can make all of their research outputs available in a citable, shareable and discoverable manner".
figshare issues a DOI for your uploaded content.
This could work if you can package the website contents suitably for viewing through figshare.
Finally, you can also directly create a new DOI for your website through a suitable **DataCite** (<https://www.datacite.org/>) member (see list of [current members](https://www.datacite.org/members.html)).
---
Assuming a simple static website, I would suggest the following steps:
1. Host your website on a free web hosting service (e.g., GitHub Pages, Neocities), create a PURL to point to it, and include the PURL in your paper and the website itself (use partial PURL redirects to handle individual pages that share a common location prefix);
2. Archive a simplified snapshot of your website (perhaps on a single page) on the Wayback Machine, and include the resulting link on your website too; and
3. After the paper is published, add the complete paper citation with DOI to your website, and archive it again on the Wayback Machine.
I believe this should help readers of your paper find your website and/or its contents long after the paper is published, using the published links or general search engines.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To my knowledge there's no single service that provides both free web page hosting and a [PID](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_identifier).
I believe one of the best way you can solve your problem is to use **[zenodo](https://zenodo.org/)** and its **GitHub integration** to freely obtain an actual DOI linked to a *versioned* *static* web page.
Upvotes: 0
|
2017/12/28
| 1,146
| 4,797
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in a need of a career advice, and I can't really think up any better to ask than all of you.
There is a post-doc position within upgrading biofuel that I am almost certain to be offered. There is some catalysis involved, but it is somewhat away from my primary interests: Organic synthesis and polymers. Similar positions within these topics are scarce, but at my alma mater they would hire me immediately if they get the funds nescessary.
What should I do? Accept being away from home ground for two years, working on getting funding for the Chemistry department, or sit tight and hope that a better fitting position comes along?
Cheers,
EDIT:
I would like to precise, that I am going to apply for funding for an industrial post-doc together with a company. They are highly interested in me, but lack the funding. The job would be way more aligned with synthesis and polymer chemistry - but I will have to take a calculated risk: There is a 60% success rate for the applications, but I'll have be without job (2 months) until we get a (hopefully) positive answer.
Is the post-doc really that career-determining?<issue_comment>username_1: The **PURL service** (<https://archive.org/services/purl/>) allows you to create a persistent URL (e.g., "<http://purl.org/my-thing>") that redirects to a specified target URL.
You have the flexibility of changing the target URL at any time (e.g., when the target website undergoes a content reorganization or web host migration, breaking the previous URLs).
Also, *partial* PURL redirections are supported, for which you can use one PURL record to handle all resources that share a common location prefix (e.g., "<http://purl.org/my-doc/A>" redirects to "<http://example.com/doc/A>").
If the target website is yours, then you may need to shop around for a suitable web host;
free web hosting services may or may not be sufficient or appropriate, depending on the size and complexity of your website (dependencies on frameworks, databases, etc.), expected traffic, whether you mind serving ads, etc.
If the target website is third party, then you may need to monitor it over time to ensure that your PURL remains valid and accurate.
The PURL service is hosted by the [Internet Archive](https://archive.org/), which IMHO will be around for a long time.
**Wayback Machine** (<https://archive.org/web/>), also hosted by the [Internet Archive](https://archive.org/), is another option, especially if the webpage contents are relatively stable (or immutable).
This service allows you to "capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future".
Other similar webpage archival services include
**Perma.cc** (<https://perma.cc/>) and
**archive.is** (<https://archive.is/>).
These options work best for simple static webpages (text and images);
I recommend testing them carefully to ensure that the archived version of the website is sufficiently accurate and that you do not lose too much functionality.
**figshare** (<https://figshare.com/>) is yet another approach along the lines of open research.
This is a "repository where users can make all of their research outputs available in a citable, shareable and discoverable manner".
figshare issues a DOI for your uploaded content.
This could work if you can package the website contents suitably for viewing through figshare.
Finally, you can also directly create a new DOI for your website through a suitable **DataCite** (<https://www.datacite.org/>) member (see list of [current members](https://www.datacite.org/members.html)).
---
Assuming a simple static website, I would suggest the following steps:
1. Host your website on a free web hosting service (e.g., GitHub Pages, Neocities), create a PURL to point to it, and include the PURL in your paper and the website itself (use partial PURL redirects to handle individual pages that share a common location prefix);
2. Archive a simplified snapshot of your website (perhaps on a single page) on the Wayback Machine, and include the resulting link on your website too; and
3. After the paper is published, add the complete paper citation with DOI to your website, and archive it again on the Wayback Machine.
I believe this should help readers of your paper find your website and/or its contents long after the paper is published, using the published links or general search engines.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To my knowledge there's no single service that provides both free web page hosting and a [PID](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_identifier).
I believe one of the best way you can solve your problem is to use **[zenodo](https://zenodo.org/)** and its **GitHub integration** to freely obtain an actual DOI linked to a *versioned* *static* web page.
Upvotes: 0
|
2017/12/28
| 1,568
| 6,995
|
<issue_start>username_0: In addition to academic work, I have done private work in industry that is directly related to the material I'm presenting. For one of my lessons, I would like to do a case study, where I take a problem posed by one of my clients and discuss the thought process and methodology I utilized to solve the problem.
For the case study, I do not intend to reference the company name (instead referring to them as "Company X"). I intended to keep the industry and solution mostly the same, although I would not present or divulge any source code from the deliverable or data from the actual company.
My concern is that the technology I developed for the company may be considered proprietary or a trade secret by the company. While I wouldn't be presenting enough for someone to identify the client or exactly how I solved the problem, I fear that I may no longer have the right to present on this information without explicit permission from the former client.
To enumerate, my question has the following facets:
* Do I have an ethical or legal obligation (in the United States) to ask the former client's permission before doing an anonymized case study, even if none of their data or my deliverable is presented?
* Is there any standard or rule of thumb for using personal real-world examples in an academic setting while respecting a company's right to maintain trade secrets?
To clarify, there was no NDA/Intellectual Property transfer document or other legal document that could complicate the situation. The work was performed as a independent contractor in the United States.<issue_comment>username_1: Honestly, I would not do this.
I am not familiar with US law so I cannot give you any legal advice. However, there are several other non-legal risks you have to bear.
According to your description, you intend to stick closely to the real case in your presentation. The students might be intelligent enough to draw the necessary conclusions or could even be involved with the company. I would not risk this.
As a result, the company *could* get the impression, that you have leaked confidential data to the students. Indepdent from the question whether this is illegal or legal, facing a lawsuit can easily have a disastrous effect on your career. Furthermore, this can also result in loss of trust, again impacting your career.
I only see two possible options here:
* You ask your former client for a written(!) permission
* You largely modify your example / problem
Both methods, when done correctly, will save you from a lot of risk.
I had a similar problem, when I wanted to write a paper about work I did for an industry partner. Usually, this is quite strict, since nobody wants to have their confidential solutions published. However, I was able to chance the problem and solution sufficiently. Despite the same ideas were used, the original problem and client remained hidden and I was able to publish my ideas. This was quite a lot of work to do, since I had to redo most of the code and experiments. Altogether, this was worth the effort since I do not have any fear of legal consequences and we still have a good relationship to our clients.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Do I have an ethical or legal obligation to ask the former client's
> permission before doing an anonymized case study, even if none of
> their data or my deliverable is presented?
>
>
>
At a minimum, you have an ethical obligation to comply with the consulting agreement. If your legal obligation under the specific terms of the agreement are unclear to you, then you have an ethical obligation to seek clarification before using the information/material, because if not, you could inadvertently breach the agreement and an inadvertent breach is still a breach for which you may be held accountable. If you are under no confidentiality or consulting agreement (as you mentioned) then the decision seems to be largely a matter of professional judgement.
>
> Is there any standard or rule of thumb for using personal real-world
> examples in an academic setting while respecting a company's right to
> maintain trade secrets?
>
>
>
Companies that do not require a confidentiality agreement cannot expect their information to remain confidential, but consultants that divulge confidential information cannot expect to retain a professional reputation and keep getting hired. The best practice is to always treat client information as if you were under contract, even when you are not.
The lack of a consulting agreement can signal that the company is unconcerned about the secrecy of information you were privy to, or that your professional courtesy is taken for granted, or that someone forgot to ask you to sign the agreement, or that the company has not yet gotten around to creating one yet... The problem is that without a contract to explain the company's interests, you may not know what types of information are most important not to disclose.
In my experience, confidentiality agreements usually require the return of all files, supplies, and so on to the company at the conclusion of the project. In that case, the use of any physical/digital assets from the project, or dissemination of any company information not available to the public, for purposes other than the company's interests would put the contractor at risk.
While it can feel uncomfortable broaching topics like this with a client - maybe the project did not go well or you did not get along with the client, or maybe it just seems like asking will raise alarms - no one knows better than the client whether the client would have an issue with your proposed use of information. If you do ask, and the client says 'yes', then you can proceed safely with no further discomfort. If the client says 'no' you have avoided trouble and demonstrated your integrity, though you will have do deal with the need to produce alternative subject matter. Finally, large companies are likely to have a legal department (probably not relevant in this case) that are accustomed to answering questions about potential conflict of interest. Simply asking questions does not imply guilt.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: It sounds like this might be your first time through this, so I think you should get a consultation with an employment or intellectual property attorney to get the legal framework. What you learn you'll use again, so it's worth the money.
I'm not an attorney, but I think you're in the clear to go ahead with your plan as described to provide an anonymized and abstracted description of the problem and your solution. To me, the important points are (1) the lack of any written confidentiality agreement, (2) the lack of any reason to believe that disclosure would harm their interests, (3) the academic purpose, (4) the limited and anonymized nature of the disclosure, (5) the disclosure is of your own skill and personal experience.
Upvotes: 1
|
2017/12/28
| 1,296
| 5,352
|
<issue_start>username_0: Three months ago, I submitted a manuscript to one of the most respected journals in my field. Today, I received comments from reviewers stating that my paper is not worth publishing in the journal. However, the editor decided to give it a major revision instead of outright rejection. Should I proceed to address all the questions posed by reviewers or should I just withdraw the paper and submit it elsewhere to save time?
EDIT:
Right now it seems impossible for me to pull off some of the outrageous suggestions from reviewers. They asked me to prove my theory by applying more expensive method that unfortunately cannot be afforded by my supervisor as her grant has already ran out and we lack of funding now. Another reviewer also ridiculed my experimental method and claimed that my method had lots of flaws.<issue_comment>username_1: Based on the description, I would advise you to sleep on it, suck it up, respond to the reviewers, revise the paper, and submit your revision to the journal.
Yes, reviewers can be absolutely, disgustingly, and unnecessarily rude and mean. Read their review, filter their non-technical rants, keep whatever helpful criticism you can extract from their comments, and address them nicely and respectfully. It may actually be that the techniques you used were adequate but you failed to point out why and how it would be unnecessary to use more expensive methods. Always assume that they are right. If they are mistaken, respectfully point out in your response why you are right and edit the original manuscript to make the issue clearer to future readers.
For instance, if the reviewer wrote:
>
> The methods used in the paper are abysmal. The authors use an outdated
> and archaic method, which is also very uncertain, to measure the mass
> of the frogs, which is by weighting them on a scale. The atomic mass
> interferometer, which uses gravitational waves and is able to
> precisely infer mass with an uncertainty of one atomic mass unit per kilogram,
> is the state of the art in weighting.
>
>
>
You can write as a response:
>
> The reviewer is absolutely correct that atomic mass interferometry
> (AMI) is the state of the art in weighting. However, we opted to use
> analytical scales to measure the mass of the frogs because the mass
> variations that we expected to measure are of at least 1 g, a quantity
> signficantly higher than the uncertainty of even the most rudimentary
> analytical scales. We do, however, agree, that the quantum mechanical
> analysis of the molecular buildup in neural entangled channels in
> during frog electrophoresis, which is suggested as an interesting
> prospective investigation, will benefit from the low uncertainty
> provided by AMI.
>
>
> In order to make it clear that the methods used in our study were
> adequate, we have modified the original manuscript to include the
> following sentence in the second paragraph of page 5:
>
>
> *While there are more precise methods to infer mass, such as atomic
> mass interferometry, analytical scales offer accuracies that are
> compatible with the 1 g mass variations that were found in this study
> (see Table 3, for instance).*
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I concur with the answer FBoist gave, but wanted to add an emphasis on the fact that in your case, the editor decided to give you a chance to revise instead of rejecting outright. I think this is a sign that the editor sees the potential value in your research work, but wants you to address the legitimate concerns the reviewers raised explicitly, both in your manuscript and the response.
In my own experience, I have had a manuscript which came back with a very long list of suggestions, many of which seemed impossible at the time. In my estimation, the amount of work suggested would have made a good PhD thesis! Through several rounds of review, the paper was modified to address those which we were able to address, make more explicit the limitations of our method, and define some things as out of scope or belonging to future work.
I think the fact that the editor invited you to resubmit means that he believes your work is of enough importance and volume to be published in the journal, but wants to make sure you are able to adequately address the concerns raised by the reviewers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Given the difference between reviewer comments and editor decision, it would be worth talking to the editor to clarify what's required before you put in a lot of work that may not be necessary.
For example, in response to this:
>
> They asked me to prove my theory by applying more expensive method that unfortunately cannot be afforded by my supervisor as her grant has already ran out and we lack of funding now.
>
>
>
You could query the editor, e.g.:
>
> Reviewer 2 has requested that we use $METHOD to confirm this theory, but due to funding limitations this is not currently feasible. Would it be acceptable if we acknowledge this issue in the 'Limitations' section and include it as a recommended avenue for future work?
>
>
>
(I tend to phrase my "Possible Further Work" sections in a way that suggests it would be really nice if *somebody* investigates these issues, but without promising that it's going to be me ;-)
Upvotes: 2
|
2017/12/28
| 733
| 3,311
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently finishing up my applications for PhD programs (in the humanities) and, in working on a draft of my statement of purpose for one school that I have not yet turned in, I noticed an error. It is a typo of sorts, the omission of a verb which renders a sentence "nonsensical." The intention of the sentence is still clear but it is quite noticeable. Think something along the lines of "Excited by the interdisciplinary dialogue at Harvard." as the uncorrected sentence, missing an "I am" at the beginning.
The problem is, I have already submitted this mistake in my statement of purpose for four or five other schools. A friend, who submitted corrections to his applications when he was applying, says that it would be no problem to contact the department/admissions administrative secretary with a corrected PDF. I am afraid of making it worse by submitting corrections, but also would love to fix it if I could.
Any thoughts on what I should do? I am kicking myself for not noticing it... what's really annoying, is that I noticed and fixed it in two applications, but must have reverted to a previous draft for the rest of the schools.
All advice/reassurance/chastisement is appreciated, especially if you have experience with such a blunder yourself.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to your question will probably depend on the department, more so than on the field. Asking if you can replace your essay will probably not hurt your application, but your request is unlikely to be met.
At my institution, for instance, PhD applications are handled first by a few staff members, who will make sure all materials are complete and assign your application to one of the faculty members who you have mentioned in your application and/or who are in the admissions committee. If the secretary has already forwarded your application, then there is nothing the applicant could do to correct it. If it has not been forwarded, there is also nothing you can do about it as the staff members are advised to not accept any separate materials other than letters of recommendation, especially by email, except under very special circumstances (a typo is not one). In this case, your email will probably be ignored or responded with a friendly "there's nothing we can do about it", which will not impact your application in any way, but will entrust another task to the staff members, who are already very loaded.
However, do not send your updated statement on first contact. First make sure that they will accept it (call/email them), and only then send your updated statement. I believe my university provides a specific url for the applicant to upload additional documents.
I am not in the humanities, though.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is not a material error. I wouldn't worry about it. We get much more egregious errors such as uploading the wrong statement (such as for another school) or misspelling the name of the core faculty member you wanted to work with, etc.
You'd think those types of mistakes would be killer, but they really aren't. We realize students are under stress and that application management systems are cumbersome. We're all human in the end.
What's most important is the qualifications of the applicant as a whole.
Upvotes: 4
|
2017/12/28
| 1,755
| 7,797
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm doing my PhD in computer science. I had a few tries for top rank conferences like IJCAI, CVPR and ICML but my paper was rejected from them and consequently I sent the papers to second tier conferences for the sake of having publications.
However when I compare my work with some accepted papers (in previous years or current year) in those conferences, I see similar technical level or novelty in them comparing to mines.
For example reviewers more often mentioned I just added something to the pre-existed approaches or combined already existing things from the literature to shape an algorithm, which I noticed is a common case notable number of papers in the top computer science conferences.
One thing I do not have in my papers is bringing unnecessary but sophisticated math jargon to show something important is happening. For example, I noticed in other's papers although the contribution was for instance adding an extra objective term in the optimization framework, they used complicated algebraic representations or visualization techniques to related their contribution to some bigger underlying phenomena! But the short answer is they did it because it obviously should make the outcome result better.
From another point I'm not sure if I try another top conference (with a new work) and my paper gets rejected, then would it damage my or my supervisor's reputation in the field?
So although I still have great enthusiasm to try for the next relevant top conference, I got a feeling that I'm missing an important ingredient from the recipe!
PS: My advisor is not so competent in this regard and I'm among the first group of his PhD students and you can guess the rest.<issue_comment>username_1: This question has its answer in the responses from the reviewers.
At the end, reviewers and the editor are the ones who decide whether a submission is good enough to appear in a conference/proceedings/journal. If they write that you added something to the pre-existing approaches, then it means that your submission lacks novelty.
Also, maybe *unnecessary but sophisticated math jargon* is the formal definition of the problem whose absence causes terrible ambiguities.
Your reputation being damaged is a very rare case. However, if you keep submitting papers that lack novelty and technical language, then you might be blacklisted. Your supervisor's reputation has nothing to do with this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> they used complicated algebraic representations or visualization techniques to related their contribution to some bigger underlying phenomena! But the short answer is they did it because it obviously should make the outcome result better.
>
>
>
This (relating your contribution to the bigger picture) is an important part in papers in our fields, so I guess in yours, too. The reviewers/readers don't know the bigger picture of your specific research, you need to tell them. Sounds like you don't, whereas others - while doing similar quality research - do.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: One thing I've experienced is not to 'overfit' to accepted papers that have been just published. It is very easy to look at a published paper and say "this isn't really very novel! I can do this too!", and then proceed to use this as a benchmark for minimum viable novelty. I also noticed when aiming at the borderline, papers tend to be rejected more. Moreover, there is also the time element. Technical novelty is w.r.t to time.
Then again, I don't think it's healthy to **assume** one's work is up to the novelty bar. You may think your work is actually novel but it *might* not. Reviews and acceptance/rejection results tell the truth, to some extent. There is some variance in results and sometimes luck is not on your side. But I always believe a reasonably okay paper should get into a top conference after 1-2 more tries after it has been rejected once.
What kinds of scores do you normally get? There are many different extents to how a paper gets rejected. There is a big difference between 1 strong accept + 2 reject and 3 x weak rejects.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> One thing I do not have in my papers is bringing unnecessary but sophisticated math jargon to show something important is happening. For example, I noticed in other's papers although the contribution was for instance adding an extra objective term in the optimization framework, they used complicated algebraic representations or visualization techniques to related their contribution to some bigger underlying phenomena! But the short answer is they did it because it obviously should make the outcome result better.
>
>
>
I can think of several ways to interpret this observation, some more charitable than others.
* **Computer science research papers are not about the results per se, but about the techniques developed to attain those results.** It's possible that in the revirewers' eyes, the apparent connection to the larger underlying phenomenon is the main contribution of the paper. The main contribution is not merely **that** the outcome is better, but at least an attempted explanation of **why** the outcome is better.
* **People are bad judges of the quality their own research results.** More to the point: Your opinion of your research is irrelevant; only your peers' opinions actually matter. If they find your papers less interesting than others, then *by definition* your papers are less interesting.
* **Emerson was wrong. The world will *not* beat a path to your door if you merely [build a better mousetrap](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build_a_better_mousetrap,_and_the_world_will_beat_a_path_to_your_door).** You have to sell your results. For your papers to be accepted, they must follow the cultural expectations of your audience. If the IJCAI/ICML/CVPR audience expects a certain level of mathematical sophistication, then papers that do not display that sophistication are less likely to be accepted, *even if that sophistication is unnecessary*.
* **It is very easy to confuse mathematical depth/complexity with importance/difficulty.** Top theoretical computer science conferences have a reputation for preferring more mathematically "difficult" papers to papers using more elementary techniques, and *lots* of reviewers assume without justification that any result that appears straightforward in retrospect must have been easy to derive. But unless someone proves that P=NP, "trivial" is different from "nondeterministically trivial".
* **Because CVPR, ICML, and IJCAI are enormous conferences with low acceptance rates, acceptance decisions have high variance.** Given the breadth and complexity of the field, the ridiculous number of submissions, and the limited time for reviews, it is *impossible* for the program committee to make fully informed judgements about every submission. There is an element of randomness even at smaller conferences, but for larger prestigious conferences, the randomness overwhelms the actual "signal". In 2014, NIPS ran an experiment with two independent program committees; [most papers accepted by one committee were rejected by the other](http://blog.mrtz.org/2014/12/15/the-nips-experiment.html). It amazes me that anyone found this result surprising.
* **PC members are apes; they do apey things.** As in any other large community, there are sub-communities within machine learning that prefer their own papers to others. Even though submissions are blinded, reviewers can identify tribal affiliation—if only subconsciously—by writing style, citation patterns, choice of method, choice of data set, or choice of evaluation metrics. If you're not in the right tribe, your papers are less likely to be accepted.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2017/12/28
| 631
| 2,853
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my recommenders has not yet submitted recommendation letter for my PhD application. Unfortunately, he lost his brother and has not been able to "take care of his professional duties for some days". The application was due on Dec 15 (today is Dec 28). What should I do?
I have submitted my application for PhD programs at UIUC (CS), CMU (RI), GaTech (ECE), TAMU (CS), UMich (CSE), and McGill (CS). Do any of these programs even consider PhD applications (or admit students) with 2 recommendation letters?<issue_comment>username_1: You are the applicant here, you should be the person able to answer this question.
Look at the guidelines of your applications and confirm whether the recommendation letters are a mandatory item for your candidature to be considered or if it is optional. In general, recommendation letters are optionals.
In which concerns your recommender, I would not bother him in this sad moment. Try to ask to another professor to write a recommendation letter for you instead, if you really need one more letter.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm sorry about this situation. I suggest that you find someone else who is willing to write you a letter within a short timespan.
Talk to the programs to which you have applied to understand how they will consider a late letter of recommendation. Many programs are very lax as to when a letter of recommendation arrives, but will begin sorting and analyzing candidates the day after the deadline (some even before!). Tell the programs, either by phone or by e-mail, that your reference has just recently informed you that something personal has occurred and that it is unlikely they will be able to provide you with a letter, but that you have already arranged with another person to submit it. Ask about how and if your late recommendation will be considered, and whether your application will suffer from it. Also ask how you can include *an additional* reference in the system if it is not directly available through the system.
I know that some programs will look into candidates even if their file is incomplete. However, they will only officially admit you once all documents are in place. Some will reach to you to let you know that you are missing a document, but the best way to know is to ask them directly.
If you don't ask someone else to submit a letter, the worst case scenario is that your application won't be considered at all. If someone else submits a letter, the worst case scenario is that you may be competing with a lukewarm letter, which is still better than not competing at all. If the original reference submits their letter, you will have four letters, which is better than two strong and one lukewarm, but not much worse than three strong, and significantly better than just the two.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2017/12/29
| 1,301
| 5,274
|
<issue_start>username_0: The length of a bachelor's degree is often 4 years, a Master's about 2 years, and a PhD 4--forever years. This is pretty consistent across countries and disciplines give or take a year.
My question is: what is the rationale behind how long it takes to complete a degree? When or how was the current recommended length in years developed?<issue_comment>username_1: Specifically for a U.S. bachelor's degree, four years is a *learning requirement,* not a duration requirement. By that I mean that institutions are constrained, by accreditation, tradition, and sometimes by law or regulation, to require learning (work) that can be competed in four years by a student working at "full load." Where I taught, there was a legal requirement that specified the number of credit hours needed for a degree.
Some, perhaps many, students take longer—often much longer—than four years, but they complete the same number of credit-hours as the student who finishes in 3-1/2 years. Some degrees, *e.g.* architecture, are five-year programs. Similar reasoning applies to masters' programs.
Note that, in the absence of such a learning requirement, a university could just hand out degrees. We call those "diploma mills."
So, the answer with respect to undergraduate education in the U.S. and often elsewhere, is that the amount of learning (work) is established by tradition and often embodied in law or regulation. Someone who can complete that work in fewer than four years is free to do so; someone who takes longer is similarly free to do so.
Doctoral programs are different; the work is set out, at least in general, and can often be completed in about three years, but the student is time-limited to seven or ten years to be sure actual progress is being made.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Degrees are standardized by the institutions that give them out, so that they correspond to a certain amount of work; whether that is coursework, teaching, labwork, publications or literature study.
They not only say that you are qualified but also that you have done a certain amount of work. Now, one can (and probably should) take the notion that a certain amount of time invested into something measures your competence with a healthy portion of skepticism. But how else would that be quantified? You could make a case for grading, but that's [a whole matter of speculation as well](https://smallpondscience.com/2014/02/19/what-do-our-grades-measure-academic-savvy-or-actual-learning/) (just one such article, there are many out there).
>
> So, when we assign grades to students, what are we really measuring?
> Are we measuring effort? Are we measuring the ability to memorize
> stuff? Are we measuring the ability to explain things eloquently? Are
> we measuring the ability to anticipate what will be on an exam?
>
>
>
At any point, there are several different programs out there which correspond to different levels of work, for example there are 1-year and 2-year Masters programs, and PhD varies anywhere between 4-6 as you mention it yourself. My PhD was 4.5 years, 1 year of it was supposed to be coursework, half year corresponding to teaching and other dept duties and the rest to be my own research.
Another important aspect is typically funding. I cannot say how it is in the US but in Europe (or at least Scandinavia) the PhD positions are typically tied to specific grants and they are then allocated budgets before the doctoral student even starts. That being the case, when the money runs out, you are expected to be done. :)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: For some recent history: The [Bologna Process](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_Process) started 1999 with the aim to reform and somehow unify the higher education in Europe and has created the European Higher Education Area. During this process many countries reformed their system of higher education and also established new degrees replacing old ones (for example Germany replaced their "Diplom" and "Magister" by Bachelor and Master degrees. The [Bologna declaration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_declaration) does indeed state that the "completion of first cycle studies" (nowadays called Bachelor in most participating countries) should last at least three years and also that "The degree awarded after the first cycle shall also be relevant to the European labour market as an appropriate level of qualification."
So far for the history of the length of a Bachelor degree (at least in Germany). As for the rationale behind the three years, I could only guess (but I won't). The Wikipedia pages do give a pretty good starting point to find more information on this topic - for example you can find the [ECTS User's Guide](http://ec.europa.eu/education/ects/users-guide/docs/ects-users-guide_en.pdf) which gives a lot of information on how the degrees should be achieved. One thing is that 60 ECTS points should make n academic year (on average) and that each point should correspond to 25 to 30 hours of work… I don't know if any of these things or the respective documents answer your question, but this is basically the de facto answer to "Why 3 years for BSc and 2 years for MSc?" (at least for Europe).
Upvotes: 2
|
2017/12/29
| 1,327
| 5,400
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some weeks ago a company contacted me via email. In summary, they offer to pay you if you include a co-author. They also need you to sign an agreement with your University and them. So, from one side, it seems kind of legal (since in the agreement they state "sponsorship"), but from the other side, these practices, I am afraid could lead to unexpected retractions, due to the likely unethical side of the business.
Is this kind of service illegal or unethical?<issue_comment>username_1: Specifically for a U.S. bachelor's degree, four years is a *learning requirement,* not a duration requirement. By that I mean that institutions are constrained, by accreditation, tradition, and sometimes by law or regulation, to require learning (work) that can be competed in four years by a student working at "full load." Where I taught, there was a legal requirement that specified the number of credit hours needed for a degree.
Some, perhaps many, students take longer—often much longer—than four years, but they complete the same number of credit-hours as the student who finishes in 3-1/2 years. Some degrees, *e.g.* architecture, are five-year programs. Similar reasoning applies to masters' programs.
Note that, in the absence of such a learning requirement, a university could just hand out degrees. We call those "diploma mills."
So, the answer with respect to undergraduate education in the U.S. and often elsewhere, is that the amount of learning (work) is established by tradition and often embodied in law or regulation. Someone who can complete that work in fewer than four years is free to do so; someone who takes longer is similarly free to do so.
Doctoral programs are different; the work is set out, at least in general, and can often be completed in about three years, but the student is time-limited to seven or ten years to be sure actual progress is being made.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Degrees are standardized by the institutions that give them out, so that they correspond to a certain amount of work; whether that is coursework, teaching, labwork, publications or literature study.
They not only say that you are qualified but also that you have done a certain amount of work. Now, one can (and probably should) take the notion that a certain amount of time invested into something measures your competence with a healthy portion of skepticism. But how else would that be quantified? You could make a case for grading, but that's [a whole matter of speculation as well](https://smallpondscience.com/2014/02/19/what-do-our-grades-measure-academic-savvy-or-actual-learning/) (just one such article, there are many out there).
>
> So, when we assign grades to students, what are we really measuring?
> Are we measuring effort? Are we measuring the ability to memorize
> stuff? Are we measuring the ability to explain things eloquently? Are
> we measuring the ability to anticipate what will be on an exam?
>
>
>
At any point, there are several different programs out there which correspond to different levels of work, for example there are 1-year and 2-year Masters programs, and PhD varies anywhere between 4-6 as you mention it yourself. My PhD was 4.5 years, 1 year of it was supposed to be coursework, half year corresponding to teaching and other dept duties and the rest to be my own research.
Another important aspect is typically funding. I cannot say how it is in the US but in Europe (or at least Scandinavia) the PhD positions are typically tied to specific grants and they are then allocated budgets before the doctoral student even starts. That being the case, when the money runs out, you are expected to be done. :)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: For some recent history: The [Bologna Process](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_Process) started 1999 with the aim to reform and somehow unify the higher education in Europe and has created the European Higher Education Area. During this process many countries reformed their system of higher education and also established new degrees replacing old ones (for example Germany replaced their "Diplom" and "Magister" by Bachelor and Master degrees. The [Bologna declaration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_declaration) does indeed state that the "completion of first cycle studies" (nowadays called Bachelor in most participating countries) should last at least three years and also that "The degree awarded after the first cycle shall also be relevant to the European labour market as an appropriate level of qualification."
So far for the history of the length of a Bachelor degree (at least in Germany). As for the rationale behind the three years, I could only guess (but I won't). The Wikipedia pages do give a pretty good starting point to find more information on this topic - for example you can find the [ECTS User's Guide](http://ec.europa.eu/education/ects/users-guide/docs/ects-users-guide_en.pdf) which gives a lot of information on how the degrees should be achieved. One thing is that 60 ECTS points should make n academic year (on average) and that each point should correspond to 25 to 30 hours of work… I don't know if any of these things or the respective documents answer your question, but this is basically the de facto answer to "Why 3 years for BSc and 2 years for MSc?" (at least for Europe).
Upvotes: 2
|
2017/12/29
| 1,013
| 4,431
|
<issue_start>username_0: I often hear from PhD students that they see their supervisor only 30 minutes per month, or 30 minutes per semester even. According to my calculations, this adds up to a whopping 13 hours and 6 hours respectively **over a three year period** (if there's no contact during the holidays). This is less than the typical amount of contact hours during an undergraduate week of lectures.
This made me wonder: To what extent does such a PhD supervisor really help you? Even if this supervisor is a star professor, does 6 to 13 hours *over a period of 3 years*, really help you *that* much with your PhD?
To formulate the question differently, let's say you're getting 10,000 education/career points out of your PhD. How many would you get if you got rid of the supervisor and basically had to do it without official guidance?<issue_comment>username_1: When I did my project my supervisor could look at my work for 5 minutes, and ask me 3 questions that would give me 3 weeks work to do.
So, depending on the topic etc that may well be possible in terms of time and can be more than sufficient help.
To do a phd with no supervision will require someone to support it and organise the viva etc - which means they have to be happy with the contents / direction of the material.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Your supervisor's job is to be sure you're on the right track, not to do any of the work. Thirty minutes a month ought to be more than sufficient for that. Also, the supervisor either takes care of the administrative details or is responsible that someone else does that. Finally, you appear to have omitted the amount of reading required of the supervisor.
I'm absolutely sure I didn't see my supervisor for 13 hours over the course of my degree, but he read every word I wrote and provided feedback without which I probably could not have finished.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: **It depends on what your expectations are**
As with most things our expectations are the driver of how satisfied we are with a relationship and the outcomes.
The best known method that I am aware of to set proper expectations in a professional relationship is ask the individual you are engaging with what their goals are for their own interaction. You may find that by asking questions of your PhD supervisor regarding their goals for student interaction that you will set proper expectations for the results and allow you to see a strategy for the interaction that can be ***very beneficial*** to yourself.
I can almost guarantee you that by asking questions about their goals for students the answers will allow you to make those 30 minutes very valuable and allow you to formulate a strategy to use those 30 minutes in a very productive way.
Rather than seeing the minimal time available perhaps you can reframe the discussion with yourself to see the benefits of the interaction and how you can leverage that time for very strategic questions rather than tactical ones.
Asking them how you can improve your grade may be considered tactical and asking them how you can improve your overall knowledge footprint for long term benefit would be an example. Try to discover the benefits of the relationship by asking questions in order to see the true value for yourself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: OK, as a retired professor, I am surprised that someone would spend as little as 30 min/month to advise a PhD student. Still, that can be valuable. In my experience, it was sometimes possible to determine in 5 minutes where a student had gone off-track and get them moving along again. OTOH, problems they faced were often much more complicated, so more time would be necessary. However, within 30 minutes, it is generally possible to decide what the next steps should be, e.g., what experiments to try, calculations to do, or resources to access, in order for the project to get past the current dilemma. However, I would expect the advisor to wish to know how that worked out in the next several days or so.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I've never met a PI that didn't love to talk about how great their work is. The onus, I'm afraid, is on you, to schedule more time, express your desire to interact more, and to be persistent. Outside of your influence, he/she is going to do the minimum required. Make it fun for them and watch as their schedule seems to clear.
Upvotes: -1
|
2017/12/29
| 224
| 935
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am planning to submit an abstract for a potential talk at a school. I was wondering if I should use my university's letterhead for the abstract? If not, is there a specific format that I should use?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: It depends, if you are doing this through or as part of your university association / studies then yes and that is fine.
If this is in your own time and and based on a hobby external to the university then maybe no, unless you want to mention “in passing” that is where you currently work.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't bother: if the school at which you're talking wants to advertise it, they will want to put it on their own letterhead to avoid confusion. They will probably reformat it to fit whatever their in-house style is, so it's best to just write it in a standard plain-text format (judging by your usename, LaTeX).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2017/12/30
| 483
| 2,154
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is the backlog of a journal correlated to the difficulty of submission (with acceptance) to a journal?
I would imagine that a journal with high backlog could be more selective in publishing journals (if they have so many journals to choose from).
At least in mathematics, this seems [anecdotally true](http://www.ams.org/publications/journals/notices/201610/rnoti-p1194.pdf).
For instance, *Annals of Mathematics* has one of the largest backlogs (and is also notoriously among the more selective of math journals).
On the other hand, I suppose it could be possible that backlog is merely a measure of how slow or fast the journal is, and could have nothing to do with difficulty of getting accepted submission.<issue_comment>username_1: The backlog of papers refers to those in the pipeline already accepted for publication. If there is a bigger backlog, it can mean a longer wait before it actually is published after being accepted for publication. There would be only a small correlation, if any, between that and the "difficulty of submission"; do you really mean difficulty of getting a paper accepted for publication?
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Depends on what you mean by "backlog". If you mean papers accepted but not yet published, then it's probably not more difficult getting accepted, because it's the publisher (not the editors who're making the decision) that's backlogged.
On the other hand if by "backlog" you mean submitted papers without a decision, then it's possible that it will be more difficult getting accepted. It indicates that the journal is currently receiving many more submissions than it needs, and it means they can be more selective. This is when an editor might incline towards rejecting a paper even though the reviewers recommend revision.
Having said that I'll add that if a journal is consistently receiving more papers than it needs, and those papers otherwise meet their quality standards (i.e. the only reason they are rejected is because the journal has too many papers), the journal is likely to increase its number of issues in the future.
Upvotes: 1
|
2017/12/30
| 1,357
| 5,623
|
<issue_start>username_0: The application for TA fellowship, one normally takes recommedations from previous professors one has TAed under.
What he replied when I messaged him asking for a letter of recommendation:
>
> If you remember I had major difficulties with the group of TAs of last
> year: the group behaved as if its internships were the most important
> jobs and only if it had time and in marginal hours, it would do its
> job. I rarely got an answer from my emails, I had to send the same
> email several times. The group rarely answered students' emails and
> their assignments' questions. I asked for the group's support to
> proctor the exam, and at the beginning, nobody was willing to help.
> You were more collaborative than the rest. However, I still had to
> invest a significant amount of time to compensate for the complete
> lack of support of the TA group. So, in these conditions is very
> difficult for me to write the very positive letter that you need to
> win the scholarship. I am sorry that I cannot be more helpful at this
> time.
>
>
>
All of the things he says are not valid for me.
I didn't have internships, students sent me thank you after attending office hours and I went out of the way several times to accommodate his requests. Although, I can remember I replied him a few times the next day due to other work. He also did several things like threatening TAs for complaints which very out of the line at my University and unheard of.
Can I dispute his claims? I don't want a letter of recommendation anymore, I feel under-appreciated for the work I put in. I feel like I should reply to him, but I feel a bit angry for
* dealing with him with through the course for this
* trying to go the extra mile for a future recommendation.
Background info:
The professor is not from my University and was hired to teach to a summer course.
Possible reply:
Attach a thank you email I received from one of students taking the course, and mention two times I went over the line to co-operate with him.<issue_comment>username_1: I am sorry for your situation, no one likes to feel under-appreciated. That being said, it is important to know which battles are worth picking. Your professor was very clear in his answer, and I can't see how can you (or anyone, for what's it worth) gain something pursuing this matter further. It would only create an unnecessary and tense atmosphere. You also said yourself that you do not want his LOR anymore. Let it go, and best of luck in the future.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Can I dispute his claims?
>
>
>
Not really, because he doesn't actually say outright that you did something wrong. His bottom line is that he doesn't have a positive impression of you.
However, if your relations with this Professor are important to you, you might consider having a chat with him about what had happened that semester so as to clear the air, possibly even apologize / make excuses for the group - even though you're not the one who was responsible.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Have you had any significant interaction with the professor other than in your role as TA?
**If not**, then he is probably right in declining to write your LoR. While LoRs tend to include lots of praise and nice words, they need some concrete experiences and successes to justify these words; otherwise the writer risks being taken for a windbag. So, for "the very positive letter that you need" (I am taking your professor literally -- yes, usually LoRs have to be really outstanding to be of any use due to the loudness war of recommendations), you need to have collaborated with him on a **successful** project. If the only thing you have collaborated on with him was a failure, at least in his view, then it will be very hard for him to use it as a basis of a positive assessment of you, at least without slamming the other TAs in the same report (which would open its own can of worms -- I perfectly understand his unwillingness).
On the good side, this has been a summer TAship; you can probably find other reference writers who know you just as well or better.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I think you should show your maturity and reply to the professor with a rather neutral e-mail. If you don't want a letter of recommendation anymore why would you want to dispute his claims because he generalized the group behaviour and projected it in some way on you? It's understandable that you are angry because you put in time to do the job the best way you could and yet don't get the 'reward' of a Letter of Recommendation. He probably feels the same way about the TA group because he had to spend more time of his own than he would have liked to.
In my opinion the best way to handle this situation is to reply to the professor and thank him for the opportunity to be a TA for his course. Tell him that you understand his frustration about the TA group and if it's important to you, tell him that you have done the job the best way you could. I would not recommend to send him the e-mail of a student who thanked you. You will not convince him to change his opinion, the damage is already done.
Take it as a learning experience. If you expect someone to do you a favor like writing a Letter of Recommendation, complete the work successfully and make sure that the person who you want to do you a favor takes notice of your work.
I don't know how the TA group was organized but maybe you could have tried to support the professor a little bit more by calling out other TA members whose commitment lacked.
Upvotes: 3
|
2017/12/30
| 294
| 1,312
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there some sort of source/website that states all the required textbooks for a particular subject? For instance, I'm intrigued too learn about certain subjects however I am no graduate or anything, so attempting to enrol would be pointless, but I do wish to study in my own time and with the correct textbooks. Does anyone have any pointers? If they could offer any advice, I'd be very grateful. Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Many Professors publish their syllabi online. You could try browsing courses on the subject you’re interested in, picking the course you like the most and look up the textbooks the Professor requires. That way you can have your suitable textbooks without any need to enroll, and you’re free to study in your own time.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Many major universities offer open access to all, most or some of their courses content. Some of the prominent examples are MIT OpenCourseWare, Harvard Online Learning and Open Yale Courses. They all have courses in a variety of fields, and will list at least the reading requirements for the course, including the textbook and sometimes the specific chapters and sections. Many courses also offer specific lecture notes, video or audio lectures, assignments and exams.
Upvotes: 1
|
2017/12/30
| 755
| 2,569
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have developed a logical and consistent body of research of 8 papers about a research topic. I've heard I can do a [PhD by published work](https://www.findaphd.com/advice/phd-types/phd-by-publication.aspx).
It is just compiling the papers and writing the scope and importance of the papers in 5000-10000 words, then the viva.
I know universities in the UK where I can do this, but they charge like 4,000 - 5,000 GBP for the submission.
Do you know other universities in other countries that charge less? I am thinking of Norway, Finland, Germany as they seem to have low tuition fees. However, I am willing to consider any country in Europe.
I am living in Portugal, so I would need to submit my thesis online, and travel to the university for the viva.
Any help appreciated.
Thanks,<issue_comment>username_1: **Proceed with extreme caution.**
What you are describing is known as a [stapler thesis or sandwich thesis](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/149/what-is-a-sandwich-thesis). This is a common practice for submitting theses, if the advisor, department, and university permit it.
However, such theses are submitted by students who are already enrolled at a university. Virtually all reputable universities will require you to enroll as a student for a period of time before you are eligible to submit your theses, and you generally have to show that you have made contributions to your field during your period of enrollment. Taking a bunch of previously submitted papers and submitting them as a thesis at a school you have never attended, particularly for a large fee, reeks of a school being a [diploma mill](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8681/what-is-a-diploma-mill?s=1%7C119.3072), a plain old [scam](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23406/is-a-university-that-grants-me-a-phd-for-1000-and-a-copy-of-my-unpublished-book/23407#23407), or just desperate for cash.
While the UK offers such programs, they are normally for their own alumni and employees, and it can be a very time-consuming and frustrating process. Moreover, such programs are not well regarded by many employers, and you will be at a disadvantage for many jobs if you have to compete with recipients of standard research PhD’s.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is possible at Danish universities. See
<http://www.medicine.aau.dk/doctoral-school/phd/become-phd-student/phddegree-without-previous-studies/>
and
<http://www.dtu.dk/english/Education/PhD/Rules/PhDguide/Thesis>
for more information.
Upvotes: 2
|
2017/12/30
| 958
| 4,066
|
<issue_start>username_0: In University, I was part of a philosophy reading group where people would occasionally give talks about their on-going research. Several years ago I gave one such talk, and presented original and new ideas that were never published or presented in a more formal setting, although the ideas were also presented in a term paper I wrote that same year. There is no public record of the contents of the talk, or even that that talk happened.
Now I am in a situation where I wish to reference that same idea in a research paper. It is outside the scope of the current paper paper to present those ideas as a new thing, but it would be something that would be appropriate to reference as existing.
How would I do that? I could get a DOI for the talk and reference it using that, but I would feel weird about referencing an unavailable talk that I gave, as it would feel like citation padding. This is doubly true since it is early in my career. I could write up a summary of the talk and put it on a publicly available repository, but I’m not sure if that’s a thing that is done. Are there other options?<issue_comment>username_1: It is not a problem to deliver a talk where you outline some ideas, which later turns into a research paper. You don't need to cite the talk, especially if there is no existing record of it. On the contrary, writing up something for the sole purpose of citing it in another paper, could be viewed as unethical "citation padding".
Consider putting a small acknowledgements section at the end of the paper, where you write something like: "I wish to thank the organizers and participants of Reading Group X, which gave me the opportunity to present and discuss the ideas behind this study".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the right action hinges on this point:
>
> It is outside the scope of the current paper paper to present those ideas as a new thing, but it would be something that would be appropriate to reference as existing.
>
>
>
It seems like you want to reference your past work because it is out of the scope of the new work and yet still relevant. If this is correct, then referencing the talk will not help the reader, who may (or may not) need to know about the past idea, concept, or whatever it was. Therefore your only option would be to publish the ideas in some form (paper, blog, etc.) or explain them briefly in the new paper.
If you simply want to show the history of your ideas, but it is not important, then I would leave out and simply acknowledge whoever helped you out.
If you are worried primarily about self-plagiarism, I do not see how not citing a non-published talk, that you yourself gave, is much different from not citing some thoughts you had in your head two years ago. It is a bit different, but not to the extent that it would constitute self-plagiarism, which is really about making it clear what is and what is not new in a paper as it is assessed for novelty during peer-review.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: My thoughts would be that a talk is not necessarily a place where a new idea is validated, and thus validated to be used in further works. Note that I am from the medical sciences field, and not arts/philosophy.
An idea presented in a talk (in my field) is generally one that has passed the peer review phase and has been rigorously scrutinized.
So my answer would be that you write the paper first on your new idea, develop the idea further, and then use it in your talk.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Can you put the part from the talk in an appendix? You could start along the line of
>
> The author is not aware of any publication of idea of X used in this paper. This idea was presented by the author in the study group Y at University of Z in fall 20?? and in the adjacent report *My cool idea X*. As both are not publicly available, this appendix contains a sketch of the basic idea.
>
>
>
As a bonus, you can cite this appendix in future publications as well as others can do.
Upvotes: 2
|
2017/12/30
| 1,059
| 3,586
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a PhD acceptance letter from an institute in Germany. They have written that my salary would be according to [TVöD](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarifvertrag_f%C3%BCr_den_%C3%B6ffentlichen_Dienst) (collective salary scheme for the German public service).
I searched about that, but there are different ideas.<issue_comment>username_1: The following answer applies to all public-service salary schemes (TVöD, TV-L, TV-H, etc.) that apply to PhD students. The information that is most likely missing is:
* **Your class (Entgeltgruppe):** PhD students typically paid according to class 13, which is the lowest class for positions requiring a master’s degree or equivalent. As even postdoc positions with class 14 are extremely rare, it’s safe to assume that this is your class if no further information is given.
* **Your level (Stufe):** You will have the following [progression of levels](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarifvertrag_f%C3%BCr_den_%C3%B6ffentlichen_Dienst#Entgelte_f%C3%BCr_Besch%C3%A4ftigte_des_Bundes) based on experience:
+ first year: Level 1
+ second and third year: Level 2
+ fourth to sixth year: Level 3
+ after that, you hopefully finished your PhDYou will start on the first level – unless you already worked in the German public service on this level before (or on a job that is acknowledged as comparable), e.g., on another PhD position.
Now, the offer will have to state how much you are officially working. It’s usually somewhere between 50 % and 75 %, but may also be 100 % – this mostly depends on your field.
This should give you all you need to obtain your gross salary (brutto) from the [tables](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarifvertrag_f%C3%BCr_den_%C3%B6ffentlichen_Dienst#Entgelte_f%C3%BCr_Besch%C3%A4ftigte_des_Bundes) or [calculators](http://oeffentlicher-dienst.info/tvoed/bund/).
Keep in mind that taxes and insurance will be deduced from this, which depends on several aspects such as whether you are married, have children, whether you will use the German public employer's retirement provision (VBL) etc. However, a considerable portion of the taxes will actually be to your direct benefit (health insurance, statutory retirement provision, etc.) and things that you would pay with your salary in many other countries.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: More information is required to answer your question. However, I want to give some basic information.
* Where are you employed?
The TVöD consists of several categories, e.g., the TV-L (afaik used by most universities) as well as TVöD-Bund (used by some publicly funded non-university institutes (e.g., Fraunhofer)). Ask your employer for this information if it was not provided to you, yet.
* Do you have a 100% contract / full time job? Depending on you employer and region in Germany, this might differ. I know guys who have a 50% contract, thus, there is 50% payment for 50% time. (Please note, that you will still be expected to be at your institute like a full-time employee).
* (When are you going to start? The labor unions will negotiate an updated salary in beginning of 2018. So you might finally end up with a few more percent.)
You will most likely start at E13 in Level 1, as this is the standard payment for PhD candidates. There you can find a table for TVöD-Bund:
<http://oeffentlicher-dienst.info/c/t/rechner/tvoed/bund?id=tvoed-bund-2017i&matrix=1>
So at E13 Level 1 at a 100% employment you will start with 3657.34€/month gross income. (Net income will be somewhere slightly above 2000€, depending on taxes).
Upvotes: 3
|
2017/12/30
| 949
| 4,165
|
<issue_start>username_0: Let's consider an excerpt from a particular job announcement for a department head:
>
> [...] The applicant must be committed to promoting the career development of others and to promoting a cohesive atmosphere of diversity and inclusion. The position requires a strong commitment to scholarship, learning and instruction (including teaching), engagement and outreach activities, alumni and public relations, international initiatives, and relations with K-12 school-based partners. [...]
>
>
>
Another example:
>
> The College of [censored] is committed to advancing diversity in all areas of faculty effort, including scholarship, instruction, and engagement. A successful candidate is expected to show evidence of integration of this
> emphasis on diversity into at least one of these areas.
>
>
>
I'm not into this elusive and vague language so much to fully understand it. I'm wondering: in these contexts, what the henk do *scholarship* and *engagement* exactly mean? And then, how on earth can one show diversity in scholarship or in engagement?<issue_comment>username_1: "Scholarship" means publication and other research-related activity. "Engagement" means various forms of professional interaction, including university service, mentoring, community outreach, and representing the university and the discipline to the broader public.
One shows diversity in scholarship and engagement by the choices you make when performing them, such as choice of research direction, mentorship priorities, or ways in which you reach the broader public. I am completely certain that you know what "diversity" means.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect that this question is really more of a rant than a serious question, but I'll try to give a serious and concrete answer.
Scholarship is a term that is widely used in defining the work of faculty. It includes original research, but also often includes translational research and the creation of survey articles, textbooks, software, and other works. In the engineering fields, the creation of patentable inventions is typically considered to be scholarly work. In some fields, the creation of artistic works (paintings, musical compositions, novels) is considered part of the scholarly work of faculty.
As a department chair, your job would include supervising and encouraging the scholarly work of the faculty and students in the department. With respect to diversity and scholarship, the chair would be expected to promote diversity in the department in hiring, recruitment of students, and the creation of a departmental culture that is inviting and open to traditionally underrepresented groups. You could establish your personal experience and commitment to diversity by referring to things that you've done in previous positions.
For example, "As the chairman of the department at University X, I oversaw the hiring of five faculty members, of which three were members of minority groups. During my chairmanship, the percentage of female students in our graduate program increased from 25% to 45%."
Engagement isn't as well known a term as scholarship, but many universities include "community outreach" or "community engagement" as one of the duties of faculty members. This is sometimes grouped under "service", but it's really quite different from the kinds of service to the profession that most faculty think of immediately (serving on conference organizing committees, editing journals, etc.) This particular position advertisement is for the head of a school of education, where outreach might include activities such as providing in-service training to school teachers.
Again, the applicant is expected to show a commitment to diversity in this area. You might write "In my previous position at University X, I chaired a committee that ran an in-service training program on the Next Generation Science Standards for teachers in Urban School District Y in which 90% of the students are members of minority groups. A new curriculum based on NGSS has been implemented across the district and test scores have improved substantially."
Upvotes: 3
|
2017/12/31
| 1,204
| 5,141
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm applying for graduate fellowships right now (I am a first-year graduate student in a STEM field), and am preparing to submit the application. My advisor has been helping me out with it for a while, and at one point, he took my draft of my research proposal and made some somewhat significant edits to it. He added several paragraphs, deleted some of my wording, added some sources, and so on. Altogether, at least half of the text in the proposal—a lot of it is figures—has been written or edited by him, while half the text is still mine (and I made the figures and the general outline of the proposal).
For obvious reasons, I'm uncomfortable asking him whether or not his contributions are too substantial (I don't want to say "I think you did too much of it, so I'm going to change it back" or to do so behind his back), but at the same time, I'm cautious about whether or not it's unethical to receive that kind of help on the proposal for *my* fellowship application, because I'm not sure how these things typically work.
So, is this something that typically happens with these kinds of applications, and is it unethical/immoral on my part to use such a proposal (i.e. something that gives me any kind of unfair advantage)? Or, am I thinking of this too much like a competition that requires solely my efforts for my submission?
**Edit** I just want to stress that when I say about half the text was written by my advisor, I mean that I initially wrote the paragraphs in question, but they were substantially edited to get the idea across in a better way.
On that note, would it be appropriate for me to further edit his edits? At that point, though, I feel as though I'd be editing it just to avoid acting unethically, not to improve the proposal. Basically, what action would I take in order to ensure I'm not acting unethically here?<issue_comment>username_1: If this is for an individual fellowship like an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, your advisor's reworking of your proposal sounds over the line. If he had discussed the specifics of the proposal with you at length, you wrote the proposal on your own, and then he made a few followup edits, that would be kosher. But if he actually wrote half the proposal himself, then it seems to me that it would be at the very least misrepresentation to submit it as your own proposal.
Even if this is common in your field, it's not good practice on the part of your advisor. Part of the point of applying for graduate fellowships is to train students to write proposals on their own. Try asking him if you can use his "suggestions" to rewrite the proposal in your own words.
**Response to OP edit:** Since you say the ideas were yours, that's better that what you initially wrote. But I still believe that your advisor should not be putting pen to paper on your proposal for substantial edits. Your writing is part of your proposal, so it should be yours. This isn't the same thing as applying for a grant--it's more like applying to a program. Your advisor should have discussed his suggestions with you and then you could either take them or not.
**Edit:** Although I seem to have gotten an equal number of upvotes and downvotes, the downvoters are simply wrong. A GRF (along with the other federal fellowships) is not the same thing as a grant.
>
> In a presentation by the program director, Dr. <NAME>, she said "the GRFP program funds people, not projects."
> [(source)](http://www.malloryladd.com/nsf-grfp-advice.html)
>
>
>
Submitting an application which has been extensively rewriten by someone else is misrepresentation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You apply for money and your adviser will profit from getting you granted the money, too. He will get some research he is interested. Why shouldn't every adviser support his student in that way?
You should also learn how to write proposals. Not just by writing it, but also to give it the finishing touches and fixing the issues you could not yet identify yourself. That's why its good to get the feedback and support you received from your adviser.
I don't see it unethical at all. It would be problematic if you could not perform the research you describe in your proposal or know it will not work or know someone already did it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Your main goals with the research proposal are i) to convey the message (in this case the aims of your research, contributions and likely future impact) in as clear a manner as possible and ii) to get funded. I see absolutely no issue with your advisor or any other person that you would like to provide feedback to your application, suggesting revisions and changes to your drafts. For me that includes both editing the written text as well as recommendations for the proposed work, expanding scope etc.
Having said that, the application is yours and you are the one who has the final word into what goes and what not. So treat the contributions from your advisor positively but critically and accept the ones that you find improve your funding proposal.
Upvotes: 0
|
2017/12/31
| 315
| 1,416
|
<issue_start>username_0: Are novels good type for that purpose?<issue_comment>username_1: This may be better on the English stack, but good novels yes, others probably not ie anything containing profanity as that is not used in professional reports.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The best book is one you will actually read. Your English won't improve by looking guiltily at that tome gathering dust on your nightstand because it's a slog to get through. So yes, novels (in your favorite genre) are excellent for that purpose.
Academic English isn't *that* different from regular English. Once you have a firm command of English, picking up the academic style is just a matter of reading a few papers in your area.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Read the news from some reliable English language sources, e.g., the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal, not Breitbart. Reliable news sources all follow current style guides, which authors of books do not. Notice how news organizations distinguish reporting from analysis from opinion.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I found that Academic articles are the best option to choose. They are written differently from other types and - in particular if you pick articles from your field - you will end up with a terminological collection that might be helpful for you in writing your paper. This is based on my personal experience,,
Upvotes: 2
|
2017/12/31
| 632
| 2,611
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to take the example of [QIP 2018](https://qutech.nl/qip2018/qip-2018-program-details/) conference. I've always wondered what the roles of committees are. In this conference, for example, there are three.
* Organizing committee
* Program committee
* Steering committee
It's obvious what the Organizing committee is, but what are the other committees for?<issue_comment>username_1: As for the particular conference, ask them. In general, typically:
* "Organizing" can mean a whole lot of things. Unclear and too broad the way the question is stated. (Sometimes "local" is added, which then changes the meaning toward local arrangements.)
* "Program committee" decides which papers to include and which ones to reject.
* "Steering committee" is a senior decision-making body. Made of high-level experts to provide guidance on key issues.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The **organizing committee** (OC) represents all organizational departments of the conference, such as local arrangements, publications, publicity, satellite events, etc. Typically, for each of these departments, the OC includes one or two chairpersons. The OC is usually coordinated by a *General Chair*, who is the main responsible "manager" of the conference. Members of the OC usually change between different editions of the conference.
The **program committee** (PC) selects which papers to accept and to reject. The main task of PC members is to review papers and, afterwards, to take part in discussions of the reviewed papers. The PC is usually coordinated by one or two *Program Chairs*, who are actually part of the OC. Usually, the PC is more stable across different editions of the same conference than the OC; PC members often stay for 2-5 editions.
The **steering committee** (SC) steers the direction of the conference, for example, by selecting the location and General Chair of the next edition, and by deciding the direction of future editions (e.g., which topics to include in the Call for Papers). Compared to the OC and the PC, the SC is particularly stable across different editions of the conference. It is often comprised of former General and Program Chairs of the conference.
These considerations assume a typical medium-sized to large conference. There can be variations, especially in small and very large conferences: Small conferences may have a scaled-down OC and no SC. Very large conferences may have several main tracks with distinct PCs, or an additional committee on top of the PC (such as a "Shadow PC" or a "Program Board").
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2018/01/01
| 5,105
| 21,647
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach a certain course which is part of the obligatory undergraduate curriculum. I teach two groups out of four; the other two groups are taught by two other lecturers. In one group I have about 20-30 students. The other group also started with the same number, but students left the group gradually, and now there remain only 5 or even less; the others go to the other lecturer who gives the same lesson in parallel. One reason is probably that I am a new teacher and still not very good at teaching. Another reason is that the other lecturer is very good.
I feel that some of the 5 students remaining in my class do so only because they are being polite. I appreciate it very much since I put a lot of effort in preparing the lessons, but it is not very efficient for me or for them. So, I thought of suggesting to the remaining students that they move to the other lecturer's group. This way, they will have a better lecturer and I will have more time for research (the other lecturer said it's OK with him). What might be the implications of such a step?
UPDATE: Thanks a lot for all the feedback. While there are many great answers, the one thing that convinced me to keep going was the fact that this is the only way I can become a better teacher. So today I came to class as usual. For some reason, the number of students rised to 10.<issue_comment>username_1: I’ll speak from the perspective of a student since it’s all I’ve got.
>
> What to do if most of my students leave? I teach a certain course which is part of the obligatory undergraduate curriculum. I teach two groups out of four; the other two groups are taught by two other lecturers. In one group I have about 20-30 students. The other group also started with the same number, but students left the group gradually, and now there remain only 5 or even less; the others go to the other lecturer who gives the same lesson in parallel.
>
>
>
At the end of the day, you can’t literally control where and what your students decide to do. But nevertheless the key points here are the following.
>
> One reason is probably that I am a new teacher and still not very good at teaching. Another reason is that the other lecturer is very good.
>
>
>
You acknowledge your shortcomings and identify strengths in others. This is important, keep reading as to why.
>
> I feel that some of the 5 students remaining in my class do so only because they are being polite. I appreciate it very much since I put a lot of effort in preparing the lessons, but, it is not very efficient for me nor for them. So, I thought of suggesting to the remaining students that they move to the other lecturer's group. This way, they will have a better lecturer and I will have more time for research (the other lecturer said it's OK with him). What might be the implications of such step?
>
>
>
Regardless of your skill at teaching, I ask you: **how would you get better if you have no one left to teach and in turn, learn from?**
Teaching is reciprocative, students learn from the teacher and the teacher from the students. In large classes, the time and opportunity for qualitative exchange is limited. Think lecture hall size, the professor and students would rarely have 1:1 time with each other.
Since you can’t literally control where students decide to go, you need to have a honest conversation with your current students as to where they want to be, acknowledge your shortcomings, and propose a solution where you will adapt to the situation as best you can.
Whether it is investing more time preparing, asking the more experienced teacher for help, or offering 1:1 time. In absence of a plan, the students don’t know what you are planning and would be fearful of their ability to perform well; communication is key here to ensure that they stay.
Nevertheless, know that moving forward you will most likely have future teaching requirements, if you don’t change and address your shortcomings now, how would ensure **your** success in the future, as a PhD student, as a professor, as a team lead in industry?
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should discuss this with your department chair. This is who you need to keep happy and their opinion matters more than ours.
Describe the dwindling number of students as a concern, then see where the conversation goes. Instead of offering your suggestion, invite your chair to offer their thoughts and suggestions first, before you launch into yours. Who knows? Perhaps they will suggest closing down your section on their own and you get what you want. Their response probably also depends on the attractiveness of your research alternative versus their need to find instructors to cover sections they've already committed to offering.
Your chair may also be glad you invited the conversation, because they may have some feedback based on their own observations and conversations with your colleagues and students they would like to share with you. They may be able to tell you how you could get better so you could one day be the instructor who draws away everyone else's students.
But I agree with and upvoted [DBB's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/101427/9553), that trying to dump the class could make you look bad and that if you care about getting good at teaching, you should simply "push through" and deliver the lectures.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: I am sympathetic as to why you feel this way based on the loss of students. But I want to answer your question briefly and honestly. The worst possible implications of taking this step is you could look to your department chair like a (a) quitter (b) person who is not interested in teaching (c) bad teacher (d) bad colleague (e) all of the above... Seems like you also were not put in a position to succeed, matched up against a beloved senior instructor.
In my experience as a student, I left classes when I felt the material was over my head and the teacher did not care about it. The smaller class sizes seem like a good opportunity for you to improve as a teacher which will be invaluable in an academic job search or tenure push. If you want to stay in academia I advise you to push through this type of adversity and improve.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: The answer to what you should do is "Keeping plugging away with the students you have." There are some side issues here, and I think they are important. First, your colleague is misbehaving. On the surface, it seems noble for him to double his class size for no compensation, and perhaps no immediate damage is done. But what happens when the dean notices that the class size can be doubled at no cost? 1. Probably half the lecturers will no longer be needed. Bye-bye. 2. The remaining lecturers have their class size doubled just because ONE lecturer was OK with it. If I were the chairman, I would have a clear policy against "course hopping" and encourage the faculty to take steps to reduce it. Assuming your chairman is sensible, I would think that the most likely implication from your meeting with him is that your colleague gets his leash yanked. Most chairmen know that it's vital to keep sections even.
Sometimes I teach two sections of the same course which has a TA-led discussion section attached. Sometimes one TA will be experienced and personable while the other is a first-year grad student who barely squeaked by the TOEFL. I absolutely forbid the students from one section attending the other. It's not fair to the popular TA, as his reward for being good, to have more students and have his office hours overrun by extra students. I help enforce this by requiring one quiz per week in discussion, so that the students attend the correct section at least once a week. (And this is a bit of free-but-worth-every-penny advice: Make attending your class worth some small amount of points. It will bring some students back. And it will help you measure how big the gap is between you and your colleague. If a 1% attendance grade brings back most students, then the gap is not that great.)
Second: A lecturer just has to be Dory (the fish in Finding Nemo.) No matter what happens (you fart real loud in class, you give the whole lecture with your pants unzipped, you accidentally offend all the women in class and don't know why, you give a test and the average is 12%, a student with emotional problems has a major meltdown in class, etc.) you "just keep teaching...just keep teaching...just keep teaching...
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Current college student here. This won’t help your current situation, since I’m not sure you could make such a change to your course’s grading mid-semester, but pop quizzes that comprise 10% of the students grade are an excellent way to ensure students show up.
Make them at the end of class or near the end of class so students have to stay the whole time to take it. They don’t have to take much time, and you can even give something like 50% credit just for taking it. In addition to boosting attendance, this will give you the added benefit of checking your student’s knowledge on the subject and knowing where you can spend more time teaching.
One final thought—if your students aren’t showing up to class then how do you hope to get feedback to help you improve? Keep your chin up and realize the other lecturer has likely been in your position before as well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: You say the other teacher is “very good.” How do you know this? If you are correct, that implies you are able to recognize good teaching. That in turn implies that you should be able to identify what makes it good and develop your own version of those characteristics.
This is a long-term solution; other answers have already addressed your more immediate issue.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: You have a great opportunity here if you can grab it. You have a very small class, just 5 students, and, if you are willing, you can offer them much more individualised attention than a regular class. Are you sure the students who are left are not enjoying this?
Given the small class you should try to engage them, and help them learn the material better.
However, I am under the impression you really want to have more time to do research (I may be wrong, sorry if I am suggesting something that is incorrect) in which case you may not be putting the needed time in this class, but if you are really interested in improving as a teacher, I can't see a better opportunity.
To add further, you have two opportunities here:
1. Use this small class to refine your teaching potential and get good feedback from your students
2. Use this opportunity to talk to the other teacher and chair and, if they agree, have more time to do your research
In other words, do not stop this class just because you think the other lecturer is better and the students will do better with him, on the contrary, you (and them) can learn a lot. On the other hand I can understand your pressure to do research, especially if you are on a tenure track or similar path, and any extra time is valuable.
What is more important to you? Do you think you have the potential to end up in an institution where your research will be valued? Or do you think, like most people, that you will end up in an institution where teaching is very valuable? (many institutions will hire you -or not- depending on your teaching abilities)
You need to consider many factors before making a decision (most of which I do not know).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: I appreciate your candor and self assessment.
You haven't stated your own background or aspirations but I feel the issue your bumping into is a manifestation of a failure in our academic system.
I have experienced this from the perspective of a student attending an entry level required physics class taught by a professor who was a research scientist.
I didn't transfer classes and attended his class for the tests but attended a much better lecturers class for the normal lessons.
My first professor had research to do, grants to fullfill, TAs to manage, PhD candidates to coach, but due to some policy in our academic institutions a man who might be a brilliant research sceintest is being forced to teach entry level physics when he has no skill as a teacher, which is an entirely different and often non-overlapping skillset from researching, manager, etc.
The idea that we scale teachers based on physical buildings, or the difficulty in grading assignments, or in providing one on one assistance is incongruent with our modern digital communication methods.
In the extreme case a great lecturer can scale to hundreds of millions of people as evidenced by things like MIT Open Course Ware.
In a microcosim this is already happening, teachers assistants are already relied on to do most of the grading, they staff labs where students can receive one on one assistance, and many of the other duties that don't scale and also do not require the skill of a great lecturer.
The thing that bothers me the most is the disservice the process does to students.
Instead of them getting the best quality lecture that allows them to understand and aquire new information with the least friction, they are made struggle with learning from someone who is not adept at teaching, whose aspirations are not to teach, who wouldn't even be teaching the class if they weren't required to, all so that a department can justify the headcount of staff based on the ratio of teachers to students.
Ultimately it comes down to money and how academic institutions are funded. When lecturing is commoditized as a product and then mass produced cheaply (replaying a great lecturer via youtube recording) that completely erodes their business model. They are not acting in the students best interests but in what they think is their own.
To keep your job, not make waves, etc. the other answers are probably better advice.
If you genuinely want to become a good teacher then there is no better way to do it then actually teaching but if that is not your aspiration, only a part of what is required of you so that you you can do what your real aim is, then any way you can lessen them until our academic systems eliminate them for good anyway (great lecturers lecture, great researchers research, etc.) seems like a good idea.
I could be wrong about all of this but it is an area I feel passionate about, criticism welcomed if you disagree.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I get from the question and your comments that the Sturdy Five are the people who suffer the first time you ever teach these classes. The other group is then fine as you have already trained and prepared for the material.
What not to do?
===============
Do not drop the Sturdy Five. Some group will have to be first to endure your lectures. If the other group will become first, they might start to leave as well.
What to do?
===========
Try to reward the first group: give more 1-on-1 time, try to be engaging and help with their particular problems. Use their size to their advantage to outweigh the flaws of first-timer.
Secondly, try to understand what exactly is that what you learn during the lecture with the first group. Maybe you can incorporate some of that in the preparations before the lectures.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: If you quit from teaching, you won't learn to teach at all. The other lecturers had to learn it as well.
Is it possible for you to join the other lecture and alternate with your colleague? One lecture held by them - you can watch them how they teach and learn it - and the other lecture held by you - your colleague can watch you and give you some feedback.
When I was in high school students from faculties of education were coming to our school for practice. They were watching our actual teacher for couple of days and then they were teaching us under our actual teacher supervision. You can try to mimic this, with your department head approval of course.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: This question has excellent extensive answers, but I want to add something that I think might help you and maybe somebody else who might ask this quite common question.
You must make a much more important decision asap: whether you want to teach in your future career or make money solely doing research. Don't make the decision lightly. Think about salaries, job opportunities, your interests, ambitions, etc.
If your career plans include teaching, do not drop the class. Push it through and learn as much as you can from it. View 5 students as an excellent opportunity to improve your teaching. You be their student, it will pay off 10-fold in the future. Also pivot the class towards what you are interested in, introduce something related to your research projects. Students will love it.
If you don't want to make money teaching in the future, drop it like a rock. Focus on research and don't waste time.
In my opinion, if you make this decision solely basing on your self-interest, everyone will benefit. Do not worry about others in this matter, they'll do well if you do well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: Are you sure you've considered all explanations other than "I'm a bad lecturer and the other one is much better, hence the students go there"? You say they cover the same content in parallel, but does this mean at the exact same lecture time? I know in my first year chem course, there were 3 lecture streams in the same lecture theatre. The first was at 9:30, the second was something like 2:30, and I think the last started at 5:30. I was assigned to the 2:30 one, and thought it must have been an utterly enormous class to fill a 1500 seat lecture theatre 3 times a day, until I realised that everyone just skipped the more unpleasant times to go to the mid-afternoon lectures. Even if they're at the same time, it could be that the other lecturer's location is simply easier for the students to get to. Maybe you have an accent that's more difficult to understand for them, I know that I had several lecturers in undergrad that took me weeks to figure out (hearing "callum wector" repeatedly in a programming class before I'd taken linear algebra... eventually I clicked that he'd been talking about column vectors).
A possible course of action here is to ask the students that remained in your section why other people go to the other sections, but this has to be done carefully if you want a useful answer - I also remember taking lectures from a new lecturer who constantly asked how things were going but also seemed like he might burst into tears if we gave a negative response. They're probably not going to say "you're a bad lecturer and the other ones are better", but you might get a hint of some of the real reasons (which are likely to be numerous). Try not to suggest reasons to them unless they don't give you any response, and try to do it casually at the start of end of the class. Giving them reasons will skew the responses, but will also let them agree with you instead of bringing up something they might consider a bit rude or insulting if they were the first to say it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: Student perspective here: In addition to improving your oration, make sure your lesson materials are good.
For me, that's been the single highest most important thing for a good class: quality visual aids, whether it be live math on a white/chalk board, or a slideshow). It's really important that they *don't have too much text* (that's what the textbook/google is for!). It's astounding how many people get this wrong, both in professional and academic settings. Slideshows are meant to illustrate your point, and add to your speech, and not just be a transcript of everything you said.
There are lots of public resources for improving general presentation skills, which would carry over quite naturally to lecturing. Perhaps those are worth checking out
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_14: I am posting my comments as an answer - others have very valid points as well.
By letting your students move to the other lecturer there are several losers here. You and yes even the students. A new teacher is learning. How do you learn to teach with out students to teach? How do you make sure students are involved, listening or even on the same page, how do inspire them to ask questions that will cause you to "Research" . too bad the work, and tests is by "website"; not really provoking reasoning skills and or additional thought. Think on that one student that asks relevant outside the box questions (where you say I never thought of it that way) - adding value to all.
I had a finance class and we were talking about a specific function - the professor had taught for years and in one of his classes an engineering student said why are you doing all of that math to get to the answer; all you need to do is x and then you will have your answer. All the texts and the guidelines taught that function long hand - he as well in his books) . He never thought to do it the engineers way before, I can tell you the engineers method was easy as can be in comparison.
Now think if that engineering student was not in his class or the professor let another professor take over - no matter how good they are; what says you can not become as good or better and the only way to do that is get your students involved in your lectures and provoke them to challenge you .. kind of like stirring you up to research / study.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/01
| 6,018
| 24,820
|
<issue_start>username_0: ### TL;DR
In the coming semester,
I will be teaching a "seminar" type course with around 30 students.
I would like to disallow students in the course
to use any electronic devices (smartphones, tablets and laptops)?
**Questions:**
* Is banning electronic devices in my course a good idea?
* How do I enforce such a rule?
### Background
In the coming semester, I will be teaching a "seminar" type course.
The course is fairly small, with fewer than 30 students.
We will spend most of the time in the course
listening to students presenting their ideas,
and the students critiquing and giving feedback
on other students' presentations.
I have had a few years of experience teaching
large lecture courses with more than 100 students per lecture.
In these courses, many of the students prefer
to type their notes on my Powerpoint slides,
rather than writing on a physical copy of the lecture notes.
Unfortunately, as I walk around the classroom,
I invariably notice that a significant proportion of the students
are distracted during the class by their electronic devices,
e.g., checking their Facebook, Instagram or playing games.
(I would estimate about 20% of students
are distracted at any given point of time.)
I have noticed that I work better without electronic devices
because I am less distracted and can focus better.
Consequently, I would hope to minimize the distractions faced by students
by disallowing students in the course to use any electronic devices.
### Why do I want to ban electronic devices from the course?
The main goal of the course is to teach students
how to analyze and present business case studies.
The course is not one that is heavy on facts or memorization.
Instead, students need to use their powers of observation
to follow along presentations by their fellow students,
and to evaluate their presentation style, body language and slide design.
Consequently, for this type of course,
I do not see that electronic devices add any value.
In fact, there are many research studies which suggest that
electronic devices negatively affect students' learning.
For example, an [article](https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-athletes-way/201706/are-smartphones-making-us-stupid) in Psychology Today writes the following:
>
> Cognitive capacity and overall brain power are significantly reduced when your smartphone is within glancing distance—even if it’s turned off and face down—according to a recent study. This new report from the University of Texas at Austin, “[Brain Drain: The Mere Presence of One’s Own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity](http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/691462)” was published in the Journal of the Association for Consumer Research.
>
>
> During this study, the UT Austin researchers found that someone’s ability to hold and process data significantly improved if his or her smartphone was in another room while taking a test to gauge attentional control and cognitive processes. Participants who kept their phones in a pocket or bag also outperformed those who kept their phones on the desk while taking the same test. Again, even if the phone was turned off and face down on the desk, the mere sight of one's own smartphone seemed to induce “brain drain” by depleting finite cognitive resources.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Banning devices is generally poorly received, everyone likes to think they know best about their own study habits. (For some of those 20%, they will be right, for others, you will be right.)
In a mandatory seminar I had to attend where it was very evident that no one wanted to be there (including the presenters), what the organizers eventually settled on was requiring all students to hand in half a page with summary and comments at the end of each talk. This forces note-taking in the immediate and generally makes the students too busy to look at their devices much even if they have them open.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you will get bogged down in the enforcer role here and it will detract from your teaching. Some of the best instructors I had knew at which point of their lecture they should ask questions and took the time to learn students names. Then you can first ask the questions to people goofing off, and follow up with someone paying attention. The peer pressure to know the answers could help people focus.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you would like to ban devices from your classroom, I think that's your call as an instructor. It's part of your academic freedom at most institutions to conduct your class the way you'd like. I imagine you would enforce it by asking any student caught using a device to put it away or, perhaps on repeat offenses, to bring it to the front of the room for retrieval after class. You would not be first instructor who's done this.
But to me, thirty students is big to be called a seminar. With thirty students, not everyone gets to talk as much as they might want. Sometimes they'll be simply waiting their turn to speak or checking out, waiting for the discussion to come back to something they're interested in. That sounds a lot like the faculty meetings I go to. We usually get about twenty-five, all there to listen to presentations and participate in discussions of faculty business. But we all have laptops and smartphones and many are using them. I don't know why I'd expect students to behave differently than faculty.
On occasion, I find it helpful that students have laptops in my own lectures (in CS) when a question comes up that I can't answer (which happens a lot :). If I don't want to take the time to do it myself, I might ask, can someone do the experiment or Google the answer?
Also, since I publish my lecture slides just before each lecture, I find that a lot of students are legitimately using their laptops to look at slides, which can sometimes be more readable on their laptops than on the screen from way in the back of the room.
So I think you can ban devices and I think you can enforce it. You can try it and see what happens. But I also think you're fighting the tide. Connectivity is here to stay. I can't say if you'll see other results you hope for, but the one result I do predict is that the students will be unhappy with you and it will probably show up in your student evals.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Be aware that some students with alternate needs may be prescribed electronic devices as a teaching/learning aid. Depending on your legal jurisdiction their needs may also be confidential and you may not be notified, but to ban them would create legal or ethical problems for you or the institution.
I cite, for example, the recording of the class for those with handwriting difficulties or vision impairment and so on.
It is a mistake to stereotype students' use of devices in class as always something suspicious as the population is wider than that.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: (I'm a student)
Why do you want to ban the laptops?
Just because some students get distracted? If this is the only reason, that is almost a question of philosophy: Should you force the students into a situation that you think is best for them or should you assume them to be mature enough to decide what's best for them?
If your students were around the age of 12 years old, I'd agree that you should ban the laptops. But I'm assuming that your students have to be somewhat self-disciplied anyways to study for the courses in their 'free-time'.
I like writing my notes on the laptop. If you or the content of your course requires the students to take notes, please allow electronic devices. If the course is entirely focused on participation and taking notes would actually be useless, it might actually make sense to forbid using the devices because then the students would probably participate more.
In a class with only ~30 students, the following does not apply, but regarding your observation that some students are playing games during your lectures:
You will never be able to give the lecture in a tempo that fits every of the 100+ students perfectly. Some may be constantly bored and it suffices for them to listen with one ear while they are gaming or working on something else. Some are perfectly happy with your speed but get bored once somebody who was a bit slower asks a question.
In my experience, when I try to listen to a (to me) boring lecture, my thoughts just drift after a few minutes and I have not much to take away from the lecture. If I instead find a balance so that I can listen to you while it's interesting and keep myself awake and active by doing something else while it's not, I get more out of it.
>
> Is banning electronic devices in my course a good idea?
>
>
>
In general a big no from me, because students don't like to be told how they should behave. Why would you need to enforce something like that when *they are here because **they** want to learn*. However, I encourage you to mention your observations to them and that you think the electronic devices might be detrimental to their learning, so they can make an educated choice.
In your case however, with only 30 students where you expect them to actively participate instead of just listen and understand, it can make sense.
But if only one student is presenting and the rest are supposed to sit and listen (opposed to interactively asking questions and discussing) then I feel like it's a similar situation to my usual lectures.
>
> I have noticed that I work better without electronic devices because I am less distracted and can focus better.
>
>
>
True. On the other hand, I can learn better *with* electronic devices because it is easy to look something up that I didn't understand without having to interrupt the lecture to ask a question. It's also imo better for note-taking because you can paste parts of the slides and freely rearrange them.
>
> How do I enforce such a rule?
>
>
>
First of all, please provide a good reason to the students along with the statement that it is forbidden. Otherwise you will get a few of them on the wrong side and they will still try to use the devices. Without cooperation, enforcing this would be very hard I imagine.
Secondly, give them a good reason not to get distracted. If they are required to be present anyways, it might be an idea to give out grades for participation. Or ensure that the content of the lecture is *really* interesting.
Think also about when you want to make exceptions. What if somebody has special needs, e.g. does not see the screen from afar? What if some student has an important deadline incoming and wants to work on that during your class, but still came to not miss completely everything? Etc.
Alternative Solution:
>
> Some of the best instructors I had knew at which point of their lecture they should ask questions and took the time to learn students names. Then you can first ask the questions to people goofing off, and follow up with someone paying attention.
>
>
>
This is a quote of username_2's answer, and it reminded me of a tutor we had who everybody considered to be *really* great. The thing that set him apart is that he noticed when somebody was getting bored, distracted or lost, and asked that person a question. It might be a really simple one just to get their focus back, or it might be one that tests whether they are bored because they already know the content or rather because they're getting tired. Often, when one student would not know the answer, a different student would know the answer (and could explain it to everybody who lost track) or nobody else knew it either and the tutor knew what he had to explain again.
Such questions make people who are zoning out focus again, even if they are not the ones who were asked. And if it is fine to say "I don't know", nobody is afraid of being asked either, so they can answer honestly and give the tutor information about what they got and what not.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: When it came time to make this decision for myself I examined why I might want to establish such a ban and came to the conclusion that I had two plausible reasons:
1. To prevent one student's electronics from distracting other students
2. Because research (up to that point) showed that the available options for computerized note-taking (or substitutes for it) led to less learning.
And this being for college I concluded that (2) wasn't my business beyond warning students of the effect, but (1) was a legitimate concern.
The text that went into my syllabus was
>
> You are expected to refrain from disrupting the class or
> interfering with your peers' ability to pay attention. That means
> among other things no texting, no calling, no IMing, no emailing,
> and no social networking. During group-work and interactive
> teaching it may be appropriate to use internet resources to
> obtain facts and figures.
>
>
> You may use a computing device to take notes, so I'm not banning
> them from the classroom, but it is your responsibility to insure
> that they do not become a distraction. At a minimum this means
> turning off *all* audible feedback. If you are using a
> device with an upright screen (rather than a pad) you should sit
> in a back row so that the activity on your screen does not
> present a visual distraction to your neighbors.
>
>
>
I've had no complaints either from students who thought the policy was too restrictive or from students who were being distracted and those few students who have used laptops have been happy to move to the back.
I don't know how I would handle the situation where a student with visual trouble that required them to be up front wanted to use a laptop. That's a hard case.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: I am normally in favor of letting students make their own decisions, but the evidence against laptops in the classroom is so strong by now that I decided to ban them in my classes (which are mostly lecture). However, there are three exceptions: disability, very bad handwriting, and the possibility of giving me a write-up about why it's a bad idea to take notes on a laptop. The last one both allows students to make an informed choice if they really love their laptops and, more importantly, provides plausible deniability to those with disabilities that they don't want to publicly disclose. (So far, no one has used any of these options.) I explain the reason for this policy in my syllabus and provide links to popular science articles explaining the research. So far, I have taught two classes with this policy and experienced no pushback and no need for enforcement. If there was, "Please put that away" should do the job.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Enough good research has been done at this point (see two sources below) that show that student learning is compromised by use of computers in the classroom.
• the act of taking notes by hand allows the brain to process and organize information in ways that do not happen when notes are taken on a computer;
• possession of a computer by students (without special needs) in the classroom invariably results in the user multitasking (email, eBay, Instagram, shopping) which takes attention away from the content of the lecture; and
• even the presence of computers in use within the field of vision of students not using computers reduces the amount learned by the non-user.
That said, some schools and organizations ban computers in the classroom, some don’t. Accommodation for special needs students can raise issues of privacy as well as ”fairness” as perceived by students without special needs.
In my experience, banning electronics sends you down the rabbit hole of monitoring and attempting to discipline students who are determined to have it their way, even if they know their use will lessen their learning.
Save yourself the hassle and the formal complaints, but try not to allow students who choose not use the devices to have their learning negatively impacted. Allow students who do not use computers to sit where they are not disturbed if they so choose.
<https://ctl.yale.edu/Using-Electronic-Devices-in-Class>
<https://www.brookings.edu/research/for-better-learning-in-college-lectures-lay-down-the-laptop-and-pick-up-a-pen/>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> The course is fairly small, with fewer than 30 students. We will spend most of the time in the course listening to students presenting their ideas, and the students critiquing and giving feedback on other students' presentations.
>
>
>
Banning electronic devices can simulate cases where such devices are forbidden/inaccessible for a real reason. In such cases you cannot easily google the answer up.
As [jaia](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/101450/9200) allready noted, explain your reasons in the syllable clearly and leave options for those who must use ellectronic devices.
As I understood your desription, the course is focused on learning how to criticise someone's work and how to respond to a critique. There is no need of using electronic devices at all (except for people with special needs).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: From my experience as a student, I would suggest you don't.
Simply call it out at the very beginning of the seminar, day 1 you introduce yourself in a loud, clear tone, then say that you don't like seeing people distracted by technology.
Mention that this is especially because it distracts those around them as well, and could you all please leave the phone in the pocket, save for those that are actually typing away notes on a laptop just please focus on the seminar.
That has the highest rate of success by far and you still come off as professional and friendly. If you see someone smiling at their phone, just politely call ask them to focus (so whole room can hear that) and after 1-2 such callouts everyone gets the idea that they will be humiliated if they do this, and they will stop unless they're rude morons. At that stage, let it go. Need to treat people like adults, if they want to come in and waste their time that's their loss, just don't let them get in the way of others who are there to learn.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: **Why do you want to ban electronic devices?**
**A.** You do it for the sake of those (~20%) students that **use** laptops etc - you believe this will help them concentrate, study better, understand the material, provide fewer distractions etc.
*or*
**B.** You do it for the sake of the other (~80%) students, that currently **do not use** devices - you hope that this will lead to more participation, improve the quality of the lecture etc.
If the answer is A, then just **don't**. You do not know what's best for them, and I'm assuming they are old enough to make their own decisions (yes, even if they will fail the class).
On the other hand, if the answer is B, I suggest you talk to the students during the first lesson, explaining your reasoning (maybe suggest that it's also polite to listen to other students talking/presenting and not use a device at this time; and/or tell them to sit in the back if they intend to use a laptop). Afterwards, **ask** the students to *minimize* electronic devices use and leave it at that. Do not try to enforce anything - this isn't elementary school.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: As a professor teaching a class, and - by extension - a former student, I'll give a few reasons why I will *never* ban electronics/laptops in my class, even if they're classes that don't need them (banning laptops in a class about computational public health is a tall order).
**Potentially Singling Out Students with Disabilities**: There are students who use laptops as assistive devices. Even with a "ban", you'll likely have to make an accommodation for these students. Which means in the class anyone who does have a laptop will be assumed to have a disability. I'm not interested in making life harder for my students who are already struggling.
**Being Able to Bring Laptops to Class Changed my Life**: I'm not actually exaggerating with this. For my *entire* life, I have not been able to stay awake in lectures. Ever. Doesn't matter how interesting the subject is. What fixed that? Being able to take a laptop to class.
Which is more distracting and disrespectful - me occasionally doing something on a screen that's not laser focused on you, or me asleep in the back? Which will result in me missing more content?
**They're Adults**: They can make their own decisions about how they approach their class work.
>
> I have noticed that I work better without electronic devices because I
> am less distracted and can focus better. Consequently, I would hope to
> minimize the distractions faced by students by disallowing students in
> the course to use any electronic devices.
>
>
>
What works better for you is not what works better for everyone. For example, I retain information better if I *don't* take notes at all. But I'm not going to ban note taking.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_13: I wouldn't recommend banning laptops outright as a global course policy, because:
1. Many students *need* electronic devices to accommodate learning disabilities. Laying down a coursewide ban would prevent them from doing so, which is not what you want (and probably against university policy).
2. Many students who may not *need* laptops still work better with them due to the affordances they provide, such as digital ink (on Surface devices, tablets, and some Chromebooks) and the ability to store their notes in the cloud.
3. The research you cited from UT-Austin, indeed almost all the research claiming negative effects of laptops on student classroom performance, is situated in the context of lecture pedagogy. Your seminar is not (I hope!) going to use lecture often or at all, so that research doesn't really apply to your case. In fact you can imagine situations where having laptops available could really help in a seminar class in terms of searching up information and so on.
4. In fact if you scratch the surface on a lot of these ban-the-laptop articles, there is either no mention of pedagogy whatsoever (so, just immediately ignore the results) or it assumes you are just lecturing. In the latter case, the results of the studies may be true, but you could make an equal case that *lectures* ought to be banned, not laptops.
Briefly, a better approach to technology would consist of:
* Creating a class environment and designing learning activities for students that keep them active, and so either their laptops are used as a tool for learning or else they are working hard enough on something else that screwing around on a laptop isn't a viable option for them. And,
* Rather than banning, work with the students (maybe on the first day of class) to come up with some reasonable boundaries for acceptable/unacceptable use. Like anything else, when the students have some ownership on the rules then they are a lot more likely to follow them.
I wrote a bit more about all this at my blog here: <http://rtalbert.org/laptop-bans-and-assumptions/>
<NAME> also has a great article about this here: <https://michellemillerphd.com/addiction-accommodation-and-better-solutions-to-the-laptop-problem/>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: Don't ban the electronic devices, ban the distractions.
Laptops and the like can have useful features (like note taking) which shouldn't be taken foregranted because they can actually help students.
Instead you should look into how viable it would be to block distracting websites like the most common social media websites - facebook, twitter et cetera.
If a student tries to get on social media, only to receive a page from the university saying "This site is blocked, get back to work", it'll hopefully discourage them from distractions.
It won't eliminate distractions but it'll make it marginally harder for students to get distracted, and it'll certainly make them think twice about focusing on the seminar.
---
Ideally it would be possible to block all internet connections within the room to stop people using the internet during the seminar, but that may not be a viable option.
(And to pre-empt the "what if someone wants to look up a definition or something?" - doing so would also be a distraction. If someone doesn't understand some terminology they should ask the teacher as soon as possible. There may be more than one student that doesn't understand the term, so it could be more beneficial to ask outright anyway, than to have 4 students silently googling a term while the lecture runs on and they start missing bits.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/01
| 745
| 3,183
|
<issue_start>username_0: I apologize if this question has been asked before. I received a peer-review invitation from a journal to review a paper. In the email there is just the author's name and the title of the article and an abstract. I should just tell them if I accept to review the paper or not by clicking on corresponding links.
Is it normal to ask the journal to send the entire paper before accepting to review it? Isn't this request odd? I am potentially interested to review the paper (from the abstract, I guess I am familiar with the methods), but I would like to see the content to be sure if the methods used in the paper aren't beyond my knowledge and to check if I have enough time to review the paper (e.g., to avoid a surprise manuscript of > 150 pages!) If that matters, the subject is mathematics.<issue_comment>username_1: It is rather common in mathematics to have access to the full paper before deciding to review (it is attached or a link is provided). You could basically use what you wrote here as the basis for your reply. I specifically mean the phrase:
>
> I am potentially interested to review the paper, but I would like to see the content to be sure if the methods used in the paper aren't beyond my knowledge.
>
>
>
I would just ask for the full paper with this reasoning.
Only make sure to decide whether you are willing to review in a timely manner after you received the full paper.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes in every engineering manuscript I have reviewed I had access to the full manuscript before making the decision about whether or not to review. Standard ethics apply (you can't use your advance knowledge of the manuscript contents for nefarious purposes)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I referee in math. I would never accept an assignment without first seing the whole article. And, over many years, I have always been offered to see the manuscript, both when asked by email directly by an editor, and also when receiving an automated invitation.
Are you sure there is no link in the email to see the article?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I gather from other answers that the norm in math is to send the entire paper when requesting a peer review. By contrast, in the fields I'm familiar with (generally, biology/molecular biology) it's the opposite; peer review requests send the title and authors, and often but not always the abstract; never (or very rarely) the full paper.
I assume that one reason is to avoid conflict of interest awkwardness. Editors presumably don't want to accidentally send the full description of a project to someone who is directly competing.
*Edit* to add a possible difference from math: I have the impression that math peer reviews are much more time-consuming than in biology, and that a peer review involves basically working through the entire paper oneself. That's rarely possible in biology (I can't take five years and 5000 mice to repeat a set of transgenic mouse experiments) so my peer reviews might take a few hours to a couple of days, and I don't need to see the paper to judge how much of a commitment I'm making.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/01/01
| 1,475
| 6,127
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently in one of my courses I have been assigned a task to be done in small groups (of 3 people). It turns out not to be too long (especially with some previous knowledge that I had), so over the course of an evening I have done roughly 60-70% of the work and the remainder would probably go even faster for me.
However the task was a group task, so I would feel that it could be quite inappropriate to just do all of the work and leave my other two friends nothing to do. I wouldn't like to make them feel left out and I wouldn't like to come across as a know-it-all. At the same time, I know that thanks to said experience not only will I need less time to complete the work, but also it is quite likely that the quality will be higher, potentially leading to a better grade and so benefiting all three of us.
Whatever I decide to do, I think I'll probably finish the task just for educational purposes, so the way I see it I can do one of those:
1. Tell them that I have the task complete. Apart from the disadvantages mentioned above they may feel compelled to also do all of the work, but forcing them to do so is absolutely not what I intend--if they also want to do so for educational purposes then they are of course welcome to, but I'd prefer to avoid them feeling like they have to do more than their fair share of work.
2. Pretend like I've only done some parts of the work and assign the "missing" pieces to them. First of all, lying about such matters seems to be a silly solution and also I feel like it could be easy to get caught and eithet be in worse position than 1) or have to lie more. Second of all, as I said when they complete their parts, it is possible that I'd feel obliged to make some changes to their work, potentially changing enough that it stops to look like their work, for us to get a better grade, which would be in all of us' best interest, but that would bring out some of the issues from 1)
How should I approach this topic, how should I communicate my ideas in the best possible way? Again, I don't want them to feel I treated them wrongly, but a the same time I wouldn't like our grade to suffer (in one of previous homework tasks I did give in even though I knew I was right at some points when discussing our solutions before turning them in, since I didn't want to come across as the smartass correcting everyone on everything, but our grade did turn out a bit lower then I would've gotten, had I turned all those tasks in by myself)<issue_comment>username_1: **To directly address your question:**
>
> Should I do a group project on my own?
>
>
>
No. It is a *group* project, assigned as such and expected to be performed as such.
>
> If so, how?
>
>
>
Not applicable.
**As to your narrative:**
>
> ...over the course of an evening I have done roughly 60-70% of the work and the remainder would probably go even faster for me.
>
>
>
That means you, and your group, are ahead of the game. That's a good position to be in. You have two choices:
1. Complete the bare minimum (which is sounds as though you can do solely), or
2. Go beyond what's required to demonstrate your, and your groups mastery, of the subject matter. Identify acceptable ways to expand the scope of the project that you and (more importantly) your group members can contribute to. Where are they strong that perhaps you are weak? How can they leverage your work to learn the material (the primary objective) while expanding the group's knowledge and capabilities? Even if there is no where further to go academically with the material (hard to imagine), how do you have to present the material? Written report, poster, etc.? Work as a group to learn a new piece of software to expand your capabilities in this regard and thus work together on the final presentation of the material.
>
> ...I would feel that it could be quite inappropriate to just do all of the work and leave my other two friends nothing to do.
>
>
>
Your feeling is correct. If they are in the same class, they are capable of, and expected to, contribute. Perhaps the direct objective of the assignment was well within your abilities, but there are no doubt other ways that your group members can contribute.
>
> I wouldn't like to come across as a know-it-all.
>
>
>
Describe to your group members that you have background in the material and was able to fulfill the needs of the assignment. Discuss your work with them and show your approach (and caution them to cast a critical eye because you may have made a mistake). If everyone is in agreement that you're correct, see #2 above. If there is disagreement, that's a great time to meet with the instructor to (a) demonstrate that your group was diligent and attacked the project early and (b) to help determine the correct approach.
>
> I think I'll probably finish the task just for educational purposes, so the way I see it I can do one of those: ...
>
>
>
Option 3: Describe the situation to your group members and ask them how they want to proceed. A major goal of group projects is to build communication and team coordination skills. This is a perfect opportunity to do so. Furthermore, group projects are meant to use the group's collective skills and abilities to outperform the skills and abilities of any one member. You've showcased yourself, now let them contribute to create a better final result than you could have alone.
Incidentally, if the project is effortless for you, is the purpose truly educational?
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A group project in class isn't the same as an assignment at a job. The teacher doesn't need this project done and isn't paying you to do it. The project is assigned for your benefit and it was assigned as a group project because not only is course material to be learned but also teamwork skills are to be honed. Use this opportunity to practice working with a group. Hone your interpersonal skills and see how good you can make the result in spite of having less skilled teammates. That's really the point of group projects.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/01
| 955
| 4,003
|
<issue_start>username_0: It will likely be several years (probably more) before I write a textbook, but it's something I've been finding myself pondering in the back of my mind recently.
I would like to distribute my book à la [Lienhard](http://web.mit.edu/lienhard/www/ahtt.html); that is, freely available on a website. Additionally, I would like to distribute complete solutions to the exercises therein through the same medium. However, I wonder if
1. educators might not adopt the book because the exercise solutions are easily found, and/or
2. students might not get the most out of the book because the exercise solutions are easily found.
If I distribute the exercises in .tex format, like [LeVeque](http://faculty.washington.edu/rjl/fdmbook/), the first point could be mitigated by allowing instructors to customize them more easily. To the second point, I did about as well in classes where solutions were provided with the problems (and the problems weren't graded) as I did in ones with solutions provided after the due date. But I'm sure that won't be true for everyone, and I know that there are other factors.
So I pose to the educators and students on this site whether it would be a good idea to freely provide complete solutions to my freely provided textbook.
Note: I see [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/1705/75748) as related, but it doesn't address the specific case of having a one-stop shop for solutions for entire sets of problems that is updated and cross-referenced correctly (i.e., no web searching required). Perhaps [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/72316/retyping-some-material-to-obscure-source-of-a-textbook-with-a-solution-manual?rq=1) is even closer, but it doesn't address open-access resources.<issue_comment>username_1: I note, from my experience, that students who have access to the solutions will look at them as soon as the solution becomes difficult instead of concentrating and focusing on working through to the solution. Some students will look at the prepared solution and “feel” they know how to solve it , but when it comes to doing a question “cold” then they find they don’t know.
Based on the comments from students I give the problems (which have the final answer so they can check accuracy) and a week or so later I give access to the worked solution - most seem happy with this.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Consider a compromise: Even numbered problems have solutions provided, odd numbered problems do not. Make sure each important point and degree of difficulty is covered by both.
An instructor setting homework would base it on odd numbered problems.
An independent student, or one that wants more practice e.g. before an exam, would use the even numbered problems.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Personally, as the author of some open-source freshman physics textbooks, I've kept the solutions secret and only given electronic access to faculty who adopted the book. I hand out the solutions to students on paper and ask others not to distribute solutions electronically to their students. I'm not under the illusion that this has kept solutions from getting onto the web, but I suspect that what is on the web is probably fragmentary and inconvenient to access.
I know at least one author of a very nice math textbook (Hefferon, linear algebra) who has included all solutions in the book.
Educationally, it seems that either way can be made to work. What I do works for me, and I assume that Hefferon chose what he was doing because it worked well for him.
In terms of getting adoptions, I also don't see any clear evidence. Both Hefferon and I have had our books adopted by other people.
I do have the impression that at most schools in the US, making solutions freely available is considered unusual. Putting solutions on the internet for free, in convenient form, is not something you can change your mind about later if you decide it was a bad idea.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/01
| 354
| 1,239
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a thesis, when referring to an R package (a statistical software), how should I write it?
Should it be italicized/treated like a title?
Or just like any other word. The package name is not a "normal word" so it seems out of place to just write it like
"...using the R package XYZ."<issue_comment>username_1: Use the citation function and inside the function use the argument package and then put the name of the package you wish to cite in quotations. Below is an example of the code.
citation(package = "NAME OF PACKAGE HERE")
You can copy the output to place in your document in the references.
For in-text citations, you can follow APA recommendations for citing software. Below is an example
* The Foo package was used in the analysis (Version number; Author last name, year).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You can do this by adding the following to your preamble. Something like this:
>
> \newcommand{\pkg}[1]{{\normalfont\fontseries{b}\selectfont #1}}
> \let\proglang=\textsf \let\code=\texttt
>
>
> \begin{document}
>
>
> Then you can refer to R as \proglang{R}, to a package
> \pkg{packagename}, and to a function as \code{functionname}.
>
>
> \end{document}
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/02
| 922
| 3,900
|
<issue_start>username_0: I currently have a bit of a conundrum - I would like to do a Masters right after undergrad and am currently applying to programs. However, I have several job offers. In case I do not get into the programs I want, should I accept the offer now? I'm not quite sure how to handle the situation.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think you should accept a job knowing you intend to back out if you get accepted to a master's program. I'm sure people do it, but it's not something I would do.
I would be more forthright. I would tell the recruiters at the companies that have made offers that you're considering doing a master's first and ask if they'd be willing to hold the offer while you do that. Either way, you'd like more time to decide.
If they liked you with a bachelor's, they'll like you even more with a master's. Depending on the size and culture of the company and your own attractiveness as a candidate, there's a good chance they'll give you time to decide and hold the offer if you decide to do the master's. Or they may have an even better suggestion. Worst case, the response deadlines they've given you are still the deadlines and your situation is unchanged.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Are the jobs and Master's programs in the same city? Many graduate programs are designed around the idea that many participants have 9-5 jobs. It may be possible to do work towards a Master's while employed. If you think that would be too difficult, you might be able to ask your employer whether you can drop down to part-time status. Another option is to look into delaying the start of the Master's program for a semester or two, so you're not leaving the job right after starting.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I'm not quite sure how to handle the situation.
>
>
>
I'd ask myself the following question: What would you rather happen?
* You start working somewhere, then get accepted to a Master's program and can't go because you're committed to your workplace.
* You start working somewhere, then get accepted to a Master's program and you completely burn your bridges by bailing on your workplace a few months into the employment.
* You start a Master's and miss out on working for those places you were interested in - at least for a few years.
Which can you live with better? Make the choice.
Note, however, that:
* Working somewhere usually helps you focus your research interests.
* You're going to refuse all of your job offers, minus the one you accept, anyway.
* Those same workplaces might be interested in you after your Master's - which is not all that far away, despite how it may seem right now.
* When you're in a Master's program, you might be just studying, but if you do meaningful research, you might actually think of this as a kind of employment: A very junior researcher / research assistant, and possibly also a teaching assistant.
This is all assuming you can't *combine* the Master's and a paid position like @accumulation suggested.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In germany we have contracts that usually start with a 6 month trial. Meaning that you and the company can terminate the contract within 1 or 2 weeks in that time period...I don't know which country you are in and which regulations you have. But if you have similiar conditions, I would do the following:
If you think there is a chance you get not into the programs you want, accept the job offers.
If you get into the program you want, terminate the contract and say you decided to do your masters(I saw something similiar several times already).
But keep in mind when you leave the company you should always go with good terms, you could even tell them that you will apply again after you have your masters. I think leaving because you want a higher education is a very good reason and no one can blame you for leaving.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/02
| 433
| 1,967
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently went to a summer program. Now, I’m asking my mentor there for a recommendation for college. The email account she uses for all correspondences related to the program is private (Gmail). The institution she works at is not related to the summer program in any way. Now, the college asks for the letter to be sent through institutional email accounts (letters from private accounts will be subject to further review).
She wouldn’t be sending the letter in her capacity as professor at the college she works at, but rather as mentor in the program, an institution in itself.
So should I ask her to send it through her private or institutional email account?<issue_comment>username_1: You seem to have answered your own question. If you don't want the recommendation to be subjected to further review, you should ask her to use her institutional email address. Anyone can set up a Gmail account, whereas there is a level of authenticity implied by an institutional email address. It's not relevant that she isn't sending the letter in her capacity as a professor, since the main purpose of the email address is to authenticate who she is. The college are requesting that letters of recommendation are sent from institutional email addresses since it reduces the amount of extra work required of them and of the recommender.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: *She wouldn’t be sending the letter in her capacity as professor at the college she works at, but rather as mentor in the program, an institution in itself.*
Nope, wrong. The way she knows you is through the summer program, but her authority to speak about what would make you successful in college is based on her position as a professor. That's a key part of what makes her letter credible (beyond the confirmations that it's literally her who wrote it). Writing such letters is part of the job of being a professor; the email she uses should reflect that.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/02
| 1,063
| 4,697
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in computational algebra. The last seven months, I have been reviewing literature and reading some research in computational algebra, but till now, I've not been able to come up with any specific problem. For the first two years of my PhD, I did the course work.
**Question :** How much time does it take to come up with a specific research problem? Is there any way to speed up this phase of the PhD?
Please note that my research supervisor is helpful, I discussed this issue with him and he told me that it takes some time to come up with a research problem, but he did not tell me how much time it will take.<issue_comment>username_1: At least in my experience, one's PhD adviser helps with finding a research topic, or even provides one. Depending on how mature and technical the field is, it might be very difficult to come up with a reasonably problem by oneself.
I suggest discussing the question with your advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Finding a thesis topic can be quite difficult. For example, I needed more than a year until I got into an interesting project where I was able to use my abilities and to find interesting research questions.
I was able to solve this issue by talking to my professor since he has a good overview of the state of the art. Thus, I would also recommend you to talk to your professor and other PhD students.
Another way might also be to read recent(!) research papers. Have a look at journals, conference proceeding. Think about attending an interesting conference and talking to other researchers there.
Even if you found a topic: Keep in mind that the beginning might still be difficult. It needs a lot of time and work to finally get familiar with a new topic, so do not give up too early.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are a full time researcher, you may not have the luxury of an adviser to guide you, especially if it's a new field. But, as a graduate student, you should seriously discuss with your adviser what you have read and what you found interesting. They should be able to help you find that research topic.
Ask them to send you to a summer school or conference, where you would get the pulse of what's going on in your subject area. That's also the place to meet other people who might become later your friends and collaborators.
Apart from the adviser, you should talk to the people in your thesis committee, if you have one. If your department is a healthy place, they would be more than happy to help. Also, talk to other faculty and students about things related to the field you want to launch yourself into.
It is not sufficient to read a lot in order to come up with ideas of research subjects. From reading you may find out what are the main open problems in your field and what are the state-of-the-art methods. But, there is no substitute for hands on research experience. Without that, you cannot know if the thesis topic you propose is something doable or not.
Since you read a lot about computational algebra, try to find a review where they talk about open problems in the field. Pick one which sounds interesting and do some more literature search to see what you need to know to approach the subject. Then discuss that with your adviser, peers or other faculty that might be helpful. They should help you divide this problem into subproblems, and one of them might be your topic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In my experience: anywhere between one second and 5 years. Sometimes you don't start from the "specific". You will frequently start from a rather general problem (perhaps even just a feeling..."there's something interest going on here..."), and then you narrow it down to something more specific and tractable as you go along and understand *why* it needs to be narrowed down, and even *how* it can be narrowed down. To rephrase some advice my advisor gave me: "Theorems are produced by proving a long series of minor lemmas. You rarely ever just produce the theorem from the start. Instead you prove special cases of special cases and technical lemmas until eventually something bigger emerges." One of the most important skills to learn to be a successful researcher is not how to identify big, overarching problems and how to solve them, but how to dissect a problem into little pieces that you then attack and start assembling into the big picture.
If you've been given, or otherwise have, some questions and are having trouble thinking of how to even start on them, then start dissecting: come up with subquestions, special cases, identify what makes things "trivial", do some accessible/"easy" calculations, etc.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/02
| 1,774
| 7,268
|
<issue_start>username_0: I failed my oral exam unexpectedly. My advisor had the impression that it would be less formal than it was (or at least that is what he told me) and I wasn't prepared. I thought it would be more along the lines of a project proposal, but instead my committee wanted my thesis to be close to half done.
It is not. The problem I have been working on is fairly unique, and there wasn't a lot of existing work for me to base it on. I've needed to run a lot of numerical tests to ensure my conjectures are correct before trying to prove them. Consequently, progress has been slow. But there have been some results, and I know that it is a good idea.
My second oral exam will be at the end of spring, and if I do not pass then, I will be removed from the program. I'm sure I could finish this in time to graduate, but with a hard, career-endangering deadline in sight, I'm becoming very worried about the timeline. I didn't expect to be in this position.
I've contemplated switching problems to something with a more predictable timeline, but at this point, starting over seems like a poor option, even if the new problem would be faster. I've thought the same about my advisor. It seems like time has locked me into playing what I thought was a good hand, but am now realizing may not be.
Are there any suggestions or advice for how to pull research together quickly for a deadline? (Other than work like hell, which I am doing.)<issue_comment>username_1: If it helps, your failing is probably more representative of your committee criticizing your adviser rather than you alone. Let me guess -- you work for a assistant/junior Professor or a tenured professor who has fallen out of political favor within the department? My guess is they are "beating on you" as a proxy for your professor because that is how academia works.
My advice to getting out of this rut is to suss out who on your committee is your adviser's enemy and work more closely with them. To handle a similar situation I had in my PhD I attended "enemy" group meetings and presented updates on my work directly to "enemy's" group. I could learn any objections to my work from the "enemy" right away before presenting in the exam. Over time the deadline for retaking exam became more flexible. I ended up satisfying it a few months before defending my dissertation. Enemy turned to friend and helped me with providing materials and access to characterization tools. Enemy-turned-friend wrote stellar recc letters and helped organize job interview for me. I ended up drafting and publishing 5 manuscripts from the research, on 2 of the papers I offered "enemy/friend" coauthorship and he/she declined. After graduating enemy-turned-friend became department chair and took away my adviser's labspace and used my PhD apparatus for his/her own research.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The actual question in the post is if there are suggestions for pulling research together quickly. For this, you need your advisor. Find out from him which of your research objectives maximize the importance to time ratio, and focus on those tasks. There may well be ways (specific to you) that improve your own efficiency, but that will depend on many personal factors.
I myself worked on a thesis problem (in math) that was basically, "I wonder if there is a connection between these two things?" When working on such a problem, it is easy for the new researcher to get bogged down in potential discoveries that are not "important" in one sense or another. It sounds to me like you need guidance in this area.
Going along these same lines, it would be best to find out explicitly what your committee is looking for in the next exam. Find out what types of things they felt were lacking from your research. Also, maybe one component to your initial failure was a perception that you lacked general knowledge of your field. If that is the case, than you don't want to put all of your effort into research. (I am certainly not accusing you of lacking knowledge. Just pointing out that there is more than one way to fail an oral exam.)
This idea that you need "half a dissertation" is way too vague to work off of in preparation for your next oral exam.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I’ll be speaking out of turn here given my inexperience. But hopefully this may be a boon rather than a deficit.
Are you familiar with Occam’s Razor?
In short, the simplest reason is often (but not always) the correct one. In this case, let’s focus on your first paragraph.
>
> I failed my oral exam unexpectedly. My advisor had the impression that it would be less formal than it was (or at least that is what he told me) and I wasn't prepared. I thought it would be more along the lines of a project proposal, but instead my committee wanted my thesis to be close to half done.
>
>
>
Before going into the first exam, how did you prepare? What information led you to presume that the exam was just a proposal? Analyze your information sources and deduce what is missing. If the missing link is input from the committee members, then it would be wise to reach out to them and cover your bases and get their opinion.
>
> It is not. The problem I have been working on is fairly unique, and there wasn't a lot of existing work for me to base it on. I've needed to run a lot of numerical tests to ensure my conjectures are correct before trying to prove them. Consequently, progress has been slow. But there have been some results, and I know that it is a good idea.
>
>
> My second oral exam will be at the end of spring, and if I do not pass then, I will be removed from the program. I'm sure I could finish this in time to graduate, but with a hard, career-endangering deadline in sight, I'm becoming very worried about the timeline. I didn't expect to be in this position.
>
>
> I've contemplated switching problems to something with a more
> predictable timeline, but at this point, starting over seems like a
> poor option, even if the new problem would be faster. I've thought the
> same about my advisor. It seems like time has locked me into playing
> what I thought was a good hand, but am now realizing may not be.
>
>
>
You have a thesis plan. You have a timeline. But I ask, given the restrictions, can you reasonably modify it to fit the new deadline? If not, what options would you have? Defend an incomplete thesis? Continue and complete your research as a post doctorate? Request an extension?
>
> Are there any suggestions or advice for how to pull research together quickly for a deadline? (Other than work like hell, which I am doing.)
>
>
>
I would urge caution and a different approach. Working like hell is good, but burning yourself out will not help you perform well in the long run.
Work smart as well as hard. Contact your committee members for their input as well as your advisor. If you have other commitments (like work, volunteering, etc) reconsider whether or not it would be possible to keep your commitments moving forward.
Lastly, remember to leave time for yourself. No one operates on 100% at each moment of the day. Remember to eat, exercise, and find time to socialize. Practice a holistic approach to keep you at 100%.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/02
| 1,579
| 6,507
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated last year and had been working on a problem. Now I have some progress and am interested in applying (non US places mostly, mathematical physics). How should I write a thesis proposal? I have the draft version of my work but it is extremely technical and will require serious patience to read the whole thing. Whoever I can summarize the important ideas in a smaller thing.
My question is if I should attach an abstract, a summary and the draft of the paper along with the introductory mail? How should the mail be structured?
On a side note, one of the people at the institute had commended my work some time back when I had sent them a previous draft.<issue_comment>username_1: If it helps, your failing is probably more representative of your committee criticizing your adviser rather than you alone. Let me guess -- you work for a assistant/junior Professor or a tenured professor who has fallen out of political favor within the department? My guess is they are "beating on you" as a proxy for your professor because that is how academia works.
My advice to getting out of this rut is to suss out who on your committee is your adviser's enemy and work more closely with them. To handle a similar situation I had in my PhD I attended "enemy" group meetings and presented updates on my work directly to "enemy's" group. I could learn any objections to my work from the "enemy" right away before presenting in the exam. Over time the deadline for retaking exam became more flexible. I ended up satisfying it a few months before defending my dissertation. Enemy turned to friend and helped me with providing materials and access to characterization tools. Enemy-turned-friend wrote stellar recc letters and helped organize job interview for me. I ended up drafting and publishing 5 manuscripts from the research, on 2 of the papers I offered "enemy/friend" coauthorship and he/she declined. After graduating enemy-turned-friend became department chair and took away my adviser's labspace and used my PhD apparatus for his/her own research.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The actual question in the post is if there are suggestions for pulling research together quickly. For this, you need your advisor. Find out from him which of your research objectives maximize the importance to time ratio, and focus on those tasks. There may well be ways (specific to you) that improve your own efficiency, but that will depend on many personal factors.
I myself worked on a thesis problem (in math) that was basically, "I wonder if there is a connection between these two things?" When working on such a problem, it is easy for the new researcher to get bogged down in potential discoveries that are not "important" in one sense or another. It sounds to me like you need guidance in this area.
Going along these same lines, it would be best to find out explicitly what your committee is looking for in the next exam. Find out what types of things they felt were lacking from your research. Also, maybe one component to your initial failure was a perception that you lacked general knowledge of your field. If that is the case, than you don't want to put all of your effort into research. (I am certainly not accusing you of lacking knowledge. Just pointing out that there is more than one way to fail an oral exam.)
This idea that you need "half a dissertation" is way too vague to work off of in preparation for your next oral exam.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I’ll be speaking out of turn here given my inexperience. But hopefully this may be a boon rather than a deficit.
Are you familiar with Occam’s Razor?
In short, the simplest reason is often (but not always) the correct one. In this case, let’s focus on your first paragraph.
>
> I failed my oral exam unexpectedly. My advisor had the impression that it would be less formal than it was (or at least that is what he told me) and I wasn't prepared. I thought it would be more along the lines of a project proposal, but instead my committee wanted my thesis to be close to half done.
>
>
>
Before going into the first exam, how did you prepare? What information led you to presume that the exam was just a proposal? Analyze your information sources and deduce what is missing. If the missing link is input from the committee members, then it would be wise to reach out to them and cover your bases and get their opinion.
>
> It is not. The problem I have been working on is fairly unique, and there wasn't a lot of existing work for me to base it on. I've needed to run a lot of numerical tests to ensure my conjectures are correct before trying to prove them. Consequently, progress has been slow. But there have been some results, and I know that it is a good idea.
>
>
> My second oral exam will be at the end of spring, and if I do not pass then, I will be removed from the program. I'm sure I could finish this in time to graduate, but with a hard, career-endangering deadline in sight, I'm becoming very worried about the timeline. I didn't expect to be in this position.
>
>
> I've contemplated switching problems to something with a more
> predictable timeline, but at this point, starting over seems like a
> poor option, even if the new problem would be faster. I've thought the
> same about my advisor. It seems like time has locked me into playing
> what I thought was a good hand, but am now realizing may not be.
>
>
>
You have a thesis plan. You have a timeline. But I ask, given the restrictions, can you reasonably modify it to fit the new deadline? If not, what options would you have? Defend an incomplete thesis? Continue and complete your research as a post doctorate? Request an extension?
>
> Are there any suggestions or advice for how to pull research together quickly for a deadline? (Other than work like hell, which I am doing.)
>
>
>
I would urge caution and a different approach. Working like hell is good, but burning yourself out will not help you perform well in the long run.
Work smart as well as hard. Contact your committee members for their input as well as your advisor. If you have other commitments (like work, volunteering, etc) reconsider whether or not it would be possible to keep your commitments moving forward.
Lastly, remember to leave time for yourself. No one operates on 100% at each moment of the day. Remember to eat, exercise, and find time to socialize. Practice a holistic approach to keep you at 100%.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/02
| 425
| 1,743
|
<issue_start>username_0: I hold a BA in a language and area studies (history, politics, social science) and a PhD in political economy (touching on social science), both from British universities belonging to the (research-strong) Russell Group, and I have been outside of academia for many years.
What route might I take towards the goal of researching for a PhD, preferably again at a Russell Group institution in Britain, in canine psychology and behaviour?
(I have read the help file, and felt that giving details of the fields was necessary in order to make clear what I am asking. Advice that is not specific to these fields is very welcome, especially if the size of the gap between them is similar to the size in my case.)<issue_comment>username_1: One route would be to take a conversion (from scratch) master's degree in Psychology, such as the [MSc in Psychological Sciences at University College London](https://www.ucl.ac.uk/prospective-students/graduate/taught/degrees/psychological-sciences-msc).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Given that you already have a Ph.D., can you network with anyone to meet a mentor in this subfield? Their personal advice could help you figure out which formalities you can skip and what skills are essential. Do *they* see your work as providing transferable skills to their field? Would they recommend that you need more background in lab work, psychological theory, or something else?
While it's not normally a good idea for people to try to contact unknown professors merely to ask for help preparing for a later application, you've been socialized into the norms of academia (especially within the Russell Group) and may be able to do so in a targeted and effective manner.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/02
| 349
| 1,465
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've found a market research report which has some really useful information for me, but the report itself is locked behind a paywall, and I've received no response to the mechanism for requesting a free copy.
My question is, can I just cite the info from the report's summary (it's actually still quite detailed) and if so, should I cite that as a separate source (webpage) rather than saying that I'm citing the report itself?<issue_comment>username_1: One route would be to take a conversion (from scratch) master's degree in Psychology, such as the [MSc in Psychological Sciences at University College London](https://www.ucl.ac.uk/prospective-students/graduate/taught/degrees/psychological-sciences-msc).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Given that you already have a Ph.D., can you network with anyone to meet a mentor in this subfield? Their personal advice could help you figure out which formalities you can skip and what skills are essential. Do *they* see your work as providing transferable skills to their field? Would they recommend that you need more background in lab work, psychological theory, or something else?
While it's not normally a good idea for people to try to contact unknown professors merely to ask for help preparing for a later application, you've been socialized into the norms of academia (especially within the Russell Group) and may be able to do so in a targeted and effective manner.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/02
| 659
| 2,815
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been admitted to University of Texas at Dallas for Master's in Computer Science program and have joined in Spring. Although, I want to have second opinion and was wondering if it's possible to transfer my school. I have some queries in the same regard:-
* Do I need to apply from scratch to the new school that I intend to apply into?
* Are the credits, that I gain in this term, transferable to the new school?
Any help would be really appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know the US educational system, but I guess that it would depend on the two institutions.
In several countries you can apply for transfer admission and also for transfer the credits you have completed to other institution. However, the institution must have classes that are equivalents to the ones you took in the previous university. For example, here in my university you could have equivalence between two classes if there are at least 75% of content overlap between them, among other factors. The application for equivalence is judged by a professor from the department where the degree you want to pursue is offered.
Here in Europe we have the [Bologna Process](http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/higher-education/bologna-process_en) and the [European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS)](https://ec.europa.eu/education/resources/european-credit-transfer-accumulation-system_en) to facilitate this kind of process.
You may check the specific policy of the university you want to go and the convention in the US educational system. As I can see [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_admissions_in_the_United_States#Transfer_pathways), is very common the transference from/to community colleges in order to save money, so this is not so odd in the US too.
Be aware that, in general, you always lost some credits when transferring to another institution due to different structures of the courses.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It isn't usually possible to "transfer" to another school, but you could always apply to a different program and terminate your current program. In this case, to answer your questions:
* Yes, you will need to apply to any new schools you'd like to consider. They are independent institutions, so they need to evaluate you according to their own standards.
* You will have to ask the school you apply to how they will take transfer credits. There is often a credit limit, and you might need to take an exam or by some other method prove your competency.
Note that you *may* need to provide reasoning for why you are switching programs when you apply to an alternate program. It may be harder to get into a program given this -- schools may not want to take a risk on a student that quickly exited out of another program.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/02
| 764
| 3,377
|
<issue_start>username_0: Earlier in my undergrad I co-authored a paper with one of my professors. Initially it was supposed to be just a class project, but on his suggestion I did some more work and went with it at a student conference and then with substantial help from his part we managed to further expand the topic and write an article which has been published on a (small) national journal.
A few months ago I took part in a problem solving contest for undergrads. Among the problems there was one which was quite interesting, basically made out of two parts. I got the highest score on the problem, but barely did any work on the second part. I tried looking in the literature and while there are many references about the general concept, nothing about the specific version presented on the contest (I should point out that there is nothing trivial about it, i.e. the solution and the implications are different from anything I found so far). This seems like a nice opportunity for a paper, and I think I could actually get it solved with some additional help. I was thinking about proposing this to the professor that was my co-author on my first paper, but I’m not really sure how to approach him, as the synopsis for the first one was totally different from this case. To make matters more complicated, we got some money out of the first paper (not much and it was his initiative to apply for the prize), and I also received a scientific performance scholarship for it, and I don’t want him to feel/think that I’m trying to do research for the sake of money.
So, how should I formulate my e-mail in order to make him understand that I see an opportunity for an article but without seeming like I’m desperate?<issue_comment>username_1: I think you're overthinking this.
I can't imagine any professor thinking you are desperate or just want money out of this. In fact, I would expect a professor to be excited to get an email from a student that has taken the initiative to start a project and reaches out to see if they are interested in collaborating.
You really have nothing to lose here. Professors are generally eager to publish. Send an email!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't understand why your professor might think that you are desperate just because you want to collaborate with him. He was a co-author of your previous paper which is why you should contact him without any hesitation. The fact that you actually got some money out of the first paper should encourage your professor to collaborate with you again. He probably gets e-mails of people he doesn't even know, who want to collaborate with him. Use your personal connection to your advantage! Your fear of him thinking that you are doing research for the sake of money is unfounded. For some people scholarships like the one you got are the only option to earn a degree because they don't have the financial resources to go to college otherwise.
If you want to increase the chance of your professor collaborating with you, make sure you are prepared to show him how far you have got and where you need his insight. Professors don't really have that much time at their hands and if you show him that investing his time is worth it he will support you. Send him an e-mail in which you tell him about the topic and kindly ask for a meeting to talk about it.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/03
| 1,729
| 7,247
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student and I believe I was discriminated against by my department. I am pretty hurt by it, but I do not want to give further details to protect my identity. I spoke to a lawyer and he said I have a convincing case and I would likely get a settlement.
I am curious about the non-legal consequences of doing so. I believe my department was legally and morally wrong. However, the people involved may have believed they were doing the right thing. I want to take action to claim my financial damages and to ensure this doesn't happen again, but I don't want to be blacklisted or see any sort of retaliation.
Has anyone here filed a discrimination complaint against their university? Should I expect retaliation? How can I protect myself?<issue_comment>username_1: The only way I can see a "happy ending" here is if the people involved in the discriminatory incidents meant well but realized they screwed up. In that case, there's a chance that they won’t cause any further problems, although as username_2 mentions, they certainly won't be "in your corner" anymore.
Unfortunately, in most such cases, if the people involved don’t think that they did anything wrong, though, you may have to expect that there will be blowback.
However, retaliation is normally grounds for further charges and damages, so the best way to ensure there are no further incidents is for the university’s lawyers to talk to everyone involved and to indicate that retaliatory behavior will not be tolerated.
I’d love to be able to say there won’t be any future problems, but the truth is, every situation is unique, and you certainly can’t dismiss the possibility of people giving you a cold shoulder (or worse) if the lawsuit becomes public knowledge.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Basically, I think you will typically not have too many troubles finishing your degree, as attempts to stop you from doing so will easily be constructed as retaliation and a rational department should typically decide that there is little to win and much to lose for them in such a situation.
*However*, as you say you want to remain on an academic career path - well, the reality is that this usually requires significant support (by your advisor and other faculty mentors) above and beyond just letting you graduate. I wouldn't worry too much about being "blacklisted", but in reality, most of us need somebody actually supporting us in our career - nobody explicitly throwing stones in our way is usually not enough.
You don't say who you are actually planning to sue, but if your advisor is not on board with these plans, or explicitly one of the involved culprits, it is difficult to see that he fully supports you in the way that is required going forward. It may be possible to find new mentors, but they would need to be people who agree with your decision to sue and who were largely unaffected by it. I don't think it's likely enough that the involved people change their minds and agree with you sufficiently that they become effective mentors down the road.
At the end of the day, I would assume that your decision to sue negatively affects your career planning at least to some degree. You will need to make the decision whether that's worth it, either because your compensation will be sufficient or because you can't let the discrimination stand.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: You might consider meeting with your university's ombudsman, if there is one. His/her job is to listen to concerns brought by any member of the university and to keep them confidential.
In particular, you could explain the details of the lawsuit you are considering, and ask what the possible non-legal consequences might be. This is likely to depend on the specifics of your situation, and h/she would be bound not to disclose these specifics to others.
The ombuds might also be able to suggest an alternative to a lawsuit. This would presumably not involve compensation, but the administration might be willing to take steps to prevent similar discimination from occurring in the future. Depending on your priorities, this is something you might consider.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: 1. *Has anyone here filed a discrimination complaint against their university?*
Personally, I have not, however, in a recent issues of *Science* [describes sexual harassment at a remote field station](http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/disturbing-allegations-sexual-harassment-antarctica-leveled-noted-scientist) and the [resulting investigation](http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/11/boston-university-concludes-geologist-sexually-harassed-student) that got the professor fired, pending any appeals.
2. Should I expect retaliation? How can I protect myself?
Historically (and sadly), many academics have been fearful of retaliation. The articles I linked to describe how a researchers waited until after she **had tenure** to report her major advisor for sexual harassment during graduate school. She waited until post-tenure because she was afraid of her advisor ruining her career if she spoke out before tenure.
I would consult with your lawyer about how to document retaliation. Sometimes retaliation can be easier to document and prove than the original crime. Anecdotally, I recall training on discrimination that warned us not to retaliate because the agency had no successful discrimination cases filed against them, but did have successful retaliation cases.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> I am a graduate student and I believe I was discriminated against by my department. [...]Has anyone here filed a discrimination complaint against their university? Should I expect retaliation? How can I protect myself?
>
>
>
I'm very sorry to hear about your situation. I have been in a vaguely analogous situation, and a close relative of mine was in a more similar situation, sued, and won a settlement. My own situation was not about discrimination (I was not part of any legally protected class), but my relative's was.
One thing that isn't really clear from your question is what kind of graduate school you're in. If you're in grad school and hoping to become a dentist, then that's one situation. If you're in grad school and hoping to become a research scientist, that's different.
If it's something like the latter, then I hate to say this, but I think the reality is that if you do this, you are burning your bridges. Academia is a very small world, and finding a path to a permanent job is difficult. Even a very subtle whispering campaign can completely torpedo your chances. It doesn't even need to be a whisper. People can simply provide one-line letters of reference that don't say anything positive or negative. It's especially problematic that you describe the discrimination as being perpetrated "by my department." This means that you have zero institutional support going forward.
You may want to think in terms of choosing an entirely different life path, and not accepting any settlement that is too small to reflect the seriousness of this change in your life.
Of course, I know nothing about your situation beyond the sketch you provided, so this could be totally wrong.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/03
| 1,011
| 4,658
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted an article to a journal, and it was rejected. The reviewers criticised some configuration values I used in my software. The comments were very helpful.
I have since improved the software, re-run the experiments, and extensively rewritten the article. I plan to submit it to the same journal. I suspect there's a good chance it will go to some of the same reviewers.
The controversial configuration parameters are no longer needed, and so are not mentioned in the article. I'm worried that if the reviewers saw the earlier version of the article, they may be confused by the "missing" parameters.
For this reason, I am tempted to include a note explaining the change. Is this a reasonable thing to do, or would it seem amateurish? Would it be better to just communicate this to the editor instead of including a note in the submission itself?<issue_comment>username_1: When resubmitting a paper after rejection, many journals require the authors to provide a detailed response to reviewers, whether or not the paper is going to be assessed by the same reviewers.
Therefore, instead of including a note to explain the change, include a complete response to reviewers, even though the journal you are submitting to does not require it. It would be useful even if the reviewers are not the same, because it's quite likely that new reviewers will receive the initial comments.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In case you do not resubmit to the same journal (in which case your cover letter could contain these notes), but rather to a different journal or to a conference (since you seem to be working on topics that intersect with computer science):
You can always add notes to the reviewers to your document. I have done so multiple times for conference submissions in CS, once even with adding a cover sheet to a conference submission requesting the reviewers to look in the appendix to see if some of their points of criticism are addressed. I've never received negative comments about this.
**However**, doing so risks a comment by the reviewer that the information in the notes is so essential that it should be in the paper. So this strategy only makes sense if you can give reasons that make it 100% clear that the content from the notes to the reviewers should not be in the paper.
The cover sheet mentioned above may look weird, but the first section in your appendix being titled "Notes to the Reviewers" should not. However, some conferences employ automatic length checking of the paper and take this appendix into account, so you can only use this strategy if your paper is short enough with the notes.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **If this is not a resubmission you do not need to add any note.** The paper should be self-standing and if these parameters are not used than there is no need to mentioned that they were in the previous model. The only parameters of interests are the ones being used, unless you are doing a comparative study or improving upon a previous model, in that case you would have to explain why you are not using these parameters. As long as you support all of your parameter choices you do not need to explain what you did before.
**If you submit to the same journal** after having received permission from the editor, than **briefly state the main changes you have made**, but again, **the paper should be self standing**.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Even if you don't call it a resubmission, if its going back to the same journal, it is indeed a resubmission. Even after an extensive rewrite. This is a common occurrence.
I'm sure as part of the application they will ask if you have previously submitted this work to this journal and ask for the manuscript number. In doing so everyone will know its a resubmission. It will probably go back to the same editor who will obviously recognize the work. And probably back to the same group of reviewers.
This means that you include with it, a response to reviewers. If the comments no longer apply due to the rewrite, then simply state that as your response.
The hard part will be convincing the editor that your paper is worth another look. In your cover letter you tell them how helpful the reviewers comments were and that you made significant changes to the software and the manuscript text to address the concerns. If you ignore the fact that your work was previously reviewed they might just reject it based on that. You want to make it easy for them to accept your work, not hard.
Including a response to reviewers makes your submission **stronger**, not weaker.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/03
| 1,200
| 5,087
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been reviewing for a particular prestigious journal in my field for some time. I noticed that the editor invites a significant number of reviewers (4-7) simultaneously. In most cases, not all reviewers submit their reviews in time, but in one particular case, 5 reviewers submitted a review, and the paper was rejected.
While I understand that it is common to invite a number reviewers because many end up declining or not submitting a review, I feel like it is unethical to do so simultaneously, and is a situation similar to an author submitting to multiple journals, as it "wastes" reviewer-hours. In the particular 5-reviewer case, the paper did not need 5 reviewers to be rejected.
Is this kind of practice common and/or is it considered ethical in general?<issue_comment>username_1: Editors are creatures of habit, just like the rest of us.
If they’ve been on the job a while, they generally have a good idea of how many invitations they need to send to get the desired number or reviewers. Sometimes, though, they end up with more than they expect. It happens. But I think the occasional example of this happening is better than inviting only a few reviewers at a time, and waiting for responses before continuing to the next group. That lengthens the time needed for review and slows down the cycle.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I've never seen this before so it doesn't seem common but an editor can solicit and pass forward as many reviews as he or she feels is necessary... Definitely not unethical.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's quite common to invite multiple reviewers simultaneously, though 4-7 is on the high side in my experience (yet sometimes, even 4-7 is not enough!). The numbers quoted in the details below are for physics, and might differ for other fields.
Regarding whether or not it's ethical, it really depends on tradeoffs. The tradeoff for not inviting multiple reviewers at the same time is that your paper will take longer to handle. It's not just submitting reviews on time. Not every reviewer invited will agree to review it! My personal guideline when I was an editor was that, each time I invited reviewers (3-5 at a time), I would budget one month till I receive reviews. That itself is an optimistic budget - 6 weeks is closer to the average, since there's a long tail in the distribution.
The alternative to inviting multiple reviewers at the same time is to invite one at a time, and wait till you hear back from the reviewer if (s)he is willing to review. This leads to the following problems:
1. How long are you willing to wait to hear back from the reviewer? Let's say a week (which was also my personal guideline). Since you might have to invite 6+ reviewers before someone actually agrees to do it, you could easily be waiting 6 weeks *before the paper starts being reviewed*. If the reviewer takes one month to complete, that's at least 2.5 months before you can make a decision, not including any administrative time (i.e. you and the editor-in-chief both make decisions immediately).
2. What if your journal requires two reviewers? You can invite two at a time, but there's no guarantee that both of them will agree to review. Maybe one will, the other won't. You could end up with one review submitted with the next one due in another month.
3. What if the reviewer you invited writes a poor review (happens more often than one might think)? Sure you can blacklist the reviewer, but you still need to make a decision for the paper. If you invite more reviewers, again, that's another 1+ month till you receive the reviews.
4. Nightmare scenario: what if your reviewer agrees to review but then does not actually submit a review, in spite of multiple chasers? If we take the worst case, you've already waited 2.5 months and then discover that you have to start from scratch, which can lead to another 2.5 months before you can make a decision. Ouch!
In the end it comes down to how long authors are willing to wait for their papers to be reviewed. If authors are willing to wait 6 months, then yes, editors can invite one reviewer at a time and waste fewer reviewer-hours. On the other hand it's common for authors to start worrying if they don't hear back in two months, in which case the editor really cannot invite one reviewer at a time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I've seen this in cases where referees were slow to respond, did not respond at all, or promised to write a review but never did. In the example below, that happened with anonymous referee #2. By the time the editor gives up on ever receiving a promised review, months may have passed.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Bg8MK.png)
If you give people a week to respond to an invitation, then three weeks to write a review, it may take a long time if many people do not respond to invitations quickly. Suppose 20% accepts a referee request and you want 2 reviews, then it makes sense to ask 10 people immediately, just to speed things up.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/03
| 230
| 972
|
<issue_start>username_0: If a student has sent 4 letters, one more than required, and the 4th letter is missing, what will happen?
Will the committee contact the applicant if his application is strong enough?
Will they ignore the letter and decide based on the other 3? Will they delay the review till they have the 4th letter?
I know this varies between schools but how it's *usually* handled?<issue_comment>username_1: If the required number of letters have been received, then most likely the candidate’s application will be reviewed normally, with no penalty attached for not having the fourth letter. If a required letter was missing, then things get a little dicier, depending on whether there are too many applications and if it’s a rolling or fixed admissions cycle.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If 4 were sent and that is one more than required then the 3 necessary are there.
If 4 are required and only 3 sent then it may not be accepted.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/03
| 580
| 2,413
|
<issue_start>username_0: I talked to a professor about writing a recommendation (sometime before winter break) and he verbally agreed to it, and I sent him the official email request during winter break. He has not responded (I suspect it is because I sent the email during winter break) and out of politeness I didn't put his email down for reference requests without his consent. Is it considered pestering if I send him a follow up email now, restating my request? It has been about 3 weeks, and deadlines are in February and I wish to give at least a month's time to write the rec.<issue_comment>username_1: It's not pestering. Professors are busy people and he probably just forgot. One polite reminder email will not go amiss.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's not pestering. Neither it is a good sign. Professors are always busy, still they are supposed to be professionals who prioritize their work and try as hard as they can to get the to bottom of their to-do list.
Sending a new polite e-mail with a reminder is certainly a good idea as he/she might just have put you down on her/his priority list. However, you need to be prepared to accept that you may 1) be down on their priority list for reasons of not being particularly enthusiastic to write that letter or 2) be facing a too busy (sloppy?) professor who may send a letter too late.
Just send the new e-mail and gauge the reaction.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Most profs leave things like this to the last second... many even are bad and miss deadlines. No recommender I am aware of would start drafting a month in advance and carefully craft before submitting. Work level is so high that they will just crank this out when the deadline motivates them.
* if deadline is hard (NSF, etc.) be sure your reminder states this
* provide info to help them write (your CV, research proposal, etc.)
* if there are any good stories of your work with this person not included in your CV that would be good for him/her to include, briefly summarize them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: did anyone consider that winter break is supposed to be just that, a break? Professors don't give you assignments during that time, so please consider their needs to work on research or take a break over the holidays, as they so richly deserve. It was self-centered of you to send the request during the break.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/04
| 478
| 2,117
|
<issue_start>username_0: I published a paper late 2016. Recently I noticed that the published manuscript has a typo error in one of the authors affiliation. But it got indexed correctly on all databases under that author. Will it be good to contact the journal now to rectify the mistake or should I not care about that much as anyway it got indexed correctly? If I contact the journal almost after an year, will it affect the reputation of the authors? Also one of the student is going to use this paper for his PhD thesis. Considering this fact should, what is the best strategy to handle this ? Any recommendations?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest doing nothing. Once a paper has been published, making further changes is a difficult thing. With electronic versions it's easy to correct the typos, but since the electronic papers have already been disseminated, lots of copies of the paper with the typo included are already worldwide. The publisher cannot recall those copies, fix the typo, and then send them out again. With paper versions there're obviously even more problems since implementing the correction is hard.
If you must make a correction, it depends on how severe it is. If it's very severe, enough so that the veracity of the results are threatened, I would contact the publisher and ask to issue a corrigendum or erratum (see [this link](https://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk/policy-and-best-practice-errata-And-corrigenda) for more details about either). But in this case it's just a typo in the affiliations. This typo makes no difference to the research conducted or the results. Nobody is likely to care, especially not the researchers who will be using the work. Many might not even notice.
tl; dr: relax! There are far better things to spend your time on.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If the error is significant enough to make it difficult to identify the institution involved, then your best bet is to send a correction to the sites that handle the indexing. Going through the journal will require a corrigendum and won't really solve the issue.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/01/04
| 545
| 2,303
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently received a rejection to a paper that I co-authored with my advisor. There was nothing wrong with the content but the reviewer believed it was too simple by the journal standards. My advisor's advisor who has more that 30 years expertise in the field has suggested to combine the paper with its sequel (which I was in the process of writing) and submit elsewhere.
While I am getting ready to do the same my advisor has asked to remove his name from the paper. This worries me a little. It makes me think that the paper isn't good enough and that is why my advisor want to disassociate himself from it.
Could there be any other reason why my advisor is doing so? Should I ask him?<issue_comment>username_1: Please ask your advisor politely. There can be numerous reasons he wanted to have his name removed:
* The quality of your work is too bad and the paper might affect his reputation. I do not believe that this is the case. You worked together on the paper for the first submission where he agreed to be on author list. Why should he remove his name when there is better content, now?
* No right of authorship: He may know that all of the work was done by you and he has too little contribution to the paper. So he is friendly by declining authorship of your work. This might be quite likely, at least this has happened for me. However, if this is the case, consider including him in the acknowledgements.
* He wants you to become more independent. You may have worked rather closely on the first paper but now he wants you to take the lead and do most work on your own. This may be due to a limit of time on his side.
All in all, just ask him, you need this answer/feedback to continue your work.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes, you should definitely ask him about the reason he decide to remove his name from the paper. Also I don't think it will be a huge impact on you or your paper if he still decides to get his name removed.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Your advisor just wants to give you all the credits for the paper. It is your hard work after all. Since he is so shy and goodwilling, don't bother him with such an indiscreet question : don't ask him why. Just tell him thank you for so much support.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/01/04
| 1,054
| 4,211
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose I've put a PDF with an paper or treatise I've written, but not yet properly published, somewhere online. This place is not some document repository or a site that has some specific copyright assignment/assumption policy; suppose it's just a lowly HTTP server: `http://some.where.org/foo.pdf` . Suppose also that a link to it gets to some person with whom I've not made any explicit or implicit agreements regarding use of this work.
What are people allows or not allowed to do by US, EU and/or international copyright law?
* Are people allowed to make online copies?
* Are people allowed to make hard copies? Circulate hard copies? Publish hard copies?
* Can people produce derivative work (e.g. applying the same ideas in some other context) and publish it, at all?
* Must people credit me as the author, or can they just use the contents and forget about the author?
* Are there any special restrictions if I mark my paper as a "Draft"?
Note: It's not that I want to prevent any of those things from happening, necessarily - I'm just asking about the defaults.<issue_comment>username_1: The default, for any creative work, is that it is protected by copyright. Your paper would have the same status as any other work protected by copyright; essentially it would enjoy the same protection as a TV show, newspaper article or a college textbook.
It would not be legal to republish the paper on another website. However, [linking to or embedding it](http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=147847&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=21728) would be allowed in the EU.
Making physical hard copies would in principle also not be legal, but there are various fair use exceptions (e.g., I would be allowed to print a copy the paper for my personal use, and use in education could in some circumstances also be considered fair use).
>
> Can people produce derivative work (e.g. applying the same ideas in some other context) and publish it, at all?
>
>
>
"Applying the same ideas in some other context" is *not* a derivative work in the sense meant in copyright law. **Copyright only protects *expressions of ideas* (e.g., the phrasing you used in your paper to describe the idea), but not the ideas themselves.** If you published a paper on, say, techniques to design more aerodynamic airplane wings, then it would be perfectly legal for someone to build (and sell) airplanes based on your techniques, but it would not be legal for them to include your paper verbatim as a chapter in a book on airplane design.
There is no way to protect "ideas". If your paper contains a solution to a technical problem, then you might be able to obtain a patent for it (e.g., a better design for an airplane wing would be patentable material). However, unlike copyright, patents aren't automatic and are also very expensive to obtain and defend.
>
> Must people credit me as the author, or can they just use the contents and forget about the author?
>
>
>
If people use your work in a way that is either permitted by fair use or simply isn't prohibited by copyright in the first place, then there is no legal requirement that they credit you.
>
> Are there any special restrictions if I mark my paper as a "Draft"?
>
>
>
Marking your paper as a "draft" just informs other people that it is a draft, but it doesn't have any legal significance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In most (possibly all) jurisdictions, the default for a creative artifact with no license information attached is that it assumed to be all rights reserved. In other words, another person cannot do much of *anything* with it besides look at it.
See, for example, [GitHub's information about "no license" licensing](https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/). They are talking about code, but the default they mention is general.
Note that there are certainly categories of work for which this does not apply (for example, [recipes are specifically not protected under US copyright law](https://web.archive.org/web/20181108082341/https://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl122.html)), but it most certainly applies for any substantial paper draft.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/04
| 3,662
| 15,322
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started my PhD in physics approximately a month ago. Now I am working on my first project with my advisor and a postdoc that follows me. I made several big mistakes for a little task that my advisor gave me, and now I feel really bad. They were stupid big mistakes that put me in a bad light, as if I didn't understand anything. It seems that I really didn't understand concepts.
I have the bad habit of always waiting for instructions, without taking initiative because in my past studies, professors usually told me what to do next as little exercises. I also have the bad habit of doing things mindlessly and not reviewing them, often resulting in errors.
I know that I am capable of completing this PhD and that I have the possibilities of doing very very well. I have the mental resources to do it(hardware) but the problem are my bad habits(software).
Now I am facing the problem that it will be harder for me to build trust with my advisor. What steps could I take to start building it again? Does a bad start affect things in the long run(like if my first two month are bad, but then I finish great my first year and do well on the other years, will my references for a possible postdoc be bad)?
I am slowly reading articles and concentrating on my little tasks, trying to understand everything I do. Apart from that I don't know what else to do.
Edit: Thank you very much! I will take all your advice and go ahead! Good luck also for the other PhDs<issue_comment>username_1: It's your first month. You will be in the program for 3-5 years. Everyone knows this, and you will have the opportunity to redeem yourself. Be patient. Do better in the future. Everything will work out alright.
What's more important is that you understand your weaknesses. Work on them. Become a better person and scientist by figuring out how you can address your weaknesses by either addressing them directly, or working around them.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would suggest you talk to your advisor about this to make clear that you realise that you are underperforming and what you think can be done about this. He probably will not trust you immediately with that but will want to see some results. But then at least it is common knowledge that you think you can do better. You don't want people thinking that you have the impression you're doing well.
You also want to mention it to him because he can better tell whether you really are underperforming. Coming to a new environment and a possibly slightly different field, it is normal that you need to take some time to adapt. (Depending on the kind of mistakes you made) he will probably tell you that there is nothing to worry about.
If there are things you want to change because you think it will help you (more/less lab work, other tasks, working more/less together with others, etc.), discuss it as well. You and your advisor need to find a way that works for you, and communicating about that is the best way to do that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Now I am facing the problem that it will be harder for me to build trust with my advisor. What steps could I take to start building it again?
>
>
>
Fix the problem. If your advisor's getting a bad impression, that's a symptom; like a cough, you can try to suppress it, but the long-term solution is to fix the cause, i.e.:
>
> It seems that I really didn't understand concepts.
>
>
>
So, sure, some damage control can help for now. But the long-term priority needs to be personal improvement.
All that said, it sounds like you're beating yourself up a bit. That's not necessarily a bad thing; being critical of oneself is a great way to avoid becoming complacent. But at the same time, make sure that you don't overdo it and get depressed. There'll need to be a healthy balance.
Like [@WolfgangBangerth said](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/101583/38709), you'll be in the program for some years yet. You probably have a bit of time to breath and figure things out.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: There are occasional shakeups early on in a PhD. You may voluntarily or non-voluntarily switch groups. That may add time to your PhD. But it's going to be OK. I have friends with similar experiences who got kicked out of some hotshot's group, and they had very positive experiences with a different advisor. They have cool jobs now to boot.
The first year of a PhD can be brutal. You can go from the top of the undergrad class to the middle of the pack, or even the lower half. But don't fall into the cognitive trap of downward comparison: searching for someone above you and comparing yourself to him/her. This is virtually ALWAYS possible no matter how smart, rich, or strong you are. After all, even those achieving some maximum hold it only temporarily. We are simply points in a high-dimensional distribution of abilities and it's nonsensical, non-healthy, and immodest to consider yourself the absolute max or deserving of it.
It sounds like your anxiety and self-shaming up until now have helped motivate you to do better. And to some extent, that's a normal psyche in a PhD student and many over-achievers. But now you would do well to reign in those strategies and add balance to your life. There is more to learn than best coding practices in your PhD; there is also all the emotional management and self-care skills that will afford you the peace of mind you need to code well.
In terms of not taking the initiative, that sounds related to shame and anxiety as well - You may want to do "right" according to someone else's definition of what right is. Let this opportunity challenge that approach. So much of a PhD is about learning to think and do independently.
Go with confidence!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Depending on your learning type, "slowly reading articles" may not be the most efficient way to get you up to speed (what you wrote gives me the impression that you do well in lectures and seminars).
Ask if they have seminars for doctoral students and attend all of them that are relevant to your topic and connect with the other PHD students. There may also be meetings on paper writing and reviewing. You can even attend relevant lectures for students if those topics weren't covered at your old university.
For the trust issue, everyone makes mistakes, you just need to learn from them and don't make the same ones again. For example, you said you made the mistake of not reviewing results, so review all results from now on. You said you don't show initiative on your own, so start doing things on your own initiative. You seem to be on the right track as you identified your mistakes, but you seem to expect some magical solution to your problems, but that doesn't exist, just learn from your mistakes, don't make them again and move on. Just treat mistakes as a learning opportunity and remember that the only way to not make mistakes in the first place is to not do anything :-) And for the first impression, you will have more than enough time to prove yourself, in the end, everything that counts are your published results.
If you do all this and it doesn't improve, make sure that there is no complete mismatch between your topic and your abilities. For example, if you never did any programming and you are expected to do programming as a large part of your work and research, you need to accept that it will take a while to learn that or change the topic, if possible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Everyone makes mistakes. Be honest. Figure out WHY you made those mistakes, and learn from that. Talk to your advisor - tell them you know you made a mistake, why that mistake happened, and how you will stop it from happening again. Have they actually told you the mistakes 'put you in a bad light' or is that just your own embarasment making you feel bad?
If you learn from your mistakes (and don't blow the lab up), then that is the learning process!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Your first month sounds a bit like mine. I completely misunderstood what my advisors wanted me to do, and kind of felt foolish. But that’s the fundamental nature of research: lots of failure punctuated by the occasional success.
The key, as you mentioned, is overcoming your bad habits, which takes a combination of willpower and willingness to reach out for help. Nobody reasonably expects somebody to completely independent in the first month of PhD studies, so it’s perfectly OK to say “I don’t quite understand what you want here: do you mean X or Y.” Asking for clarification early on helps you to become more independent later, which is your ultimate goal!
As the other commenters suggested, you should also speak with your advisor, to explain that you know things went poorly. If your advisor knows you want to do better, you’re more likely to smooth things over than if you say nothing. Your advisor may also have more specific ideas about how to help you with your project and your performance.
In the long run, your first few months as a PhD student are a lot like your first semester as an undergraduate: so long as you finish strongly, the impact of the first few months will be negligible.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: It is early in your PhD career. Mistakes happen and they are often the best way to learn things. I struggle with similar bad habits. Sometime I make a game of trying to catch my own errors before others do. If I catch errors then I let myself by a fancy coffee or go out for lunch. Kind of simplistic idea, but it helps me.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: From a university administrators point of view, speak with your advisor now before things get worse. Tell him/her you have a plan to work harder and more independently and identify the items you would like to change, the items you would like to work on. If you have questions in the future, explain to the advisor the research you have done to solve the problem, what you think the answer is and why. This will show initiative and critical thinking. Professors mentor many students so they do expect their students at the PhD level to be much more independent and resourceful.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: You will need to evaluate for yourself whether the following would work in your particular situation, as you know your advisor.
You seem to have a fairly solid self-awareness of what when wrong and why. I found, in a somewhat different doctoral situation, that if you explain to your advisor the basis of your failure - what it was about your misunderstanding that led you astray - it can generate a lot of respect.
That doesn't mean making excuses, but a brutally honest discussion of what when wrong and how you intend to correct it. Honesty, humility, and resolve to improve, including a plan for improvement.
The fact that you have the self awareness is only the first part. If your advisor doesn't recognize that you do then you may be paying a price needlessly.
---
My context was different. In an oral prelim exam with a few faculty members, but not my advisor, I was asked a question and started to answer. After a few minutes I realized that I'd gone wrong, so I said to the faculty, "I've gone wrong here and ... is where I went off the rails and *this*... is why my answer is wrong. I don't think I can find my way back now." I learned later that I'd become a sensation in the faculty for my ability to analyze an error and admit it. I passed the exam and went on to earn the doctorate.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: It is entirely normal to be disoriented when starting a PhD. First time you're in charge of yourself! It can take a bit of time to get into the right state of mind. It usually starts when you get into the depth of your subject. Focus on it, strive to understand it and make progress. A PhD is a window of time for really working hard on something, that's what you need to do. Be dedicated, you'll get something at some point, and confidence with your advisor will then develop no matter what happened before.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: You need to assess your advisor. I have known senior people who would never forgive a bad first month and others who figure newbies make mistakes and need nurturing. If your advisor is the first type you need to get out now and do better next time. If your advisor is the second, don't worry about it.
You mention two different problems-wanting detailed instruction and making stupid mistakes. For the second, you should look at the mistakes you have made and try to understand what you could have done to avoid them. Are you making assumptions and not making sure you understand the direction you are given? Do you understand the direction at the start but are sloppy in execution? If you can find a common thread you can try to find a way to overcome it. For the first, you are progressing in your career and you are expected to understand what needs to be done at a higher level. You are still rather junior, so it is good to think about the direction you are given. Do you *really* understand it? If not, the best time to ask is when you are given the direction. We used to have a sign on the wall "Don't be afraid to ask dumb questions. They are a lot easier to handle than dumb mistakes." Do you understand why you are given the direction you are? This is important if you want to be more than a lab technician. You hope to be giving the direction someday. You need to understand what things are useful to do.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: Your advisor should not have to tell you what to do. Presumably, you are now a scientist who needs some guidance. Eventually you are expected to guide others. As such, it is up to you to decide what needs to be done, and do it in the most academically professional manner. As this habit develops, your advisor not only trusts you, but also respects you as a "very junior" colleague.
Your advisor is there to get you out of the predicaments you will invariably fall into, due to academic naivete. But, certainly do not expect him/her to dictate each step you are taking
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_14: Friend,
I'm routing for you! I had a bad first semester in my Ph.D. Through no fault of my own. I encountered health issues which had me confined to my bed for 8 weeks. I couldn't recover from that, so I withdrew from the program and took a different direction professionally.
Enough of my story. Here's my advice:
To reprogram yourself, you need to replace bad habits with discipline/regimen. For example, a good discipline is to keep a check-list of things that you need to do and continually churn your check-list to make sure that things are getting done and add new items as they come up. I have found this approach to be an exceptional way to get things done and to stay on track for both short-term and long-term goals. You have to force yourself to do this on a regular basis or you will most certainly fail. I would say that a very powerful regimen is to review and prioritize your check-list on at least a daily basis. You may also consider having a separate check-list for daily objectives, another for weekly objectives, and a third for longer term objectives.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/04
| 1,881
| 8,044
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work as assistant professor in a STEM field. I have been receiving a large number of emails from professionals, usually from government organisations and companies, asking for various advices and information.
One example is about asking me which software product is currently best at accomplishing the task X in the Y setting. These are usually short emails which take no more than 10 minutes to process (reading, searching, and replying).
I think I have responded to over 100-200 such emails so far, and now I am at a point of asking myself whether it is worth to continue. Academics do a lot of uncredited and unapreciated work, but I feel that this is especially pointless and even harmful. Initially it felt good to be an internationally recognized expert in academia and industry, which is very encouraging and important for an early career researcher, but now I am evaluating whether I should start ignoring them.
I am here to ask opinions and experiences of fellow academics on this matter. When I think about disadvantages and advantages of replying to enquiries, these are…
Disadvantages:
* They take time. Each may take less than 10 minutes, but accumulating a large number of emails means lots of time that could be spent on something else.
* They entail responsibility: I don’t think that I get anything by giving a correct answer, but once I give a wrong answer leading to a bad decision my reputation can be put at risk.
* They don’t seem appreciated in industry. I never got any follow-up or feedback on what happened later. Replying never led to anything for me. Also, I don’t think I learned much (only in 10% cases I learn things like “Oh these people are working on that, cool”, but that’s usually it)
* These things don’t go on your CV (let’s be frank).
Advantages:
* They can help building one’s reputation as an expert outside academia
* They can extend one’s network
* They can lead to a relationship bringing new projects (never happened to me personally)
Alternatively I was thinking about starting a part-time consulting service, but it doesn’t look viable.
So the question is it worth responding to emails from non-academic strangers asking you advices?<issue_comment>username_1: As someone who has written a few such emails while working in industry I really appreciate what you are doing. That said, you cannot be expected to answer each and every email you get. I would try to answer those emails that you think are worth your time or interest you. For the others, a simple canned email that you are receiving way too many such requests to answer them, with a list of books relevant to your field would IMHO be the polite thing to do.
As for getting feedback from industry: Keep in mind that most engineers would love to talk with you about all the details of their work and how to make the product better. But unfortunately, the company does not pay for this. They are pressured to make a product that can be sold and make it fast. Hence they are pressured to spend as little time with you as possible, once they get the answer. Maybe adding a line that you would like to get some feedback would make it more likely for someone to send you an email later, but I wouldn't hold my breath if they don't.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Why don't you start a blog? An FAQ and a few posts might be enough to address the vast majority of questions without costing you a ton of time.
You can then refer any inquiries to the blog. In time its popularity will grow and people might go directly to it instead of sending you emails.
You can highlight you research, grow your professional network, lead to collaborations AND save time by not having to answer the same question a million times.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Unless the email is from a person or organization that you strongly support and don't mind giving free advice to, then you should delete these emails on sight. Otherwise, they are trying to mooch free advice off of you to avoid paying a fee to a consultant, and I can almost guarantee that they care nothing about adding you to a network or expanding the contribution into a paid gig (because why should they, when they can just email you for free?).
In my experience, 99% of these emails have nothing to do with getting answers to questions but are rather attempts to open a conversation that ends with the other party trying to sell me something. Again, delete on sight.
You could alternatively make up a form letter to send back to those who are making these requests that clearly states your hourly fees for consulting, and invite them to connect with you if they are interested in hiring you to get your advice.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I suggest approaching this question from the point of view of “**selfish altruism**”, which is the philosophy (whose name I just invented, although I’m guessing it‘s already known in one form or another) of a person who wants to do good in the world but also understands that caring for oneself and putting a high priority on one’s own self-interest are important and are part of what makes it possible to make the most impact on the world in the long term.
In practice, what this means is that before spending significant amounts of time helping someone for free, you should not be ashamed to ask yourself, *what’s in it for me?* If you cannot give a satisfactory answer to this question, then it’s likely that answering the emails is not a good use of your time - it may *feel* like you’re doing something good by helping someone who asked you for advice, but when the opportunity cost (the things that you could have been doing with your time instead of answering the email, but didn’t) is taken into account, probably the net effect is negative. In essence, by answering an email that takes away your time without giving you *anything* in return, you are sacrificing your long term career success and happiness (which are important both for maximizing your own self-interest and your future ability to help others) for a short-lived emotional satisfaction of helping someone who asked for your help; or worse, it may not even give you much satisfaction but would simply allow you to avoid the feelings of discomfort and awkwardness that come from refusing someone’s request for help.
I should emphasize that when I talk about asking *what’s in it for me?*, I’m not talking about money. Money is good and useful and if you have opportunities to supplement your income with a bit of consulting, certainly that is a perfectly good reason to help people from industry. But there could be other good and valid reasons to answer these sorts of emails (e.g., as you mentioned in the question: networking, learning useful things about what people in industry are doing, etc). The point is that as long as you can articulate a *rational* reason why answering the emails will bring *you* some tangible benefit that matches or outweighs the opportunity cost of the time you will be spending, it should be fine answering the email. Otherwise, you should be wary of acting based on purely emotional motives that ultimately will not serve either you or the world well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I would write an FAQ. No, not as bad as <http://www.dourish.com/goodies/see-figure-1.html>, but still good enough to direct the non-academics to an appropriate place (away from you). In particular, the FAQ should state which questions you are likely to ignore and why the person should not wonder when they get no answer. According to <https://pty.pe/bad-ux-faqs/>, FAQs "unleash a user experience you don’t want on your current or potential customers". They "tell people who don’t like to read to read more." That's exactly what you want to do with your non-customers (outside academia) who prefer to ask you!
If you are impudent enough, take a different, perhaps an even better approach: direct the people with all the really useless questions to your worst academic enemy. ;-)
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/04
| 682
| 3,117
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am thinking on sending a paper to a conference. However, the conference CfP says:
>
> The Journal XX will publish a special issue with a selection of papers presented at the conference. The selection of the papers will be made by the Scientific Committee of the Conference.
>
>
>
Now, if I get accepted into the conference, and my paper is selected to be published in the journal, can I oppose it, or am I forced to accept it by the sole fact of participating in the conference? In other words, if I do not want my paper published in Journal XX, is it fine for me to apply to the conference?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, there are typically two classes of conference special issue, and the answer to your question will depend on which one this conference is using.
* Some conferences simply have their entire proceedings published as-is, "converting" them into indexed journal articles for the benefit of people in departments or fields where conference articles do not count.
* "Selected papers," on the other hand, typically refers to inviting the best papers of a conference to be upgraded into better articles for final publication, presumably on the basis of continued work and feedback received at the conference, and typically with an expedited peer review process.
The statement that you quote is unclear, since it says only selected papers, but doesn't mention invitations, extended versions, expedited review, or any of the other words typically involved with the second model. Moreover, if the conference is not very good, it may be that they simply don't care.
I would thus recommend writing to the organizers for clarifications --- and make sure it's a conference that you really want to be at.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It would be extremely unusual for a reputable scientific organisation to publish a paper without the author's consent. Most will require the author's sign-off on the content to be published, so if all else fails you can prevent publication by withholding that sign-off. And as @username_1 has mentioned, it's enough trouble for them to publish the ones who *want* to be published, it's probably not worth their while to argue with those who don't.
That said, if the conference is being run with the expectation that selected papers will be offered for publication, springing them on this after the event could ruffle some feathers. If you want to maintain harmonious relations with these people, I would suggest notifying them at the time of paper submission that you may not be able to authorise publication in the proceedings.
Be aware that they may prefer to accept papers from authors who are willing to be published. However, in fields where "commercial-in-confidence" or similar issues are common, such a request might not be too unusual.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: They wouldn't be publishing it "against your will". You were notified in advance that possible publication was a condition of acceptance. If you don't like their terms then you have the option of not submitting your paper.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/04
| 1,541
| 6,627
|
<issue_start>username_0: A colleague of mine has recently asked me about an uncomfortable dilemma that he faces. Some years ago, a rather problematic student of his requested a recommendation letter. My colleague indicated that it would not be a good recommendation, but the student insisted. Accordingly, my colleague provided a not-very-supportive letter containing only completely non-disputable facts, basically saying "This student met the requirements for graduation."
My colleague has recently been approached by a potential employer of the student who wants to have an in-depth discussion about the student. Given the nature of the student, my colleague does not want to get drawn back into dealing with anything to do with them.
What would you recommend as an ethical and appropriate way to deal with this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: It's one thing to write a letter of recommendation and another to add to the letter of recommendation your willingness to discuss the candidate further. In positive letters of recommendation, I usually include something like "Please contact me if you have any questions about <NAME>."
Did your colleague say in that letter of recommendation that he/she would be willing to discuss the candidate? Since the letter was written several years ago, does the candidate still want to use your colleague as a reference? I wouldn't have this discussion unless both of these conditions were met. If these conditions were met, I'd feel obligated to have the phone conversation, but I would restrict my answers to the bare minimum and make it clear that I wasn't giving a positive recommendation.
In general, it's a lot easier to just refuse to recommend a student than to give a negative evaluation- the real mistake here was in agreeing to write the recommendation letter.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This smells like a trap. I tend to be more paranoid than most, but this has often paid off. Could it be that this potential employer is really a friend of this student and they're trying to get damning evidence recorded to aid in a planned lawsuit? These manipulative types are adept at spotting people who are easy to manipulate, which would explain why the student originally insisted on your colleague writing a letter, even after he'd been put off. Now he's back with another scheme. That your colleague feels uneasy means that he's aware, on some level, that the student is predatory. My opinion is that he should run away from the situation. He might state that he has a policy against doing any sort of recommendation for anyone he hasn't dealt with in 5 years, since his knowledge would be so dated.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Although I'm sure your colleague knows this, I think it should be noted that there is no inaction or, more precisely, a way to not communicate anything good or bad about the student. If your colleague discusses the student, then they will likely have to say something good or bad. If they say nothing at all or if they refuse to discuss, this is a clear implication that they - cannot - discuss the student honestly and without being subject to a lawsuit (if there are such and such laws in the given jurisdiction). Even if the colleague simply says "I do not have time", that indicates the student is not worth their time.
Your colleague does not have much agency in this case. The student did, however, they could have opted not to ask for a recommendation letter.
I think the ethical and safest (legally) thing to do is simply refuse to discuss, saying "I'm afraid I cannot discuss the student with you". And the party responsible for this tacit admission (via an omission) is the student for putting the colleague in this position.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Agreeing with username_2's answer, I might be inclined to also be a bit paranoid about the motivation of your colleague's former student. Having said that, let's take a look at the situation: since
1. the initial request was several years ago,
2. assuming the student has not made more recent contact with your colleague asking them to serve as a reference for the potential academic job opportunity in question, and
3. your colleague did not have a favorable opinion about the student, then
it is best for your colleague to decline potential employer's request.
Note that this is a good general approach to those cases where a student signs someone up as their reference without contacting the potential reference-to-be in the first place; that the student wasn't a very good one makes this approach an even more attractive one for your colleague.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: A simple declination to discuss should suffice.
>
> Hi (Person),
>
>
> I will not be able to discuss (Mr/Mrs student). Sorry for the
> inconvenience.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> (Professor)
>
>
>
Don't make up a reason. It only gives someone an opportunity to continue asking if they have a way to mitigate said reason. Also, if it is indeed a nefarious as others have suggested, there is nothing for them to take and run with.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: If this is in the United States, in the absence of a FERPA release signed by the student, your colleague cannot discuss anything that's protected by FERPA and *should not* discuss anything that is arguably protected or might be. It's not just a good idea, it's the law! (But this isn't legal advice.)
FERPA contains an exception for recommendations to schools to which the student has applied. That exception *does not* apply to potential employers.
The right answer is, "I'm unable to discuss former students."
Edited to add: I was being precise when I wrote "former students;" don't say anything at all about *this* student. And, as [username_5](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/101613/16183) has already written, don't give a reason.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: I would suggest that your colleague discuss the situation with the university's general legal counsel, assuming such an office or officer exists.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I would indicate that the student did not leave enough of an impression to remember him well after several years, and thus decline the discussion. That does indicate that the student was not the best, but does not point out any concrete flaws, staying almost neutral.
If the student did put your colleague on the list of references, even though he was told that he would not get the best recommendations, then I feel like he got into this on his own, and does not need to be gone easy on.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/04
| 464
| 1,995
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student who does research with a professor at my University. Recently we submitted a paper (which I am second author of) to a conference, and it was accepted with shepherding.
I'm obviously proud of my work, and would mention it even if there was no formal paper associated with it. But I also think mentioning that I helped write this paper would strengthen my resumé.
How can I responsibly present this on my resume? Can I say the title of the paper? (I feel like that's reasonable) It's submission status? (I feel like this is a no-no) I'm unfamiliar with the academic guidelines here.
Edit: I'm looking for an industry internship, if that's relevant to the question<issue_comment>username_1: I usually have three categories for papers on my CV:
1. Peer-reviewed accepted papers (if published they have the bibliographic info, otherwise they just say "Accepted by *journal name*")
2. Submitted preprints (with the month and journal of submission and a link to the readable preprint)
3. In preparation (means there's a file started but not finished)
You shouldn't move things from 2 to 1 until they're really officially accepted though. Be honest and accurate, but list it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: A paper goes through various stages of review before either being published or rejected. The stages usually have names, but the names vary by journal so using the journal specific names could make your cv inconsistent.
If a paper is in the early stages of review I make an entry like
Author names, Paper name, Journal name, submitted.
If it is in the later stages I exchange 'submitted' for 'to appear'. If it has been published I add the page numbers. The advantage of this is to have a uniform format in your CV. The difference between early and later is a judgement call. Note that anyone with few publications to their name would be doing themselves a disservice by being overly strict about this distinction.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/04
| 710
| 3,043
|
<issue_start>username_0: Hi I am a currently enrolled PhD student who is looking to exit before the end of the 1st year. I give the gist of the issues of my impending exit.
1. Advisor states that I am working hard and constantly coming up with ideas but due to our differences in the direction the work should take, we might be held back as the project duration is really short (3 yrs) and it is better to identify this now and for me to take a call. (Apparently in my university this is normally acceptable)
2. Since this is a funded project I cannot ask him to switch me to a new project with him (Could be unadvisable also due to not matching working styles)
3. Due to slow progress as a result of conflicting early expectations, I feel severly depressed and disheartened with the current PhD, which is also in a completely new area compared to my previously published work (As master student and as a research associate).
I am now looking to apply for a new PhD position as early as possible to start working afresh. I could look for new positions in the same university or apply elsewhere. Which would be recommended? I hope that my exit should not be looked at unfavorably in other places that I apply to, seen as my lack of commitment even though it is not the case here and I will not get an unfavourable recommendation from my current advisor.<issue_comment>username_1: I would look for new positions at your university. There's no need to *sound the alarm*. It's pretty common for students to rotate around different labs during the first year and then make a decision at the beginning of the second. Where I did mine, they had a soft requirement that you had to do a rotation in at least 2 labs before you were allowed to decide.
Getting involved with the right project is (arguably) the single most important decision you can make to set yourself up for a successful PhD. If it takes you an extra 6-8 months to find the right project for you, then that is absolutely worthwhile. I had a friend change labs after 2 full years of working on a project. I thought he was crazy but he was able to find a different project in another lab and received his degree, just the same as the rest of us.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My guess is that changing earlier is better than later. However, being flexible is a big part of being a PhD student. Me nor any of my PhD classmates ended up working on projects that matched up with our prior research and work experience. Most of us just adapted to what our advisers and/or programs needed at the time. I feel lucky in that I flexed to a project that did not match my desires exactly, but I still enjoyed what I worked on, but like I said I was lucky. Best wished to you!!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Be flexible, especially since you are funded. The best dissertation is a done dissertation. Once you have your PhD you will have plenty of time to do the research you enjoy most and will have an opportunity to mentor others that may need the same flexibility.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/04
| 2,174
| 8,647
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I'm not mistaken, most PhD students (at least in the sciences, which is the field I'm most interested in) are funded. They're provided with a stipend, and all tuition fees are waived. In other words, it's effectively a low-paying job for them. My question is, why fund PhD students instead of postdocs?
I'm dismissing the altruistic reason ("we fund PhD students as a service to the community") immediately since it doesn't make sense - presumably if someone is spending money in this fashion, they'd fund need-based scholarships. The only other reason I can think of is that the department wants something out of the PhD students - presumably research output; can't think of anything else - that they think they're getting a good deal on.
Now according to Google, the typical PhD stipend is about [$20-25k / year](https://www.aip.org/statistics/physics-trends/typical-stipends). Meanwhile, the typical postdoc is paid [$47k / year](https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Postdoctoral_Research_Associate/Salary). That means that a department can hire approximately one postdoc per two PhD students. To that we can add:
1. Postdocs have already been trained; PhD students are in training. Postdocs should hit the ground running while PhD students take time to get up to par.
2. PhD students especially in 5-year programs spend the first couple of years taking courses, i.e. not doing research work.
3. Postdocs can do other things like supervise Masters students that PhD students can't.
4. PhD students apparently have a high attrition rate, [as high as 50%](https://www.chronicle.com/article/PhD-Attrition-How-Much-Is/140045). Postdocs have been in the business longer, so presumably are also more aware of what they're going into.
It seems more sensible to me that departments should concentrate all funding on postdocs, and leave PhD students to pay for their own education. This is already the case for undergraduate studies. Why do departments continue to fund PhD students?<issue_comment>username_1: Adressing your points:
1. I find this only partially true. The spread inside each population in competence is larger than the distance between the populations.
2. (+4.) PhD students - if motivated and good - will stay until you give them the PhD. Others (not motivated, not good) will leave early. Postdocs are less easy to control and may be more prone to doing politics. Typically the motivated postdocs will change when it fits them best (e.g. after having a good publication) and the others may stay
3. That is purely theoretical. Wherever I looked, PhD students had other functions in the lab, too.
Additionally:
* people can be assessed and trained during their PhD - if they are good they may stay.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: One of the premises of your question is simply incorrect in the US. Since most of the funding for postdocs and PhD students in the sciences comes from grants and the usage of that money is specified by the grant and approved by the funding agency, departments can't simply decide to spend the money differently.
Furthermore, in the US, postdocs can be considerably more expensive than PhD students.
For a Postdoc you've got to pay full time salary, plus fringe benefits (typically 30% on top of salary) plus overhead on the salary and fringe benefits. For example, a postdoc might cost $50K in salary per year, $15K per year in fringe benefits, plus another $35K per year (54%) in overhead for a total of $100K per year.
For graduate students the costs include a stipend, fringe benefits
(typically much lower for graduate students than postdocs, e.g. 2% at my institution), tuition waiver (varies a lot between universities), and overhead (on stipend and fringe benefits only, since tuition waivers are excluded from overhead.) A student might cost $25K per year in stipend, $1K per year in fringe benefits, $20K per year in tuition, plus $15K in overhead (58%), for a total of $61K per year.
In these calculations, a postdoc was almost twice as expensive as a graduate student. Also notice that the postdoc costs three times as much in overhead as the graduate student. Many program managers hate to see funds going to overhead. For these and other reasons, there's a widespread preference in the funding agencies for funding graduate students rather than postdocs.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There are several reasons, here are some:
* The most important one, IMHO, is that the reputation of the department depends a lot on how many good PhD students they can produce. This will affect the ability to obtain funding, attract (masters/undergraduate) students, etc.
* There are some grants that are only enough to fund PhD students, or that can only be used to fund PhD students.
* Advisor to PhD student can be considered academic parent, advisor to postdoc is just another employer.
>
> It seems more sensible to me that departments should concentrate all funding on postdocs, and leave PhD students to pay for their own education.
>
>
>
In Computer Science (and STEM in general), if you don't fund PhD students, not many people will do it. If one can have a PhD offer from Stanford, s(h)e can also get a job offer from big five (Amazon, Google,...) with a six-figure salary. And you want them to work for free in 5 - 6 years?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A few additional points that I have not yet seen mentioned.
First, many funding agencies have an explicit preference or even requirements that the funding be used to fund PhD students rather than postdocs. If your main funding sources don’t want to give money for postdocs, it’s hard to have them.
Second, tenure-track faculty members are usually expected to shepherd some number of PhD students to their degrees as part of the expectations for receiving tenure. You can’t do that if you only hire postdocs.
That said, postdocs are useful, and having an excellent postdoc does “pay for itself” several times over in terms of cost.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> "I'm dismissing the altruistic reason"
>
>
>
Therein lies one of the biggest problems with your question. I work for a land-grant state university in the U.S. Our *mission* includes education. It's not an altruistic reason, it's literally why we exist.
The other flaw in your question is assuming that the money to hire these two groups is fungible - it isn't always. For example, there are grant programs where education of graduate students is a *major* component of what one is supposed to be doing - "we're going to hire a postdoc" is simply a non-alloweable use of funding.
There are some other nice features of graduate students to consider as well:
* They're cheaper. While a postdoc is probably more value for *complex* activities, there are sometimes things that require some expertise, but not a full-blown PhDs worth. Masters and early-stage PhD students are excellent people to conduct literature reviews, field collection, etc.
* You can identify promising researchers early. Lets say you see someone in undergraduate courses whose impressed you. If you only recruited postdocs, you're essentially saying "Look me up in 6 to 8 years, I'd love to work with you." If you recruit graduate students, you can usher them into their research career.
* You get them for longer. Postdocs are (by and large) transient positions, and much of their time may be taken up by looking (rightly) for another position. In many labs, especially those without long-term technicians, graduate students may actually have more institutional knowledge.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: In general, postdocs are expected to be able to write good scientific texts and have some reputation in their field. In particular, they are expected to be able to attract their own funding by writing research/grant proposals. This is *not* how it should be: postdocs are good at research and should concentrate on it, "converting coffee into theorems" (or, more generall, money into research)! But this is how it is, and is unlikely to change.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: Another point that hasn't yet been mentioned is that it's not always correct that research output is what PhD students are being paid for. Especially at large American universities, PhD students are paid for teaching, often for leading discussion sections rather than lecturing courses as the main instructor. A postdoc is generally too senior to serve as a teaching assistant in this way, so there is a constant stream of money from undergraduate tuition to graduate student stipends.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/05
| 1,548
| 6,340
|
<issue_start>username_0: I never quite understood why you need to do a postdoc after completing your PhD. Is it like getting an unofficial second PhD?<issue_comment>username_1: It's not a second PhD, because the length of the postdoc is typically much shorter than that of a PhD.
The function of a postdoc is sort of an "advanced apprenticeship," where you may choose your advisor (who should be different from your graduate advisor!) according to several possible goals, including:
* Learning a new technique or field
* Gaining further experience in a slightly different area from your graduate research
* Personal needs (such as the "two-body" problem)
Such positions usually last anywhere from one to four years, depending on funding. Your duties will also likely involve helping to supervise some of the graduate or undergraduate students in the group. You may or may not also have some teaching duties. But you typically don't have the obligation to write grants and "bring in" money.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No, it's not like a second PhD, because there's little to no documented requirements, no thesis, no defense, no coursework, etc.
In the 'old days' (prior to the squeeze on academic funding and exponential increase in PhD candidates), one took a post doc primarily to:
1. Learn a new skill, technique, or method
2. Dedicate a few years time conducting research to strengthen one's CV without the added stress of teaching and other tenure-track requirements.
Ideally, the post doc came out a very desirable candidate armed with a great research program and toolbox.
Today, a post doc is quickly becoming mandatory for academic-track scientists, as the pool of jobs shrink and the pool of candidates expand. It is not uncommon to find people doing multiple post docs, or people finding themselves in a permanent post doc (or research scientist) position.
While this is somewhat discouraging, the simple fact that funding is scarce and science can be expensive suggests that the ideal candidate has a proven track record and is likely to secure additional grants. Post docs provide one the time and resources to prove that tangibly.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If you intend to work in industry, you don't need and should not do a postdoc.
If you want a job in academic, it often requires a strong profile. You need to do a postdoc to continue doing research, and building up your profile.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Why do you need to do a postdoc after getting your PhD?
>
>
>
In practice? Because very likely you won't be able to get any better (academic) job than that.
These days "postdoc" simply means a research position that is not permanent or indefinite (e.g. tenure track). It is far, far easier to land (yet another) postdoc than a permanent position.
This applies to the fields I'm familiar with (mostly sciences). The humanities may be different.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: First, you don't *need* to have a postdoc. The standard for whether or not a postdoc is necessary (and indeed how much "postdoc" is enough) varies wildly by field. This, incidentally, makes interdisciplinary hiring committees an interesting experience.
But it's not a "2nd PhD". What it's meant to accomplish is to be the transition period where you start to view yourself (and the field starts to view you) as an independent researcher. While working on your PhD, it's quite likely that one's advisor had a significant hand in formulating the question you were addressing, etc. The idea of a postdoc is that you can begin to mature as an independent scientist, potentially mentoring others, seeking funding, determining the direction of a project, etc. while still in a protected, mentored environment.
By analogy, if a PhD is learning to ride a bike with training wheels, a postdoc is taking the training wheels off, but still having a parent jogging by your side.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: ### 1. There isn't really such a thing as a "post-doc"
A "post-doc" is just a non-tenured fixed-term research position which requires the maturity and experience which a Ph.D. degree is a recognition of. That's it.
Now, it's true that it's customary to spend time in such a position, and in many academic institutions tenured position candidates are considered to be inadequate if they have not first had a stint (or two) as non-tenured "post-docs" somewhere - but there's no fundamental principle at work here.
### 2. Weakness of the academic staff (in terms of collective ethos, organization and action)
You could rephrase your question this way: "Why not just hire people with Ph.D.s into tenure track positions?" And indeed, there is no good reason not to (generally). Tenure track does not mean you actually have tenure immediately on employment; and even tenure is not some carte blanche to not do your job, or a guarantee to not be terminated. It should really be referred to as the "normal track" for employment of academics.
The thing is, non-tenure-track researchers are cheaper, and require less commitment. Additionally, universities and high-and-mighty PIs can cast this employment as something inherently temporary, increasing the chance that these employees not expect much to begin with - they'll just shuffle along. Thus in many countries there's a glut of post-doc positions and a dearth of proper academic staff positions.
Had there been a resistance from the tenured academic, or support by them to their non-tenured, more junior colleagues, in a demand to be moved into the tenure track / promoted to associate professors based on good performance, plus for permanent positions for research assistants where relevant - the balance of forces would change, and fewer people would spend many years moving from one post-doc to another despite being worthy of a proper position.
Of course, this requires academics to have a strong sense of what *really* benefits research; a memory of the history of their field going back several decades (if not a century); a sense of community or solidarity with their junior colleagues; and organs for collective action independent of university management, namely - academic staff unions. As the latter are often missing or weak, the former tend to be missing or weak as well.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/05
| 719
| 3,077
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have two profs that would make great references for me since I worked closely with them on some research. I emailed them 2 weeks ago (which was nearly 6 weeks before the application deadline). I heard back from one of them immediately but still haven’t heard back from the other. To be fair, it was the day before the holidays. I sent him a follow up a couple of hours ago. This is a professor who has always responded back to me within a few minutes. Still haven’t heard back. The application is due in less than a month and I’m really panicking I’m running out of time! If I need to find someone else, I don’t want to give them short notice. So should I contact someone else today?
Another question, I’m not really sure if this other person would be an appropriate reference. I worked with her on a research project (the same project I worked with the other professors on). She’s not a professor (which is fine) but I didn’t work all that closely with her on the project. I helped her out with a few specific tasks, but the other references would definitely be better able to evaluate me. I know you can’t tell me if she would give me a good reference, but does anyone else have a similar experience with getting a reference from someone you only worked with briefly on a project?
If I do ask her, what should I say in the email on such short notice (and since we aren’t that close)?<issue_comment>username_1: Contact the second person anyways, but continue to try and get the slow-responder to get the recommendation to you. This might mean extra work for you, but having backup options tends to be a safer bet. Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are bounded by deadlines or in the hurry of getting the letters please do contact someone else.
If its okay for you to spend some more time and wait for the letters then I think that's what you should do.
Getting letter from people who know your expertise and your work flow is really important. Also it does make impact in future.
cheers!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I assumed you need only 1 reference letter, in this case a good action plan in my opinion would be:
* **Contact again the missing professor in a more *pushy* way (e.g. by phone or in person) if possible and show to them the importance of this letter to him.** There could be a number of reasons for his delay and in my experience, he may have forgotten or failed to give due importance to that. Thus, it is always better to make things clear and fight for your goals. Do not mind to bother him as it have a critical importance for you.
* **Contact other professors and create a possible list of references. Send some emails asking if they would be comfortable on writing reference letters for you**. State clearly your goals and deadlines (if possible, give a tight deadline for them) and show how important it is to you.
You can take a proper decision based on their answers. Remember that one *not so strong* reference is better than none.
Good luck and keep pursuing your goals.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/05
| 478
| 2,090
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm preparing a CV and required documents for PhD applications and I've been asked to provide references to publications. I've been wondering if it's appropriate and a good idea to put my student poster there?
The field is Computer Science and the poster has been presented during one of the top conferences. Posters were not part of proceedings and are not officially available (only online abstracts).<issue_comment>username_1: Contact the second person anyways, but continue to try and get the slow-responder to get the recommendation to you. This might mean extra work for you, but having backup options tends to be a safer bet. Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are bounded by deadlines or in the hurry of getting the letters please do contact someone else.
If its okay for you to spend some more time and wait for the letters then I think that's what you should do.
Getting letter from people who know your expertise and your work flow is really important. Also it does make impact in future.
cheers!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I assumed you need only 1 reference letter, in this case a good action plan in my opinion would be:
* **Contact again the missing professor in a more *pushy* way (e.g. by phone or in person) if possible and show to them the importance of this letter to him.** There could be a number of reasons for his delay and in my experience, he may have forgotten or failed to give due importance to that. Thus, it is always better to make things clear and fight for your goals. Do not mind to bother him as it have a critical importance for you.
* **Contact other professors and create a possible list of references. Send some emails asking if they would be comfortable on writing reference letters for you**. State clearly your goals and deadlines (if possible, give a tight deadline for them) and show how important it is to you.
You can take a proper decision based on their answers. Remember that one *not so strong* reference is better than none.
Good luck and keep pursuing your goals.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/05
| 357
| 1,507
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an assistant professor and was invited to do a "stealth" interview at another university.
Should I really treat this interview as a secret (and risk that others in my department find out through the grapevine), or should I go ahead and tell my department chair now (even though it is just an interview)? What are the pros and cons of each?<issue_comment>username_1: There's absolutely no payoff to telling your chair that another university might be interested in you unless and until you have an offer you think you might want to accept.
If an interview visit is confidential or, as you put it, "stealth", everyone involved should know what that means and there should be very little risk that word of your visit will filter back to your home institution.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Usually, researchers do move around the globe, travel for research, give interviews, and it's considered pretty normal. Still, such visits should not violate your contractual obligations. So, first check your contract.
If you are formally obliged to spend 100% of your time in your workplace, you formally have get an ok from your boss (department head or dean) before going. Or you have to do the visit in your free time, at least, formally speaking.
If you are allowed spend time on travel to other institutions, simply do it: no need to inform anyone. After all, an interview is a particular form of research: yout also talk about your scientific achievements.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/05
| 769
| 3,208
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc and am currently applying to tenure-track faculty positions. I am unsure whether or not I should apply to my current institution.
On one hand, I would be happy to get a permanent position where I am. However, it seems like this might violate some social norm or custom. If I were to be rejected, that would feel rather personal, given that I see those who decided every day. Also, sitting through the competing job talks and meeting other candidates would be rather odd.
What is the standard etiquette for this situation? Should I ask someone before applying? If so, how should I raise the subject? I assume the answer also depends on the area and country -- this is computer science in the US.<issue_comment>username_1: In general, you can apply if you feel you're qualified. If they don't want to hire you, they'll reject you, but it's not inappropriate to apply.
Tenure-track jobs get huge numbers of applicants, so statistically, it's extremely likely that you *will* be rejected. If that's going to seriously disturb you and affect your ability to succeed in your current job, then you may want to think twice.
Some departments might prefer "fresh blood", which would put a strike against candidates from inside. On the other hand, if you've been particularly successful and it's clear that you really want to stay and would take the job if offered, that can be a plus, since it reduces uncertainty for the hiring committee.
If you have a trusted contact or mentor within the department, you could talk to them about whether they think you might be a good fit for the job, or vice versa.
If you do apply, then you should make yourself scarce while other candidates are being interviewed. (Unless of course you have already been rejected by then.) Don't go to their talks and don't try to meet them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There a too many reasons to be rejected to take a refusal personally. You can be rejected even if everyone, in the jury, as a very high esteem of you, just because you research topic will interfere with someone else's, or is not in the lab priority, or they try to hire someone from *that* university to create a partnership, etc.
So, if you feel qualified and would like the job, I do not see any reason not to apply.
Also, if ever you ask to someone in the jury whether you should apply:
* if he/she says no, then it's maybe not worth applying;
* but he/she will probably say yes, just for you not to take it personally, even though he/she knows they will eventually reject you. So that might be a forced encouragement to apply.
In short: don't take anything personally!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Getting people from outside is considered the norm. One of the main reasons: avoiding "scientific incest". Fresh ideas *must* arrive. So, do apply by all means, but do not count on success.
Of course, there are exceptions. For example, you might be exceptionally good (though you would know this by now). Or you have serious personal reasons to stay in one and the same place (e.g., taking care about a family member).
Still, in the US, I perceive moving as pretty normal.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/06
| 463
| 1,996
|
<issue_start>username_0: The student claims that the department contacted him asking for all letters in printed form with full contact details and signature.
Is this a common request? How do I know it's authentic? How should I respond?<issue_comment>username_1: No, it's not common.
I would guess that for some reason the department is not convinced that the letter really came from you. Maybe there was something about the letter, or the student, that raised their suspicions; or maybe they just don't trust the security of their online system. It's not really your concern, so I would just send the letter as they ask.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's completely possible a school might ask for an original letter on paper sent direct to them.
It's been identified as a US school but not which one. There are perhaps 600 graduate institutions in the US. Multiply that times the number of programs. There simply has to be some variance in admissions policies. At any particular school, it's completely possible they have an admissions policy of auditing LORs by asking for paper copies of all or some subsets of those submitted electronically. There's no national standard on this kind of thing.
(I was surprised when University of Washington wanted paper originals of my own LORs for my first faculty appointment a few years ago. So I figure there have to be schools that might want paper originals for student LORs.)
If you're unsure of the authenticity of the request, you might ask to see the communications the student received. But once satisfied, I'd try to comply. (I keep copies of the LORs I write so I can resend them with a new inside address when a student applies elsewhere; I assume you do, too.)
I would, of course, only accept a request for an original sent *direct* to the school. A request that the original be given to the student *for delivery* to the school would ring bells as bogus and likely end the need for any new LORs for that individual.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/06
| 2,597
| 11,200
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am new to this forum. I am encountering a problem in my doctoral studies that I haven't been able to find in an existing thread so I wanted to ask here. Any advice on how to navigate this would be very welcome.
I'm 2.5 years into my doctoral studies (geography) working under two co-advisors. Their areas of expertise broadly overlap with my dissertation topic, but the topic is my own, and I know the study area better than both of them. One advisor has been pressing for me to conduct a certain methods for social data collection that I knew wouldn't work (research fatigue is high in this area, distrust towards scientists without existing connections in these communities is a huge - if not insurmountable - obstacle). I tried to explain that these issues would make this type of social data collection very hard to pull off. I suppose I failed at this communication, because he pressed for this method all the same (with the rebuttal "science is hard"). Because he's an advisor I assumed he knew something I didn't, and I wrote up a dissertation proposal with this approach being used to answer one of my research questions (in my program a "dissertation" consists of three publication-ready papers). I emailed a few groups engaged in work in these communities. The reply I got was what I expected: they strongly advised against attempting to collect household surveys for the reasons I had tried to explain to my advisor before. I just got this reply today, I have not yet discussed it with my advisors.
This does not sink my entire research proposal necessarily, but only a portion of it. There are other methods of data collection and analysis I'm still working on to answer the other research questions. Furthermore I spoke to my other co-advisor earlier in the fall (not a social scientist) asking what my recourse is if the social data collection component falls through for the reasons I feared. I was told not to worry necessarily, that we could figure out a way to work around it.
That being said, I'm still worried. I'm worried that the advisor who pushed for the an approach that was ultimately dead-on-arrival doesn't fully understand my research. He's suggested approaches in the past that have turned out to be dead ends too. I'm also worried that I wasn't able to recognize this as a problem until I am 2.5 years into my program. The heavy initial course-load (full graduate course-load for the first two years) and first few research dead ends had me seeing the individual trees, not the forest. I'm sure a lot of this is my fault; I should have communicated better, I should have been more clear on what the expectations were. But now that I'm waking up to the fact that this is a problem, I'm not sure what to do about it. I have (excuse the lack of modesty) a good topic, and I think there's still a lot of value in seeing it through. I suppose I will have a better idea of what to do about this when we all meet next week, but an outsider perspective would be really valuable to me right now.
Thank you in advance<issue_comment>username_1: If you have not collected the data, and figured out your proposed method will not work, do not use that method. If you have used it, and the usage of it revealed the difficulties, report this in your study so that it can benefit others. This can make this part of your thesis weaker but not the whole thesis, I guess. You still can make the other two questions stronger.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: One piece of useful advice my thesis supervisors gave me was:
>
> We're going to throw a lot of ideas at you. You need to figure out which ones are worthwhile and which ones aren't.
>
>
>
If you know that something isn't going to work, then you need to figure out how to communicate to your advisor that it's not feasible. If you've tried and didn't succeed in making your case, try again using a different means of communication. Remember that the ability to make a convincing argument is crucial to success in research.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: A few (hopefully) practical measures:
* **Talk to your co-advisor** about this, asking him to accept your position and, assuming he has, to call for a three-way discussion of this matter.
* This is not always possible, but if you can - **schedule the dead-end work last**, i.e. after other endeavors about whose success you're more certain. Why do this? More opportunities to change the advisor's mind; time for him to learn to better value your judgment; or perhaps even time for you to theoretically reconsider your opinion.
* Regrading your "failure at communication" I: **Write up your objection** - Write either a methodological survey paper, or something less formal such as a blog post, arguing the shortcomings/dead-endedness of the collection method.
* Regrading your "failure at communication" II: It sounds like you feel ashamed/afraid/embarrassed to bring up the subject again with your advisor after it was supposedly settled. Try to accept the danger of appearing foolish/obstinate etc. and **have another go at convincing your advisor**, being better prepared for it, perhaps with material you can pull from some folder you've compiled etc.
* Consider whether you can't **do research on the failing methodology**. You could employ both collection method A (the poor one you disapprove of) and collection method B (a better one), documenting your preparations for both and the process of collection, more closely than you would do when interested in just the results. Then, besides a paper about the actual subject matter, you could write a methodological paper about the comparative failings of the method you disapprove of. In other words, make lemonade from the lemons.
* **Consult your advisor's other graduate students**, current or former, about this matter. Maybe they've had similar issues and can share their experience of how they handled it. Hey, maybe one of them has had the *exact* same issue regarding data collection, which would help you even more.
It goes without saying you shouldn't try all of these at the same time (but some of these do fit well together).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Some further practical points in addition to @username_3's answer, in particular the advise of having another go at convincing the advisor (and too long for a comment)
Directly trying to convince your advisor (who is convinced of the opposite) may just result in more communication chaos. So instead, I'd
* ask the advisor for an appointment to discuss (again) the choice of method: Ask the supervisor to let you first present your point of view so that once they know your understanding of the situation they can convince you of their point of view.
* present your arguments
* keep in mind that practical arguments are not necessarily scientific arguments. IMHO, they should be marked as such and then practicality considered separately from scientific arguments\*.
Practical arguments against doing something share the disadvangate for you with negative results that there's always the latent question lurking of you being lazy or not good enough. So make sure your presentation of arguments will not look as trying to avoid hard work.
* Now listen to their arguments.
* Actually, you should also prepare a list with the advantages of the method. Doing this in preparation for the discussion would put you into a much stronger position, and it is actually an important working technique to be able to identify advantages of methods you dislike. Take the role of the [Devil's Advocate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_advocate).
* The important point for the discussion with your advisor is: you need to be willing to be convinced! Be curious how they come to the opposite conclusion you came to.
Otherwise, no communication to solve the scientific/practical problem can happen.
---
\* I have in mind several situations where computational feasibility was a question. I found that quantifying the effort goes a long way: computation time of 1 h (single occasion) may be unpleasant in an interactive session, but is certainly feasible in general. A final calculation taking a couple of months on a desktop computer would IMHO be quite inside what can be expected for a PhD thesis (I mostly deal with calculations where a "sneak preview" will give you a rough idea what is going on and then lots of computational effort goes into refining the results). So would be a couple of months of unpleasant final data collection given that pilot experiments/a small pilot survey shows that this is actually the way to go with the data collection. Whereas a computation that would take several years of Rosetta@home would clearly be outside a single PhD thesis and there would be no discussion whether this is feasible or not.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Building on cbeleites’s answer - ask for a couple of recent examples relevant to your work where your advisor’s approach was used to good effect.
It may be that your advisor has more insight on how to do this properly, and you can learn something from the examples. In that case, your advisor would likely be able to rattle off a few references off the top of his head. Studying those examples should give you some idea of how to do what your advisor is advising (which, incidentally, may not be exactly what you’re objecting to).
On the other hand, it may be that your advisor is too busy / is distracted / etc, and makes the same suggestion to all his students. In that case, it might be harder for him to come up with relevant positive examples, and you can then suggest a few relevant positive examples you’ve found that follow your preferred methodology. (Naturally, you’ll have to do some work to find those examples first.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Not all advisors are up to the task, and sometimes they are wrong. I've personally encountered situations where advisors were wrong and guided (or misguided) their students down a failing path. Depending on your university, and your financial situation (are you beholden to a particular advisor for your grant funding?) it might be necessary to find another advisor. You indicated you already have two, perhaps a 3rd?
That said, remember your goal is to get the PhD. Share this feedback from the outside groups with both of your advisors and discuss it with them. I'd start first with the one more likely to agree with you, then the other. If he/she still insists, then politely toss the ball into their court: "Professor, I don't understand how this (survey stuff) is going to work given the limited time and resources, can you please show me how *we* can do this." I used "we" on purpose - it draws them in as a collaborator not an opponent in an argument.
Part of the PhD process is learning how to manage people, your advisors in this case.
Also consider the possibility your advisor is correct. It's not easy for the student to call out the master, and you have to be pretty darn sure if you do. If the advisor is wrong, find a way for him/her to gracefully back down rather than challenging them directly.
Been there, done that.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/07
| 932
| 4,156
|
<issue_start>username_0: Right now, I am taking a BSc in computer science from a more reputable online university. Courses from there are transferable to most major Canadian universities. I would have preferred to take it from a brick-and-mortar place, but I wanted to just get as much done as fast as I can. In addition, I already have a degree.
Now, many of the programming courses (e.g., Beginner's Java, C++) are quite intensive even coming from a programming background. Some courses like Data Structures go through the concepts as well as have you code them (also fairly involved). However, some courses like Operating Systems and Computer Networks do not have a programming component. They are quite intensive, but I’m worried that not having a programming component will render my learning useless by future employers. (Though, on the other hand, they do have courses like socket programming that does cover that aspect)
So, I am wondering: Do brick-and-mortar universities typically have every computer-science course require you to program?<issue_comment>username_1: "Reputable" universites are a wrong term.
Whether an institution is reputable or not is irrelevant IMHO.
You should distinguish between
1. *Research* universities and
2. Universities of applied sciences and professional education.
As for 1., I would say *only few* courses should contain a programming component. The few ones are operating systems, programming languages (in the sense of types & semantics), and compilers. You see, C/C++/Java are really not the object of research any more. They are the object of our industry.
As for 2., definitely, *most* of the courses should be practical. They have to be hands-on, in terms of either software or hardware. So, a programming component is a must for software-intensive courses.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: **No,** computer science is much more than just programming. That's what makes it *science.*
Introductory CS course tend to focus on programming, but as you get deeper into the subject programming becomes less central. Thus many (maybe even most) graduate-level CS courses at top universities do not involve programming at all. (Of course, graduate courses on systems or security will still involve programming, but it's no longer universal.)
By the same token, assembly code, digital circuits, and semiconductor physics are all vital to how computers work in practice, but we don't expect those to be a ubiquitous part of computer science education. We are able to abstract away from the implementation details of how our Python script gets executed. Likewise, more advanced topics in computer science will abstract away from the practical aspects of computing.
For example, course in computability and/or complexity theory is unlikely to contain programming aspects. The reason being that these subjects focus on what is impossible to compute and such impossibilities do not depend on what programming language you use or how good you are at debugging. That is, these scientific questions require you to think more abstractly. Similarly an advanced algorithms course may avoid programming assignments because (i) it's assumed (i.e. is a prerequisite) that the students could in principle implement the algorithms and (ii) the algorithms are complex and it would take a lot of time to implement them with little pedagogical value.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It's good to know how to implement an algorithm efficiently, but if you want to be more than a technician (i.e., if you want to be a tool maker instead of just a tool user), you need to learn how to develop algorithms. You need to know why A works and B doesn't, or why A works better than C, and what you mean when you say it works better.
Sometimes an instructor will assume that you can implement an algorithm that has been studied, without your having to demonstrate that you are able to do so.
The key to your coursework being accepted lies in the accreditation and the prestige of the school, I think. Universities look carefully at transfer credits to ensure that the transferred course had the needed rigor.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/07
| 2,469
| 11,080
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a student at a tech school and otherwise unemployed. I’ve never been a scientist or published a paper.
So I am a little skeptical of some results I have been hearing about experiments using computer simulations, and I would like to at some point do my own experiment. (The topic is among differences in gender, homosexuality, global warming, etc., i.e. a topic that can provoke emotions.)
I figured that I should probably learn as much about research as I can before I do any experiment. On the other hand if I learn how exactly the others did their experiment that would bias how I construct mine. I would be prone to solving problems by doing the same thing rather than coming up with a new way to test it.
So does it make any sense to limit the study of existing experiments for the sake of more diverse testing, or should I try to learn as much about them as I can?<issue_comment>username_1: You should write down your thoughts now, then get on and do the proper research, before trying to do any experiment, if you wish to be taken seriously. While there is a need for radically different ideas, most research succeeds by following what has been done before ('standing on the shoulders of giants'). It is very unlikely that you will come up with something amazing without any reference to all the other intelligent people who have thought long and hard about the issue.
If you did come up with something, but without reference to any other work, the likelihood is that you would be seen as a 'nutcase', or at least viewed with deep suspicion, until you could explain yourself very clearly. Your research should not be about simply accepting what others have said. You should think critically about it, and question their assumptions and conclusions. For the most part, you do not find new ways of doing things by working in isolation, but by looking at what others have done and making different choices where you aren't fully convinced by the justification for their choice.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Get used to thinking about what you want to accomplish first, before thinking about who it is going to bother!
Yes, I know this advice may not be categorized as *academic* per se, but try it out, nevertheless, please. I have been in situations similar to yours when trying to present out-of-the-box research to scientists who bare the title "experts" in their respective fields and if I learned something it is to **never let anyone else decide the faith of your research**. If you manage to raise in yourself the awareness of exactly where and how you stand defending your position with **facts**, rather than opinions, than, **this is all you will ever need!**
I know there are many topics in today's science when the public tries to get in the way and when people (mostly paid by parties who have nothing to do with academic institutions) are doing everything they can to convince everyone fictions are facts and vice versa but I believe there is only one reality and we are all living in it! I know I may sound trivial but I will advice you to adopt this principle when browsing through literature no matter whether if it comes from academia or not. Although everyone tries to shout otherwise, I myself do not believe academic journals are "safe heaven" for serious research only and parties who have the means can get their way there, too. This means you should build a kind of "compass" in your field as to what is likely the reality behind the observed phenomena and what is the position people with enough money are trying to put up for the whole world to see. Then, the important step comes-**compare your compass with reality itself**. This is where your experiments should come. If they work just fine, than probably you are on the right track to reality and somebody is paying money to somebody else somewhere in academia to silence something. If it turns the other way around-then, it is you who are out of touch with reality.
At the end of the all ends-There is only one world we all live in and everything else are private parties trying to wear "the academia skin". But no matter how much money and influence they could amass nothing can compare with observable experimentally verifiable data. I think this is all there have always been to the matter and if you manage to garner that sense of what you can prove and what you can not, than, you could manage the challenge of browsing through any source.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In many fields, finding good methodology was a long and tedious process. You gain nothing by repeating this process, if you can manage in one life time at all. However, if you do not use a reasonable methodology, your research will likely be without value.
For example, consider that you have twenty drugs and try to investigate whether any of is good for the common cold – without any knowledge of methodology going beyond basic statistics. You might do something like testing each drug with hundred test subjects suffering from the common cold and consider the drug good if it is significantly more than half of the subjects state that their condition has improved after a few days. When doing so, your research is completely useless as you ignored [the placebo effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo), [multiple testing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_comparisons_problem), [the final duration of the disease](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_cold), and [the unreliability of self-reports](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-report_study). Without any knowledge about previous research, you would not be able to identify all these mistakes on your own. Just consider all the adherents of esoteric healing methods, whose beliefs are typically based on such mistakes.
That being said, you should not blindly accept established methods, but try to understand why they are the way they are and assert their validity on your own. This is not only a relevant control mechanism but it also makes you aware of the methods’s limitations – which is a relevant when applying them.
As already suggested, you should probably write down your current ideas as well as any that arise when studying existing research, and evaluate them afterwards. Chances are that your approach is either flawed or a reinvention of the wheel.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: It does not really make sense to limit the study of existing experiments for the sake of more diverse testing for the following reasons, and possibly more:
1. A methodologically sound study or experiment design must be free of biases as much as possible anyway. This means that no matter what you read or know, you have to pay attention that your biases (or the biases of prior research) are not reflected in the study design. I recommend you take a research-methods class and study the scientific method, statistics, behavioral study design, etc. on a more generic level before you get started with research. Learning about these things will also enable you to evaluate prior research better.
2. You will for sure not be able to publish your results without including in your paper a review of previous work on the topic. You will have to read and write about all sorts of previous work. This doesn’t mean you should take them for granted. In fact, if you focus on a specific bias or limitation that is problematic in previous work, and conduct a study that addresses it properly, that may be easier to execute and publish, compared to a completely novel angle.
3. It is highly probable that at some point, somewhere, some other researchers have noticed the issues you are noticing, and addressed them. This may be work that is dedicated to the issue; but you may also find this in a section (usually named *limitations* or *discussion*) in a paper about a study where the issues are evident.
If you are just getting started on this topic I would actually suggest that you write up a literature review on the topic – survey the papers written before, summarize them, highlight important findings, point out issues, etc. Write it in the form of a paper. Even if you don’t get to publish it (which you may try), you can recycle it to provide background in an original research paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: My experience has been that the danger of bias is much smaller than that of ignorance or of result duplication as lots approaches to a problem are obvious enough that nearly everyone tries them first; one must (I think) examine other approaches to find out what doesn't work so as to avoid wasting time. One cannot be original except by avoiding other approaches (especially the failures) or at least modifying them to work better.
You can eliminate bias by noting down your own thoughts before starting and keeping notes of your approaches and why you took such a path.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: **TL;DR**: No, read as much independent sources as you can.
While one might (maybe rightfully) accuse you of looking for a justification for omitting a proper literature review. There is a philosophical part to this question. Which reinforces the study of previous research.
This answer consists of two parts: *Criteria* and *Process*
Your contribution to what ever field of research needs to satisfy certain criteria in order to be valuable. There might be a lot more criteria but the following two definitely need to be fulfilled:
1. Novelty
2. [Falsification](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability)
While it is self evident that a contribution to a field of research needs to contain something new (this might very well be a new *data-set*), there exists the possibility that available data already falsifies your research. So in order to be sure that your theory/contribution was not already falsified you need to be aware of the rest of the research.
[UC Berkeley](http://www.berkeley.edu) created a very good overview of the [complex process of the scientific method](https://undsci.berkeley.edu/). Nicely showing (besides others) two characteristics of science:
1. Science is not linear, but interconnected/complex
2. Science is a adaptive in that the outcome of a test might be interpreted differently based on the community which performs the test/analysis.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wvuv1.png)
Both approaches (limited and extensive review of the available literature) will influence the way research will be conducted and both approaches allow for biases to interfere with the research. Assuming that everyone is biased to a certain extend by the experiences of once life the limited study does not prevent biases it just does not add new ones.
Since biases threaten the research in both scenarios it is necessary to prevent (or limit) their impact through awareness and transparency.
Conclusion: In order to maximise the scientific value of the research a comprehensive knowledge/study of the available research is necessary to ensure novelty.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/07
| 1,775
| 7,633
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a follow-up of my [previous question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/98512/how-shall-i-report-an-error-in-a-given-paper) about this course task:
>
> Find an existing, published research paper in the field of Chemical Engineering and try to autonomously replicate its results (plots, data, equations et similia).
>
>
>
In my replication study, I found that there was a **report error**; that is, a mathematical model was wrongly written, *but* the results shown on the paper were related to its correct form.
>
> After my revision and replication trial, I found that using their same model, I do not obtain the paper results. There is no presence of replication error by me, and my TA pointed out flaws (of fundamental nature, for example F = mv instead of F = ma) in the model, that once corrected allowed me to obtain the results shown in the paper.
>
>
>
Now, I discovered a **pure error** in one of the basic assumptions of the model (namely, the molar mass of molecular oxygen set to 16 u, and not 32 u). This error in itself changes *all* the results of the paper, since it invalidates the reactor model and the subsequent optimization.
I have verified and consistently proved that the error exists, as I can reproduce the paper results including said error. *What are my options now?* I want someone to take notice and fix this paper, since I have proved it contains wrong results.<issue_comment>username_1: At first, you could talk to your TA and confirm that these errors really exist. According to your description, this should be a rather quick and easy task since you have identified the error already.
As a next step, you (together with your TA) should contact the corresponding author of the paper in a friendly manner. Do not try to sound accusatory but rather be interested in their work.
However, I do not expect that such an error could easily be fixed in the paper. Once a paper is published no modifications are allowed usually. Perhaps they might add an erratum note or even retract the paper (if the error is significant).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I have verified and consistently proved that the error exists, as I can reproduce the paper results including said error. What are my options now?
>
>
>
I recommend *co-authoring a manuscript with your TA that highlights and fixes the noteworthy issues that you have found*. (Fixing the issues makes the contribution far stronger, but perhaps isn't absolutely necessary.) I recommend sharing this manuscript with the original authors prior to any publication/submission (as noted by [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/101727/22768)); the shared manuscript needn't be in publishable state, it just needs to be comprehensible enough for the authors to comment on.
>
> I want someone to take notice and fix this paper, since I have proved
> it contains wrong results.
>
>
>
I recommend that *you* fix this paper, perhaps in collaboration with the original authors (this would reduce the burden on you). Your results demonstrate that the original work is unsuitable, so fixing the paper is a publishable result.
---
Answers to issues raised in comments:
>
> Couldn't the manuscript just be an email? I don't agree that an erratum is a publishable result (if by that, you mean a research article worthy of journal publication).
>
>
>
The following issues have been noted:
1. a mathematical model was wrongly written;
2. flaws...of fundamental nature...in the model; and
3. a pure error in one of the basic assumptions of the model [which] invalidates the reactor model and the subsequent optimization.
The first sounds like it belongs in an erratum, the second doesn't (albeit the accompanying fix "F = mv instead of F = ma" sounds like it does), and the third seems to suggest a non-trivial fix is required to derive a new reactor model and new optimizations. Thus, it seems like a new article is required. As an alternative, the original article could be extended (in collaboration with the original authors) and published as a technical report.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You can publish your results and your experiment results, methods, model, etc. and note the differences in the results with previous work, and suggest what might have gone wrong in the previous paper.
I do not see a big deal or problem or that one should take permission from previous authors. This is part of working in science, and you might well be wrong in your assumptions or proof! Sorry, but having read enough in my field, encountering papers that dis-proof previous work is something I have seen it happen.
Having said that, I do not know your qualifications. If you are a student, you definitely should speak to your supervisor or an expert in the field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: **Talk to an experienced researcher in the field before getting too excited.** For instance, you could talk to the professor of your course, if they are an active researcher in this area.
The question of what constitutes a "critical error" is subjective and often hard for a student to evaluate. For instance, perhaps the authors are just using conventions that you are not familiar with, or you have misunderstood what they are saying.
It can also happen that although the text of the paper is literally incorrect, an experienced researcher can see immediately what was intended, and won't be confused by it. These sorts of errors are typically not taken seriously and are not considered to warrant a formal correction to the paper, which requires a lot of work for the authors and editors.
It's good that you've discussed this with your TA, but your TA is likely a graduate student who doesn't yet have a lot of experience with research and publication in this area.
I think it's pretty common for students to get very excited about finding errors of any kind in published work, and to feel that "the world needs to know". I've had this experience myself. But community standards may not be what you think they are, and if you try to raise a big fuss about something that the research community regards as trivial, it'll just waste time and make you look a bit silly.
**If** an expert agrees that the error really is critical, then they can also advise you on how to proceed. Typically you would begin by contacting the authors, and they would talk to the journal editor about publishing a correction (or "corrigendum"). In the unlikely event that they don't acknowledge the error, you can also raise the issue with the journal editor directly. If the discovery of the error is itself something of significant scientific interest, then you could think about writing a new paper about it. But don't cross that bridge until you come to it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: I‘m not sure if this answer is allowed, based on advertising guidelines of Stack Exchange. Either way: A friend and I have started an app for iOS and Android with the intention of making reporting, discussing and looking up errors in publications as easy as possible. If you want you can check it out at <https://mistakey.com>.
The idea is to provide a network for collecting reports on all kinds of literature (currently, anything that has an ISBN, ISSN, or DOI can be reported). As others here have pointed out, it is unlikely that an already published paper can easily be revised. We therefore envision our platform to coexist as a hub for discussion and critique without requiring full papers for commentary or response to an existing one.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/01/07
| 216
| 890
|
<issue_start>username_0: After publication of my paper, I have discovered that I made a typo citing a very well known formula (part of undergraduate curriculum). Is there a need for corrigendum, as it is a well known formula ?
thanks<issue_comment>username_1: You don't specify your field, but in engineering and physics typos in formulae are fairly common (I daresay that papers without typos are the exception rather than the rule), and, no, there's really no need to write a corrigendum, especially if the formula is well known (everyone will understand that it's a typo).
Of course, in the above I assumed that what you derived in the rest of the paper was derived with the right formula.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: A corrigendum where? To publish it is (as the others say) not needed. To put it on your web site along with the listing of all your papers, fine.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/08
| 387
| 1,675
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am the TA for a class and we plan on assigning problems from a book. The professor also has the solutions manual for this book.
Would any legal problems arise if, instead of writing the solutions myself, I simply photocopied the relevant solutions from the manual and posted these on our private class webpage?<issue_comment>username_1: Legally? Dunno. I'm not a lawyer and the test for fair use is anyway not a bright line test.
Pedagogically, it will be far better to give answers that relate to how the course was taught, and it might be possible to generate those from the publisher's manual without much trouble. Pick something discussed in class, relate it to the current problem, and explain how one gets to the solution.
Also, see *both* comments to the question by <NAME>.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Ok lets go back to good old fashion common sense! Obviously it is not ethical to just "copy/paste" the materials. This applies for questions/solutions/slides/etc. The legal issue is secondary in my opinion.
Why not come up with your own questions and answers and take ownership of your own work? What is the point for students to attend your class? To get a photocopy of things? You have the better understanding of the the field and topic, so I suggest to come up with interesting questions/answers that triggers the imagination of student about your teaching topic/field.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't think so to be honest. However, from what I have experienced, solving the problem in your own way can help the students have more trust in your expertise. This will help learn better.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/08
| 2,200
| 9,717
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to finish my PhD in bioinformatics. I am trying not to give out too many details, so I won't be very specific.
In the field I am working in, there are two extremely important databases being used. During my MSc internship, I chose one of the two databases, decided to stick with it and never looked back. However, as my PhD approaches its term, I find more and more errors in this database.
I only contacted the database team once to tell them I thought I had spotted an error and to ask them whether my reasoning was correct. They took more than 2 weeks to reply and only said they had fixed the error without providing other explanations. Intrigued, I looked more closely at the data and started "reverse engineering" the database: I don't know how everything is internally articulated but I start getting a pretty good picture of how they do it. It's a very old and big database that keeps getting bigger and richer. The scientists behind the database are constantly trying out many new things to enrich the data. They keep some changes and discard others.
Now here's the problem: these attempts at enriching the data are badly integrated. The database is never checked for internal consistency. It is highly inconsistent, and I can prove it with a systematic approach. I can point out actual problems and potential problems, with suggestions to discard dangling references.
They also license their data. Some of it is freely available and some of it can be obtained with an academic or a commercial subscription. If they sell their data they might as well sell clean and coherent data!...
Many database maintenance operations seem to be handled manually and with no regard to existing data. Their enrichment methods seem to be based on in-house scripts that the team praises in different publications and that can be used in web forms, but for which the source code is never available. The whole database seems to use a very old and messy design and I have the feeling they never had engineers in their team. The team itself and their research... well, they are not really transparent. The website only has a feedback form. One can never know what problems have already been reported and fixed. There is no changelog. They can change what they please, when they please and in any way they please.
My PhD adviser encouraged me to pursue this investigation and warned me not to contact the database team any more because we will need to figure out what to do. According to my adviser, even though I'm right, this investigation alone does not warrant a publication. In any case, it will at least make a chapter in my PhD thesis.
What I want to obtain is to get these problems fixed. What I would like to obtain, but I don't think it's likely to happen because of the aforementioned lack of transparency, is to get a paper co-published with the authors behind the database, or at least a collaboration for my lab.
Side note: my PhD research is utterly uninteresting and advances a boring method of doing something nobody wants to do and that will therefore never be used. If I manage to link my name to updating and correcting this database, then my PhD will have served a purpose.
Do you have any experience and advice on how to best handle this delicate kind of issue?
**EDIT: I want to thank everybody for their contribution. I will select the most helpful answer. The answers and comments I received pointed me to the right direction. I want to make the issues known once I finish writing up my tool on consistency checking. How exactly I will go about making the errors known is something I still need to decide on.** A few final notes:
* As one of the comments pointed out, it is only fair for the bioinformatics community depending on this database that such errors be known. Maybe making them public will lead some research groups to reevaluate the degree of this dependence.
* I did not mean to start a stir on *computer science* vs *engineering*.
* My PhD is valid and defend-able as it is; it's just not innovative, but that is another story. Pointing out inconsistencies in a public database is not what my PhD is about and will not be used to "save" my PhD as it doesn't need to be saved. :-)<issue_comment>username_1: You should contact the person above the database team.
------------------------------------------------------
The database that you describe seems to be huge and complicated. As such any modification on it can be relatively big and complicated.
I've already worked in a place with an atrocious database. The relying architecture was simply badly designed. Everyone was aware of it, however we decided to leave it that way.
Why? because improving it meant recreating and redesigning the whole thing and then migrating all of the data from the old one to the new one. We estimated that it would take us months, if not years, of work to end up with a nice database.
At the end of the day, it was decided it was both less expensive and less of a hassle to correct by hand all of the errors created by the database than to improve the underlying system.
Which is to say, that there is a possibility that they are aware of a certain number of these problems but choose not to solve them and not to inform the users as it could leave a bad image. Imagine them answering you :
>
> "We know our database has a lot of problems, but we're fine with it. Too bad for your errors."
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Aha ok, I read your question; and here my thoughts. You may like it or not but here they are:
**Pure Engineering Is not Research**: Ok this might be debatable to some, but if you go to your PhD viva and say well "I fixed the database", you will have a hard time explaining your role as a researcher.
**Supervisor Issue**: If what you said is the truth, it is the supervisor and his/her to keep the **integrity** and **semantical correctness** of the DB. Your supervisor **must** manage this situation and it is not your job to do so.
**What if you cannot do your research with corrupted DB**: This is where the head of research group should weigh in and suggest perhaps an extended deadline where you can do your research and finish your thesis.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There are many critical scientific resources out there that have massive known flaws, but are still useful because the flaws don't prevent people from getting high value from the resources. GenBank, for example, is the predominant source of genetic information in the world and is also [known to have many mislabelled sequences](https://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/41821/title/Mistaken-Identities/).
From what you have written, it is not clear whether something like this is also the case with the resource that you are dealing with. The course I would recommend you take depends on 1) the degree to which the flaws are known and 2) their degree of impact on scientific conclusions derived from the database. The key cases that I see are:
* **The flaws are well-known and researchers are able to work around them:** Here, there's nothing you really have to do, and the maintainers are unlikely to be particularly responsive to your complaints, since their system is "good enough" and they likely have other priorities.
* **The flaws are well-known and difficult to work around:** This seems the least likely case, as why would people use this database and not the alternative that you mention? If it is so, however, you should probably just finish your thesis and move on: a paper on the flaws isn't interesting if they're already well-known, and while you should report your problems to the maintainers, you'll just be one more instance of the issues they already know about.
* **The flaws are not well-known and likely to cause serious problems in most research:** In this case, a publication about the flaws is likely to be of interest and worth doing. It might or might not cause the database to be fixed, but it is likely to be important to alert researchers *using* the database to the problems in their work, creating pressure for the database to be fixed or people to migrate elsewhere.
* **The flaws are not well-known, but not likely to have a serious impact:** This is likely to be the case if you are using the database in a very different way than most others, such that your research is more strongly impacted. In this case, talking about it in your thesis seems sufficient. You should document the problems you had and the flaws you discovered, but you are unlikely to get them corrected because you are not their target market.
Notice that in all of these cases, I assume that the database is unlikely to get fixed. That is because the persistence of the problems over time and the non-professional curation that you report indicate an organization that is probably missing either the resources or the incentives to make the fixes you would like, even in collaboration---although you might turn out to be pleasantly surprised.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: It is injudicious to describe your own PhD project as boring. It sounds like you are not able to go beyond what is currently known. Well, it takes all sorts. Maybe you can teach what is known to those who don't know later.
Anyway I see no gain in getting into conflict with external groups.
You need to quantify what impact the database errors have on the results of your work and ideally show they are minimal or that you can detect them when they occur. And that should be the most minimal part of your presentation. Using that issue to fill an empty void isn't going to pass muster.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/08
| 594
| 2,595
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to apply for PhD admission, but I have no research experience; never published any research paper or had any research assistantship during my Master's (although I did have a course assistantship for a semester and finished it 1 semester earlier). The professor I am intending to ask for supervision and research is involved around coding and I can make a good portfolio of projects about it (i.e. industry experience after Master's, GitHub profile, etc.).
**Questions:**
1. What should I mention in my email to professor to convince them that I would be a good fit for their research and fellowship?
2. Should I contact a professor first and then apply to the program, or should I apply first and then contact professor about it?
The university I am intending is a private university in central US with very high reputation (one in top 30 in Forbes US list).<issue_comment>username_1: Remember that professors often get dozens of emails every day, so your chances to get an answer are higher if you keep things short.
Send an email saying that you are interested in a PhD in program XX under his supervision and ask a few short, relevant questions, e.g. if spaces are available at all.
Any longer questions, or even sending a whole portfolio, should not be done in the first email. If things go well, he agrees to talk to you about your application and there are spaces available, you can go on with your other questions.
If possible, a short visit in person might help; you can for example discuss most of your questions with PhD students or postdocs should the professor be too busy.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One important thing to keep in mind is that a PhD is a (reasonable) long-time commitment and it is (sort of) all about researching and publishing. If you can "convince" yourself it may be possible to convince other people.
So the first item on your list is to understand why do you want to pursue a PhD if you have no research experience. Don't get me wrong, it is possible to have research experience with no publications, or with publications in minor conferences that have little impact. But if you went through a Master Degree you should have some research experience, just not a publication.
Definitely, trying to contact the Professor before applying to the program would be better. If something goes wrong you will have saved yourself a lot of time and resources.
You could also consider trying to find some other professors and institutions that would be alternatives to this first one.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/08
| 224
| 941
|
<issue_start>username_0: Papers can include clickable-link formatting with in-text citations. It's convenient to click a link to check the citation, however, it's disruptive to have to manually scroll back up to continue reading.
Is there an easier way to resume reading after checking a citation? Alternatively, is there a less disruptive method for checking a citation?<issue_comment>username_1: If you're using Adobe Acrobat Reader (which I suspect you are), you can press alt + left to jump back to where you were before clicking the link. I find it amazingly useful.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If using Preview on MacOS, you can use Command + [ to go back.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In a web browser, you can right-click and select "Open link in new tab" or whatever the specific option is for your browser. Then you can click through the tabs rather than scroll through the article.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/08
| 557
| 2,477
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am sorry for naïveté.
I found a workshop that fits my research and I want to submit a paper to the workshop. The problem is that the location of the workshop is far away from my hometown and I don't have funding to cover the travel expenses.
Do you think it is obligatory to visit the workshop (conference) and to give a talk in case the paper is accepted?<issue_comment>username_1: The best option is to contact the academic committee of the conference (by email) and ask them directly.
Some conferences allow the author to publish their work on the proceedings without the presence of the author on the conference. However, in many cases you will need to pay the registration fees.
I believe that is highly recommended to go to the conference to participate in discussions and receive feedback about your work, but is not obligatory in some cases.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Personally, I have only seen conferences which require **every** paper to be presented on-site. Most conferences explicitely state that paper will not be published in the online proceedings, if the authors do not present their paper. If this is not stated on the conference's website, please write to the committee.
However, I recommend you to find a different solution. Discussing a paper at a conference is a very important part of your scientific career since you get in contact with other researchers. If you encounter financial difficulties, you can write to the committee and ask politely for a waiver or reduction of the fee.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The point of a workshop is to generally meet with other people and talk about your work with them.
For that reason, workshops with peer-reviewed papers typically expect all authors to appear to present their work---even more so than is typically the case for conferences. In many cases, it is in fact strictly required, and papers will be officially unaccepted and removed from the proceedings if nobody appears to give the talk (IEEE, for example, requires this of all of their sponsored meetings).
In certain extenuating circumstances, such as illness or visa problems, some organizers may be willing to arrange for a talk to be given remotely. Likewise, larger meetings in some cases will offer scholarships that can help with the expense of attendance. If you just don't want to go, however, then you should submit to a journal rather than a workshop or conference.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/08
| 1,547
| 6,596
|
<issue_start>username_0: While submitting applications for tenure-track academic positions, I encounter myself making mistakes. Such mistakes are, e.g.:
* submitting in the wrong format (one PDF file is asked, and I'm submitting many as usual),
* taking too much time until submission deadline (the deadline is today, and, oh $h1t, including the reference letters),
* sending an e-mail to a wrong institution whose e-mail address is slightly different from the one you wished to use,
* sending an e-mail from a private e-mail address instead of an institutional one,
* being uncertain about whether I apply for ALL positions in question at one and the same institution and then switching between applications to different institutions, which takes additional time,
* etc.
Clearly, certain mistakes could be avoided by doing things extra slowly or introducing check-up phases. However, these solutions take more time and, therefore, are a no-go for me: the deadlines pass by before I'm able to submit. Instead, I'd like to arrange my application processes in a best possible way, getting them quickly right *the first time*. How? (Before you suggest asking for help: there is nobody from my circle who would be able to help me with that more often than once every half a year.) Please share the technological, organizational, or self-organizational steps that DID work for you to avoid the mistakes of the above kind. You may also share the steps that DID NOT work for you.
This question primarily seeks advice from people who have already gone through the tenure-track application process (with success or failure). If it is the case for you, please say so.<issue_comment>username_1: Set yourself a personal deadline that is 2-3 days before the actual deadline. Upload everything you can in the online form (assuming this is an online form) but do not press the "definitively send your application to the committee, no backsies" button. If this is an email application, write a draft in your email client but do not send it; save it to the "Drafts" folder.
This way, you will be able to take the five minutes necessary to review your application before actually sending it. Should you realize "at the last minute" that something is wrong in your application... well, no worries, the deadline isn't actually for another couple of days! It shouldn't be possible to get to the point that the mere act of checking whether you wrote the email of the university correctly make you miss the deadline... Then once you're ready, you can actually submit your application.
Set several reminders on your phone, tablet, computer or whatever you use, as soon as you know the deadline. One for two weeks before, one for a week before, then three days before, then six hours before... Mark the deadlines on your calendar (either a physical one or a software one) and take the habit of looking at the next few days in your calendar every morning.
If you want to go the extra mile, you can use something like a [personal wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_wiki) to keep track of all your applications, or even some task management software (personally I use something based on Kanban boards, maybe it's not optimal but it works for me) and write down in it everything you need to know to complete the application, such as what documents they need, where they need them, when... You can even make logical links between tasks, such as "I cannot complete task 'Send list of referees' before completing task 'Ask potential referees if they can send a recommendation letter'".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Self-organisation is important
==============================
* Keep track of all announcements, ideally in one place
* Be able to quickly review which are due soon
* Plan your time
I have a separate browser window with all the calls I'd like to apply to. (I am in an active search phase, the question rings a bell to be.) You might be better of with a calendar application with links to the actual calls in the events or a wiki, as suggested above.
It's basically about knowing *what* applications are due soon, and *when* is which.
Customisation vs. chain-mail
============================
Customisation is important. Arguably, nothing is a larger turn-off to an HR than an application which is not-specific. But not everything needs to be customised. Cover letter? Yes! Research statement? Maybe. CV? Nah. Well, it might be, but, frankly, what changes in your biography and list of papers, depending on are you applying to School A in research area X or institution B in research area Y? You are you, you have achieved what you have achieved.
* Prepare blocks that are permanent for each application.
* Identify and be able to change the blocks that are unique for each application.
I have a `Makefile` that goes into each application folder and builds the typical parts of an application from separate files, but YMMV.
Read the damn call
==================
The call says a lot and you need to get this information out of it.
* One PDF or separate files are Ok? (Not prob, `pdfjoin` does the job in one sec.)
* Email or snail mail? (Add one-two days for latter.)
* Deadline is date sent or date received. (STRANGE, as there are sort of unspoken conventions in my country, but happens. Add one-two days.)
* References to be sent directly or attached. (Culture in my country is very different, so I need to worry much less about this. But yep, add **two weeks** or something and ask them well beforehand!)
* Whom should the cover letter be addressed to?
* What are the requirements for the job? (Adjust cover letter and research plan, meditate if you should apply at all or it is waste of time.)
* Google the damn school and look at their rankings. (Do you want to go there? Really?)
Now you have sort of an internal deadline before the actual deadline. Try to make it. Be aware of "oh, I also need to make this application which is due in 3 weeks, but they need this special sauce with the personal signature of god as an original document, not a copy, thank you very much, so I need to start now". (And yes, it's exactly my thought, there is such a call on my radar right now.)
Be bold
=======
Generally, apply everywhere. The only chance missed is a chance not taken, and such. I can reassure you, few years ago I got into a very prestigious university I never thought I would. During the application I clearly thought "they won't take me, this is special-tailored for someone else, it's a waste of time, BUT I'll try it nevertheless". Surprise, they took me.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/08
| 3,225
| 13,655
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a previous test one of my TAs discovered a fraudulent pattern in six of the exams. The answers were uncomfortably similar, actually identical in many places. I called the students to my office and brought two colleagues to help me "interview" them individually (ask them questions about the test, gauge their level of knowledge about the subject, ...)
One of the students reacted very explosively at my one and only question: "Could you please tell me how you solved 'problem 2'? He told me he felt threatened by the question and that I had no right to ask him questions after the exam. To what I reply: "do you or do you not know?"
At that point things spiraled very fast out of control, he reacted violently, stepping out of the office while muttering some insults. On the way out he hit the door. I tried to calm him down but he got only angrier and the color of his words became redder. After seeing this, the other students refused to continue the interviews with my colleagues and left.
I definitely don't know if I should have approached the situation in a different way. Should I make them repeat the exam? Start a disciplinary process?
**EDIT (Jan/09/18):**
In case of suspected misconduct I should bring the case, along with evidence, to the Dean. He then reviews it and decides whether to bring it to the Academic Council or stop it there. They ultimately have the power to decide what to do. However, almost a year ago a colleague also faced a situation that involved fraud during a test, and the Dean decided to not do anything because the potential punishment for the student would be too harsh (he might be expelled)
**EDIT (Jan/10/18):**
Just to add some details into the situation: At the moment of the incident I was talking with one student, and each of my colleagues was doing the same with a student. The six of us were in the same (big) room. And the other three students were waiting outside.<issue_comment>username_1: Report the student and his problem behavior to your honor council or academic conduct officer, as appropriate at your institution and let it be their problem. At most schools, your responsibility as an instructor is to report suspected cases of misconduct, not to form a final judgement.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: If you do not want a student who feels alarmed and threatened to react like a cornered rat, I suggest that you not corner him or humiliate him.
Students make mistakes. I think our goal as teachers should be to help students learn certain facts, skills, habits, and ways of thinking and analyzing, and provide useful feedback in a fair way. I don't think our goal should be to create a cornered rat. If a student appears to have cheated on a midterm exam, but we don't have proof, then let's step up our proctoring on the final exam, to minimize the chances that a student could cheat without our realizing it.
(As a TA I once faced this situation. Two students handed in identical homework. But there was no proof of misconduct. Solution: the department scheduled my class's final for a special room where I was able to put the suspects in isolated seats widely separated from other students. One student got a D and the other failed the final and had to repeat the course over the summer.)
If a student cheated in the midterm, chances are very good that if s/he is prevented from cheating in the final, s/he will fail the exam.
If not -- if the student manages to demonstrate the desired knowledge and skills in the final, without unfair assistance -- that's a good thing, no?
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: It is a good thing you had two colleagues present. As far as the cheating part is concerned, it is now time to escalate (in the bureaucratic sense of the word) the process, that is, hand it over to someone higher up the hierarchy. Ideally, this is someone or some committee who is specifically appointed for that purpose. But when that is not the case, discuss this with your colleagues who are knowledgeable of what that might be.
As far as the language is concerned, you need to make a judgment call. I would take into account that as an instructor part of your duty is to maintain a safe and unthreatening work environment for your students and for yourself. If you feel that that language imperiled that environment, then it is certainly legitimate to take action against that. Again, in this situation, I would not try to handle it yourself, but instead hand it over to someone higher up the hierarchy.
For the future discuss with your department what a standard process is in such cases. Following a standard process makes it easier to defuse the situation; you can deflect the anger away from you to the process.
---
In reaction to your edit: You should have brought this to the Dean without your own "interrogation session". Whether and how to investigate was her or his decision, not yours. Trying to create an unofficial "pre-Dean stage" in this process can easily backfire, as you have noticed.
If you are unhappy because she or he is too lenient, then you should discuss that in the appropriate committees. It sounds like the Dean does not have enough sanction options, either do nothing or expel and very little in between. Fixing that would be a possible way forward.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Your initial action to speak to all the students together was correct and well done for getting some of your colleagues to sit in. This will help you to make a case if need be at any disciplinary action. However, from the student's perspective he/she may have felt embarrassed as this was happening in front of some of his/her friends. That would have probably overwhelmed any sense of guilt/regret or simple acceptance the student may have felt in this scenario.
I would give the student another chance, this time in a one-to-one tutorial. If at all possible (perhaps you see this student regularly) try to speak to the student without contacting them and booking a time - that may simply result in no reply or a refusal. I would try to catch them in passing in a corridor, at the end of a class or if they are in an open lab area on their own. This will already show the student that you are concerned about the situation. Take them somewhere where you can speak to them discreetly and privately. Tell your line manager in advance that you are going to do this and if you are particularly worried about the student, if they have a track record in any way or you feel you may be threatened or they may use the private space to their advantage (e.g. later state things that did not occur) perhaps locate the tutorial somewhere where their is cctv - just in case. Explain to the student the seriousness of cheating and plagiarism and your obligation as an academic to report any suspected incidents. Explain that if the student refuses to discuss it informally (the tutorial is their opportunity to do so) what occurs when an incident is formally reported - the worst case scenario. Try to make them understand that it is in their interest to discuss it.
Report back to your line manager or the head of department. If the student admits cheating/plagiarism and this is a first incident by that student it is in their power to deal with this without escalating it to a formal disciplinary action. For example, I had a plagiarism incident in the past where the student had no prior incidents and what they plagiarised, while clearly plagiarised and evidence was provided via Turnitin, was a small percentage (less than 15%) of the body of work they produced. They admitted it and the decision was taken by the head of department to deduct an equivalent percentage from their overall grade. Formal disciplinary action was not taken however the student did fail the assignment and was required to repeat it during the summer in order to progress to the next year. All-in-all this seemed very appropriate, the student learnt their lesson, it did not end their opportunity at university and they did not plagiarise again on their degree.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I've had similar situations arise many times in my 20+ years of teaching, and I have gotten confessions 100% of the time. Everything is easier with a confession -- you don't need to worry about a trial or dispute later, the student doesn't get mad at you, etc. My technique:
1. Establish rapport with the student(s), through casual conversation about unrelated topics.
2. Explain that the purpose of the interview is for you to understand issues with the exam.
3. Present the exams (or copies) side-by-side, and show the similarities. Explain that the likelihood of this occurring due to chance is very small (below 1%). Ask the student(s) how they think this might have happened.
4. Usually at this point there is a confession. If not, I state that without a confession or mitigating factors, the evidence is so strong that I will be forced to punish all parties to a very high level. I then explain all the various punishments available, and how I have substantial flexibility in my choice.
5. Guilty people want to tell their story. Also, one party is always less guilty than the other (or even completely innocent), and the guilty person doesn't want their friend or classmate to be punished unfairly. Hence, there is a confession.
6. Only once have I faced both parties completely denying everything, and I moved forward with punishing both. The next day, after reflection, one of them made a full confession exonerating the other. They were not friends, so this was not an agreement between the two of them.
Note: I only pursue these cases if I am over 99% sure that cheating occurred. If not, I keep copies of the exams and wait for the next exam to see if it happens again.
---
The unfortunate situation described by OP was caused by the misguided interview question "how did you do this problem?". It challenges the student to solve the exam question again, spontaneously, in this stressful environment. This is the wrong question to ask, for several reasons. Most importantly, it doesn't get at the heart of the matter, whether or not there was cheating (and who was responsible). Students who don't know the right answer can get lucky sometimes, and students who do know the right answer can fail to reproduce it later. Also, as the student was pointing out (explosively) it is unfair to repeat portions of the test, with the lower of the two grades applying. The interview should not be about the content knowledge of the students, but solely about the issue of academic misconduct.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: Many people have addressed the procedural question regarding handling suspected cheating.
However, your post and comments indicate that a student, when asked a perfectly reasonable (albeit, potentially challenging) question:
* Raised their voice
* Cursed
* Struck an inanimate object (a door, I believe)
This indicates a significant anger management problem. This kind of behaviour, if repeated, will result in the individual losing jobs, friends and, potentially, get them into trouble with the law.
If your school provides any kind of counseling service, I would recommend talking to them (without mentioning the student's name, to begin with) about getting them engage to talk to this student.
This is probably not the first time that this student has reacted so inappropriately and this may be part of a broader pattern that will not end well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I have 30 years experience teaching at the college level. Angry, aggressive reaction to having been caught cheating, while not common, is not all that rare either, in my experience.
Some people seem to think that attempts to intimidate will work. Make absolutely sure they don’t. Calmly stand your ground, and let the person know that you will report aggressive, abusive, or otherwise inappropriate behavior to the relevant dean.
Additional advice:
1. Become thoroughly familiar with your institution’s policies regarding academic misconduct and follow them. That protects both you and the student. At my university we are instructed to talk with the student directly and privately first, before reporting it formally.
2. At the beginning of each semester provide a written (usually in the syllabus) explanation of your approach to academic misconduct, including your policy of reporting it to the dean (or other administrative authority).
3. Avoid any potentially humiliating conversation with a student within earshot of any other student(s).
4. Any test re-taking or paper re-writing should not be taken as proof of guilt or innocence, but rather discussed at the end of the process as a possible form of partial “restitution” to be completed a few days later.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: I used to work as teacher assistant and tell you for sure - if student refuses to give answers - he is cheating. Student who does know material has no fear.
In this situation - ignore what happened or give a second exam for everyone.
On next exam give everyone individual tasks. Just unique tough questions which can only be solved if student knows the subject. Yes, get ready to see a lot of F marks. It is better to do on finals when mark has more weight.
Failing exam will be a good lesson for cheaters.
You are not mommy, you don't have to teach students how to behave or control anger. This is not your job.
If students don't respect you and cheat - give them some lesson. A tough one. This is the time. Smart students will respect you, others - hate, don't care about them.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/09
| 1,210
| 4,969
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to conclude my Ph.D. work. The research has led to a possible commercial product which I always pushed. So now, after four years of work, we've filed four patents with three already granted. A year and a half ago, the PI moved to another position, so now I communicate my progess once a month).
I developed the scientific product along with software, electronic hardware, web apps, and so on, not to mention journal papers on the way. The technology is promising and we have businesses interested and willing to invest.
Along the way we got a part-time master's business student, who supports us when we have to write proposals and do interview calls and meeting possible business leads. I always join those meetings and often take decision on what should be the way and what is achievable.
Now we are on the verge of legally founding the company and possibly soon begin sales.
My dilemma is finding out what share of the company is fair for me.
The partners in the business would be me, the business student, and my PI. (I think the PI should get a fair share; after all, it was research done in her lab, however I have seen opinions saying this should be no more than 10 percent.)
Of course, on the way, there were master's student with whom I worked and taught them the lab work and tricks and all that I could to have them their work done in timely manner, also I offered them opportunity to be part of startup but they were not interested.
I don't want it to be a quarrel but also don't want to feel exploited.
If I leave there is no one on the team who understands how the technology works, or how we can produce with alternative methods (I might be overestimating, but this stuff I did for my PhD and mostly it would be another PhD who could do it. It is countless hours of labwork.) I am a co-inventor along with PI on all the patents filed/granted.
Please help me out in figuring what share of the company I should expect.<issue_comment>username_1: **TL,DR:** You deserve a large majority. I consider 90% for you and 10% for your professor fair.
I finished my Ph.D. and co-founded a company based on dissertation work. I continue to work as a funded tech entrepreneur. I offer the following insights:
1. From your situation, it sounds like no one else is remotely close to your level of contribution. If you leave, there is no business.
2. Equity should be determined based on real contribution to the enterprise. You aren't being cruel or disrespectful by placing a value on what people bring to the table. At this point of the business, value equals cash or know-how. Do not award equity to someone who's really eager and ready to "work like a dog" (chances are they will fade in six months) without tying their effort to a vesting period -- they don't receive their equity until after a period of satisfactory work, quantified and agreed-to in writing.
3. As co-author of the patents, your professor is entitled to proceeds from the use of the intellectual property, but not equity. In this case, you are choosing to give equity in exchange for permission to use the patent. Your business operating agreement should state that.
4. You need to check the university guidelines regarding use of the patent. Most likely, the patent is controlled by the university and you'll have to work out a licensing agreement.
When all is said and done, you need to have enough cushion to absorb dilution (if you bring on investors or high-level staff), yet retain control or a profitable equity position. I think a 90%-10% split between you and your professor is about right at this point. If you bring on the business student (they may be a nice person, but aren't providing a lot of value), I propose a 85%-10%-5% split with a vesting period for the student. Consider awarding more equity to the student later if they work hard.
Good luck and remember: you have the know-how if people decide to make things difficult. Walk away if needed.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Anything less than giving yourself 100% comes with risks, risks you are probably completely unaware of and with huge complications. What if someone wants to buy the company but only the entire company, but the minority shareholders don't agree to the sale? What if one of the minority shareholders dies, gets divorced, gets sued, etc. and now you have to deal with a shareholder of substantial percentage you may or may not get along with? Are you sure you won't be sued for minority shareholder abuse if you make unpopular decisions?
If you value the success of the endeavor, do not give away shares in it for work that was done for fair wages at the time.
Only give shares out when there is an event that merits another change in ownership such as when someone does offer you funding or at the time of a sale.
Talk to an attorney who is an expert in this specific subject before offering anyone anything.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/09
| 720
| 3,104
|
<issue_start>username_0: My research answered a very specific question. But the hypothesis I was testing will also likely have very broad application. I want to make sure to convey that importance in my paper. Is the first line of the introduction an acceptable place to do that?
I am thinking the first line of the introduction might be something like:
>
> For decades our knowledge of myTopic has been insufficient to answer questions like A, B, and C. I considered scenario C₁ to test my hypothesis, which now shown to be correct in this case, will likely play a key role in answering these other questions going forward. Some background on scenario C₁ is...
>
>
>
Or should the introduction only mention background info which is directly relevant to the scenario I actually investigated? And then I can suggest the larger importance of this discovery elsewhere in the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to your question entirely depends on your field and the venue to which you will submit your paper. Software Engineering papers, for example, tend to have much longer and broader introductions than Math papers. Papers at smaller and more focused conferences and journals have shorter and more focused introductions that those at broad venues, since they address a more specific readership.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Within the field of mathematics research, there is a bit of a tradition (almost a competition really) to create useful but extremely short papers, with minimal context. In some cases the introduction is non-existent and the reader is expected to put the result in context through the statement in the title of the paper, and their own knowledge of the field. This is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, and is a way of demonstrating that valuable results can be given without padding them out with literature.
For example, there is a [famous mathematical paper](https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.bams/1183528522) that refuted [Euler's sum-of-powers conjecture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%27s_sum_of_powers_conjecture) by providing a short counter-example. This paper states its objective in the title, and then presents the counter-example in two sentences, without any further context. This is regarded as a useful paper that establishes the falsity of a major mathematical conjecture.
Another [mathematical paper](http://www.openculture.com/2015/04/the-world-record-for-the-shortest-math-article-2-words.html) (dubbed the shortest ever) states its question as a single sentence, and then has an answer that consists of two words and two diagrams. In this latter case, the authors refused to add an introduction to their paper despite requests by the reviewers, since they wanted it to be as short as possible. (Although this has been dubbed the shortest paper ever, my view is that it is effectively longer than the above paper, since it includes two large diagrams. Also, the article describing the article is inconsistent with how it was actually published; the editors put the title sentence into the body and gave it a simpiler title.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/09
| 2,003
| 7,628
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question is ubiquitous when applying for PhD studies, and it's one I don't understand. On the surface it's a simple question, but I found it to be frustratingly complex.
I tend to think in economic terms. My calculations indicated that PhD studies are not worth it, especially in a world of exponential growth. The details aren't that important, but briefly, I calculated that if I stay in industry and invest most of my salary into the stock market, I can expect to greatly outperform someone who spends 4+ years in a PhD program unless he or she commands a very high starting salary, which is usually not the case. This doesn't take into account the fact that [49% of PhD students are depressed](https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/04/22/berkeley-study-finds-high-levels-depression-among-graduate-students)
and [half of them don't complete](https://www.chronicle.com/article/PhD-Attrition-How-Much-Is/140045).
So since the economic argument is a failure, when I wrote my PhD applications, I put in all the other reasons I had to do it, such as:
1. I felt I'm in a dead-end job where my skills aren't appreciated. A much less-trained person can do what I'm doing, and while I believe I do a better job, I do so in ways that management does not track.
2. I wanted to swap careers. To do that I needed a new set of skills, and further study would not only let me pick that up, it would let me back up my skills with a paper qualification. Since I already had a Masters degree a PhD is the next obvious thing to do.
3. I choose this field because it provides transferable skills to the careers I want to move to, and because I'm sufficiently interested in it to want to keep up to date with its most recent developments (even though I probably won't stay in it as a researcher, per the fact that the odds of finding an academic job are very low).
4. I did well in my Masters (which was in the same field), including the research component, so I believe I can also do well in a PhD.
5. I can afford it. I hadn't been in the workforce for long, but I'm extremely conservative with money and we've been in a bull market for the past several years. Of course I would rather not self-fund, but if I have to, I can.
When I showed these reasons to my professors, they responded with "you are telling them why they shouldn't admit you!" Following their advice I rewrote my statement of purpose to what I'll call half-truths, which got me admitted.
I don't understand why my original reasons to do PhD studies weren't valid. I'm happy doing what I'm doing right now, and my supervisor has said I'm progressing well. That seems to be indicating that my original reasons aren't inappropriate. I further don't understand why PhD programs care about the reasons why the student is doing a PhD. It seems much more natural to worry about whether the student is capable of doing it. Certainly the latter question was the focus of all my non-academic job interviews. Finally it seems admission committees like candidates who are passionate about the field and want to become researchers themselves. However I also see plenty of complaints by academics about academic life (e.g. the funding lottery, the nomadic lifestyle). If academics are trying to convince students that they shouldn't try to be researchers, why are they turning around and looking for people who want to be researchers? It feels like they prefer the ignorant and starry-eyed over those who're aware what they're going into.
Can someone explain?<issue_comment>username_1: Let's consider why "you are telling [professors that] they shouldn't admit you!":
>
> 1. I felt I'm in a dead-end job...
>
>
>
That doesn't show motivation for doing a PhD.
>
> 2. I wanted to swap careers...
>
>
>
You don't need a PhD to swap careers.
>
> 3. I choose this field because...
>
>
> ...it provides transferable skills to the careers I want to move to...
>
>
>
This requires more detail to be relevant.
>
> ...because I'm sufficiently interested in it to want to keep up to date with its most recent developments...
>
>
>
You can do that without a PhD
>
> ...(even though I probably won't stay in it as a researcher, per the
> fact that the odds of finding an academic job are very low).
>
>
>
This doesn't show motivation for doing a PhD.
>
> 4. I did well in my Masters (which was in the same field)...
>
>
>
Many "do well" in their Masters, PhD students do better.
>
> ...including the research component, so I believe I can also do well in a PhD.
>
>
>
This requires more detail to be relevant.
>
> 5. I can afford it.
>
>
>
This doesn't distinguish you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Performing a PhD thesis can be tough at times; there are times when your experiments do not deliver the results you want, when your articles are being rejected (sometimes with unjustified criticism, or at least it appears so to you), when you are working long hours, when you are suffering from writers block, when you have to teach unmotivated students, etc etc etc.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=PhD+blues>
Not all of the above may happen to you, but some of it may occur at times. And in certain fields and geographies you are absolutely right about the economics; a career in industry may pay more than in academia.
So when asked the question "why do you want to do a PhD?", people are looking for your motivation. They would like to see candidates who are intrinsically motivated, who like doing research, who like to publish, who like to contribute to academic knowledge. Because these kind of people are most likely to overcome the hurdles described above.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If a school is acting morally, then it takes pains not to admit students who are unlikely to succeed. So we give the SAT to high school students and hope the score predicts whether they are apt to graduate college. (I know of a school which lost it's state funding because they admitted too many ill-prepared freshmen and over 50% of the freshman class dropped out that year. It appeared on the surface that the school simply let them in, took their government financial aid, and let them fail. IMO, this was fraud. Also in the state's opinion.)
So how to we decide if a person will be a successful Ph.D. student? We want someone who is enthusiastic about the subject and someone who will contribute to the on-going mission of the department. I think most of us believe that the type of student we're looking for will be *internally* motivated. All of your reasons are external motivations. We'd like to know that the reason you're with us is because the craving for this type of knowledge is part of YOU, not part of the circumstances you happen to find yourself in at the moment. Internal motivation is more permanent and more stable. Your external motivations can change at any moment. If you win the lottery, will you immediately drop out of the program and leave a pile of dirty test tubes for someone else to clean up?
I look at your first 3 reasons and think, "The instant this guy gets an offer he likes, he's gone. He's a mercenary."
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: A PhD is essentially an apprenticeship in research, for academia or industry. If you are not interested in a research based career, don't apply for a PhD. If you want to push forward the state of the art in your field, then a PhD ought to be excellent training, but if you just want an advantage in the job market or to stay up-to-date, then there are likely to be better approaches.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/09
| 1,295
| 4,874
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm mostly using Mendeley, but after reading lots of ebooks with the Kindle app, I've noticed that **I really like the feature that shows me the content of all highlights** and **the ability to jump to the relevant section**.
Is there any software for reference/paper organization, reading and note taking like Mendeley which has this feature?
As an example, for those who don't know this feature from e.g. Kindle, if the text above was part of a paper and the bold part was my highlight, I want to have a list that shows:
* I really like the feature that shows me the content of all highlights
* the ability to jump to the relevant section
and clicking on one of them should bring me to the respective section of the paper.
Any pointer much appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: Let's consider why "you are telling [professors that] they shouldn't admit you!":
>
> 1. I felt I'm in a dead-end job...
>
>
>
That doesn't show motivation for doing a PhD.
>
> 2. I wanted to swap careers...
>
>
>
You don't need a PhD to swap careers.
>
> 3. I choose this field because...
>
>
> ...it provides transferable skills to the careers I want to move to...
>
>
>
This requires more detail to be relevant.
>
> ...because I'm sufficiently interested in it to want to keep up to date with its most recent developments...
>
>
>
You can do that without a PhD
>
> ...(even though I probably won't stay in it as a researcher, per the
> fact that the odds of finding an academic job are very low).
>
>
>
This doesn't show motivation for doing a PhD.
>
> 4. I did well in my Masters (which was in the same field)...
>
>
>
Many "do well" in their Masters, PhD students do better.
>
> ...including the research component, so I believe I can also do well in a PhD.
>
>
>
This requires more detail to be relevant.
>
> 5. I can afford it.
>
>
>
This doesn't distinguish you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Performing a PhD thesis can be tough at times; there are times when your experiments do not deliver the results you want, when your articles are being rejected (sometimes with unjustified criticism, or at least it appears so to you), when you are working long hours, when you are suffering from writers block, when you have to teach unmotivated students, etc etc etc.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=PhD+blues>
Not all of the above may happen to you, but some of it may occur at times. And in certain fields and geographies you are absolutely right about the economics; a career in industry may pay more than in academia.
So when asked the question "why do you want to do a PhD?", people are looking for your motivation. They would like to see candidates who are intrinsically motivated, who like doing research, who like to publish, who like to contribute to academic knowledge. Because these kind of people are most likely to overcome the hurdles described above.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If a school is acting morally, then it takes pains not to admit students who are unlikely to succeed. So we give the SAT to high school students and hope the score predicts whether they are apt to graduate college. (I know of a school which lost it's state funding because they admitted too many ill-prepared freshmen and over 50% of the freshman class dropped out that year. It appeared on the surface that the school simply let them in, took their government financial aid, and let them fail. IMO, this was fraud. Also in the state's opinion.)
So how to we decide if a person will be a successful Ph.D. student? We want someone who is enthusiastic about the subject and someone who will contribute to the on-going mission of the department. I think most of us believe that the type of student we're looking for will be *internally* motivated. All of your reasons are external motivations. We'd like to know that the reason you're with us is because the craving for this type of knowledge is part of YOU, not part of the circumstances you happen to find yourself in at the moment. Internal motivation is more permanent and more stable. Your external motivations can change at any moment. If you win the lottery, will you immediately drop out of the program and leave a pile of dirty test tubes for someone else to clean up?
I look at your first 3 reasons and think, "The instant this guy gets an offer he likes, he's gone. He's a mercenary."
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: A PhD is essentially an apprenticeship in research, for academia or industry. If you are not interested in a research based career, don't apply for a PhD. If you want to push forward the state of the art in your field, then a PhD ought to be excellent training, but if you just want an advantage in the job market or to stay up-to-date, then there are likely to be better approaches.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/09
| 619
| 2,066
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’ve been looking at the bibliography of an old book called *History Of Burma* by <NAME> and am quite confused.
There are abbreviations introduced first like this:
>
> **B** Bodleian Library
>
> **BM** British Museum
>
> **IO** India Office Library
>
>
>
An example for an actual citation is:
>
> <NAME>, The Portuguese Asia, three vols 1695.
>
>
> **B** 55.b.59-61.
>
> **BM** 582.e.6, 8.
>
> **IO** 300.A.76.H.10-12
>
>
>
I can see the abbreviations refer to respective libraries, but what about the numbers? Are they referring to the book’s location in the library, or pages within the book itself?<issue_comment>username_1: A quick search of the current Bodleian catalogue [turns up this record](http://solo.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/OXVU1:LSCOP_OX:oxfaleph014326415).
Selecting the 'find & request' tab indicates that the three volumes are still available with call numbers 55.b.59-61. Thus, it would appear that the bibliography is specifying call numbers in the different libraries (much as modern bibliographies list DOIs!).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To expand on @username_1's answer: those numbers very likely refer to manuscripts, incunabula, or other rare or unique items.
Specific index references are necessary for a number of reasons, even if a single library may have multiple copies of a work:
* Titles get many variations over time, may be spelled multiple ways or in different languages.
* Dates are often sketchy at best, but oftentimes may be century estimates (even if there's a date, if it's a manuscript it may be a copy from a different era).
* Manuscript tend to have important errors, variations, and marginalia, that distinguish copies, so we need to know exact tomes/scrolls/etc that were used.
As an aside, you will probably not get copies via ILL, but you may be able to get the source library to scan them for a nominal fee (or they may already be scanned and freely available—check online especially for large national libraries).
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/09
| 632
| 2,507
|
<issue_start>username_0: So, in a bit more than 1 year, I will have my PhD. I have been doing well, I will probably with 4 papers published by the end of it. However, I have been feeling a bit empty. I feel like I started doing research because I thought I could make some difference but I'm feeling less and less that isn't going to happen.
So, I don't know what to do. Obviously, I could do a pos-doc, but I'm a bit afraid of the feeling staying there. I was considering other career options, but I don't really know what to do. One thing that I like is computers and I wouldn't mind working for cybersecurity, particularly associated with cybercrime. The problem is that I have limited knowledge. I do know that some people start working for software companies with PhDs in unrelated fields, like physics. Is it the same possible with a PhD in theoretical biology? I deal with maths and programming a lot, but can I expect that people will want me for that kind of position and offering me some basic training?
In general, are there any other career options for theoretical biologists besides academia?<issue_comment>username_1: A quick search of the current Bodleian catalogue [turns up this record](http://solo.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/OXVU1:LSCOP_OX:oxfaleph014326415).
Selecting the 'find & request' tab indicates that the three volumes are still available with call numbers 55.b.59-61. Thus, it would appear that the bibliography is specifying call numbers in the different libraries (much as modern bibliographies list DOIs!).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To expand on @username_1's answer: those numbers very likely refer to manuscripts, incunabula, or other rare or unique items.
Specific index references are necessary for a number of reasons, even if a single library may have multiple copies of a work:
* Titles get many variations over time, may be spelled multiple ways or in different languages.
* Dates are often sketchy at best, but oftentimes may be century estimates (even if there's a date, if it's a manuscript it may be a copy from a different era).
* Manuscript tend to have important errors, variations, and marginalia, that distinguish copies, so we need to know exact tomes/scrolls/etc that were used.
As an aside, you will probably not get copies via ILL, but you may be able to get the source library to scan them for a nominal fee (or they may already be scanned and freely available—check online especially for large national libraries).
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/09
| 738
| 2,944
|
<issue_start>username_0: I attended Capella University from 2009-2016. I earned a Master's degree without any problems. I completed all of the coursework for the Ph.D. at the same university and spent two years in the dissertation program. Due to many hindrances by the university (Absenteeism of 4 dissertation chairs, Lack of guidance and direction/feedback and extremely slow response time- many weeks) I decided to withdraw from the university. My overall GPA for the doctoral program was a 3.8 and my total tuition was $185,000 for the two degrees. The university issued me a Ph.D. completion of coursework certificate. Can I use Ph.D. as an earned degree on my resume and other credential necessary situations?<issue_comment>username_1: No, you cannot. Your GPA and the money you paid are irrelevant here – there is simply more to a PhD than coursework. What you can try to do is try to apply to another PhD program and see if they will waive the coursework requirements, as you have already completed them – I don't know if that's possible. But if you don't have a paper from your university with the words "PhD diploma" (or equivalent) on it, then you cannot say that you have a PhD without lying. If your (potential) employer catches you, they will be in a good position to fire you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Absolutely not. Unless you have a diploma, you do not have a PhD! There are certain rules you have to follow to get a PhD, including a dissertation and a defense. The fact that you feel slighted by the university does not mean that you can re-define what rules apply for you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with the previous votes that you cannot claim PhD on your resume. Future employers would be able to use this as a reason to fire you without any additional justification. Unfortunately, you are not alone in this situation. Approximately 50% of all PhD students leave before completing the dissertation. This is so common that many cite your level of degree work as an "ABD" degree -- ABD stands for all but dissertation.
You might consider giving the dissertation another attempt. You could re-enroll for the minimum dissertation hours and form a new (and possibly better?) committee. Most universities allow 7 years for PhD completion, so you may be able to get back into the program without too much hassle. You may not want to do this, but it is an option for you to consider.
Another consideration: if you want to work in academia, all that is required to teach undergraduate students is a masters degree. Many colleges and universities have an "ABD" category in their payscale -- meaning that your PhD hours would enable you to earn more money than another candidate with only a masters degree. (I live in Florida and am a professor at a 4-year college. The "ABD" category was added several years ago and seems to be growing in popularity here.)
Best luck moving forward.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/10
| 622
| 2,388
|
<issue_start>username_0: I contacted two professors six weeks before the deadline. One prof emailed me back immediately. The second one still hasn’t. It is due in 3 weeks. I emailed him last Friday asking him again if he would be willing to be a reference but still no response. I don’t have his phone number and he doesn’t work at the university. I really don’t want to annoy him, but should I email him again? I do have his gmail address (I’ve been emailing him from his work one). Usually he contacts me from his work one but I have received ones from his gmail account in the past. But I am afraid this would be frowned upon and looked on as being too invasive? I am really at a loss. I do have another reference, however, she is more a professional reference and I am not sure if that is allowed (the school isn’t getting back to me on this question).
This question is not a duplicate. I am wondering if I should email the professor for a third time or if that would be considered inappropriate?<issue_comment>username_1: I was in a similar position as you a few months ago.
Given the deadline, it matters that something rather than nothing is submitted before the deadline. Ask asking for extensions is an unreliable strategy.
Send an email to your professor stipulating that you are concerned about the lack of response (which you are) and inform the professor what your plans are (asking someone else).
No need to ask why, be short and to the point.
>
> Dear Professor X,
>
>
> It has been sometime since the last time we talked about you writing a
> letter of recommendation on my behalf. I am concerned that your
> silence is indicative of your unavailability to write a letter. I know
> you are busy and I understand your time constraints.
>
>
> In the meantime I’ll be asking [you can choose to be specific or
> vague].
>
>
> Thank you for your time and consideration.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> [Your Name]
>
>
>
Make sure the second letter writer is willing and able to submit in time.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes , it is perfectly fine in approaching the same professor for the 3rd time. It happened with me in past. Initially i thought it would be rude to approach, but at last I mailed the professor and he replied me back.
But you should write the email sophistically. You should describe your problem in the mail.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/10
| 1,064
| 4,221
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I'm technically a graduate student. My school allows people who are studying a certain subject apply to the graduate program early, so if you get in, you get to work on your master's at the same time as finishing your bachelor's degree. Anyway, I applied and got in. I am also only 20. So the plan was to graduate with both degrees by the time I was 22. Here's the thing though, I think I'm going to be academically dismissed. The rules are that you cannot a C in more than one class. I got a C in my last class and it looks like I'm going to get a C in this class too unless I somehow get a 98% on the final. Unlikely, but I guess anything is possible.
So my question is, what do I do if I fail out? I don't have my bachelor's yet. I'm only 20 and if I'm being completely honest, I don't think this is something that I want to do anymore. I'm just not passionate and my level of caring is so low. It's probably why my grades are so bad. I just don't care anymore. I just can't deal with the fact that I'm probably going to fail out.<issue_comment>username_1: Welcome to the real world.
If you can still get a bachelor's degree, I strongly recommend you do it. The number of jobs that require a bachelor's degree is much larger than the number of jobs that require a masters (which is in turn larger than those that require a PhD). If you can't get a bachelor's degree, you'll really have wasted a lot more years of time and will probably be forced into an uninteresting low-pay job.
The next thing to do is look for a job. Use your local job repositories or job search portals. Figure out what you want to do, and approach the companies in that area to see if they're hiring. If you don't know what you want to do, then look for jobs that require the skills you have. For example if you're trained in psychology, look for jobs that require a degree in psychology. You should also use your network. When I left my previous job, the vacated position literally "fell into" the lap of my replacement. I told my Honours supervisor I was resigning, and she recommended my replacement.
Then prepare a CV that caters to non-academics, stressing what you learned in university. Especially emphasize the transferable skills. For example if you learned the programming language C++ during your university days, and the job you're applying to needs programming skills, you're in business. Be aware that you'll likely be interviewed before getting hired, and one question you are odds-on to be asked is "why did you not finish graduate school". I would recommend preparing a good answer.
There's a lot of advice out there on how to find a job. It's up to you to look for it. Unless you stay in academia forever, you'll end up in a job search eventually. If your university has a career center, absolutely visit them. They're a great resource.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I would agree with username_1 (+1 username_1), and I'd suggest that you follow that as a contingency.
In the meantime however you are acting **passively** rather than **actively** in your situation.
* Have you talked to your advisor as to what options you have?
* Have you talked with your current professor for the C class to see if you can earn **extra credit**?
* Have you talked to your dean about your performance and proposed a plan where you would not find yourself needing to be academically dismissed? **Such as retaking those classes**?
There is always something that you can do about your situation that I don't think you've considered. Before well... giving up... and failing out, why don't you take a moment, pick yourself up, and act how a mature, responsible, adult would do?
Just as you don't want to be academically dismissed if you don't want to, I can reasonably presume that the academic board of your institution doesn't want to kick someone out who realizes that they screwed up and is taking responsibility for their shortcomings.
My words seem harsh but as username_1 said,
>
> Welcome to the real world.
>
>
>
You are your own best advocate, your parents aren't going to make sure everything is alright for you. You have to take responsibility and make things happen.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/01/10
| 2,048
| 8,656
|
<issue_start>username_0: Most journals use similar manuscript handling systems such as ScholarOne. I have seen both author and reviewer accounts (which are similar). I wonder how an editor account looks like. I mean how you search for reviewers, how they are assigned, notifications, etc.
Can you share some screenshots of your editor control panels (of course, sanitizing the sensitive information)? I am sure that many young researchers like me are curious to have a picture of the other side when we submit our manuscripts.<issue_comment>username_1: The following screenshot is for **Editorial Manager** (used by **Springer, Nature, APA, Wiley, Taylor & Francis, PLOS**).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/oEPCk.png)
The action links on the left are where everything is done. Brief explanation of some of the tabs:
1. iThenticate is a program that checks for plagiarism. This particular submission has 16% similarity, which is low. If desired the editor can read the entire report, which includes both where the similarity occurs and where it came from.
2. "Duplicate submission" checks if the manuscript was submitted multiple times. Sometimes it's in error (author submits twice thinking the first time didn't go through); other times it flags a reject-and-resubmit manuscript.
3. "History" shows the history of the manuscript from submission till today, such as when it was submitted, when an editor was assigned, when each reviewer was invited, and so on. Every time the system sends an email, it's logged here.
4. "Edit submission" lets the editor modify the submission (e.g. if the authors later discovered they've not included a source file, this is where to add it).
5. "Invite reviewers" - self-explanatory. Clicking this goes to another menu that lets the editor both mine the current database and / or register new reviewers to invite. If this submission had a completed review there'd be a "view reviews and comments" button, and if it's ready for a decision, there'd be a "submit editor's decision and comments" button as well.
6. "Set final disposition" terminates the peer-review process. For this manuscript, since no decision has been made yet, the only option is 'withdraw'. If a decision has already been made (accept / reject), this is also where to set the final status.
The other boxes should hopefully be self-explanatory. In the review status on the right, the first manuscript currently has 3 reviewers who've agreed to do it, 1 who hasn't responded, and 3 who declined. Clicking the "more" button lets the editor see who those reviewers are, when the reviews are due, how long it's been since the reviewer invitation was sent out (for the reviewer who hasn't responded), and the reasons for declining, if any.
The bottom manuscript is showing status "required reviews completed" because the settings for this particular journal is set to flag any submission with 1 completed review as such. Some journals might require two or more reviews before the status updates.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_1: This answer is for SuSy, the in-house editorial management system used by MDPI. Caveat: I have used SuSy for less than two weeks as of time of writing, and my understanding of it is relatively rudimentary.
Papers in SuSy have their own page, which is much bigger and more detailed than Editorial Manager. It is big enough that I can't fit it in one screenshot.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZNocF.png)
Manuscript ID: the identifier of the manuscript. It generally starts with the name of the journal, followed by several numbers.
Type: what kind of article is it? A review, a research article, etc?
Open Review: see [this article](https://www.mdpi.com/reviewers#_bookmark10) on MDPI's website describing their editorial processes. To quote, "MDPI journals offer the possibility for authors to publish review reports together with their paper (Open Review) and for reviewers to sign their open review reports once “Open Review” (<https://www.mdpi.com/editorial_process>) is selected by the authors. However, this will only be done at publication with the reviewer’s permission. In all other cases, review reports are considered confidential and will only be disclosed with the explicit permission of the reviewer." If this shows as "yes", then the authors agreed to open review. It does not mean the reviewers will agree to open review.
Recruiting Reviewers: see [section 5 of the same article above](https://www.mdpi.com/reviewers#_bookmark5). The authors, when submitting, can choose whether or not to accept volunteer reviewers. If they indicate yes, then the title/abstract is viewable by volunteer reviewers, and vice versa if no.
Manuscript: the source files for the manuscript.
Section: Some MDPI journals have sections, topics, or similar classifications. If there is such a classification then there will be a corresponding box here. Similarly, if the submission is for a special issue, there will be a corresponding box here.
Author contributions: which author did what for the work? Who conceptualized it, who ran the analysis, who wrote the paper, etc.?
Submission received: when did the submission arrive?
iThenticate: this is an automated plagiarism checker. The report it produces is uploaded here.
Some boxes not shown: There is a section with who the pre-check editor is (i.e., the person that makes the decision whether or not to send the manuscript for peer review), and details of that pre-check. This is also usually the person that will make the final accept/revise/reject decision for the manuscript. There is another box with the APC confirmation. This tells the author what the APC will be should the article be accepted. MDPI offers a lot of discounts, so there is a high chance the published APC is not the one that is actually charged. If there is a discount voucher for the manuscript, this is where to input it.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/nnxnX.png)
To search for reviewers you need an email address. Inputting that email address brings up the reviewer profile (the editor can also register a new profile if that reviewer is not already in the system). The reviewer profile gives details like the reviewer's name, affiliation, when they were last invited and by whom/for which journal, whether the reviewer is a guest editor/editorial board member, etc.
SuSy will warn the editor if the invited reviewer shares an email domain with the authors (a little annoying when it flags <EMAIL>), as well as things like whether the reviewer is a volunteer, whether that reviewer is being invited too frequently, and so on. The default is to warn the editor if the most recent invitation was within the last 30 days, although this might not apply if the reviewer is a volunteer with a frequency of 1 review per 15 days. If the most recent invitation was within the last 15 days, then SuSy will refuse to send more invitations unless an editor with advanced permissions overrides the block.
The authors can propose reviewers, in which case they are shown here. The pre-check editor (more precise term used by MDPI is "academic editor") can also propose reviewers, in which case they are shown here. Other reviewers are invited by the MDPI editor assigned to the manuscript.
Finally, the green check mark indicates that this reviewer has agreed to review the paper. As with other EMSes, SuSy will display when the reviewer was invited, when the report is due, when the last reminder was sent, etc.
Reviewer/Authors co-authorship: this feature wasn't in Editorial Manager the last time I used it. This lets the editor check if the invited reviewer has co-authored any papers with the authors, and if so what those papers are. It does flag a lot of false positives (multiple people with the same name/initials), which is especially common with Chinese names. If there is a flag then SuSy requires confirmation from the editor before sending the invitation - typically either false positive, or the previous collaboration was more than 3 years ago (3 years is the conflict-of-interest [threshold](https://www.mdpi.com/reviewers#_bookmark9) given on the website).
Overall (and this is a personal opinion) I'd say SuSy does some things better than Editorial Manager, and some things worse - with the most important negative being, since each manuscript has its own huge webpage, SuSy is rather unwieldy when trying to monitor the status of every submission in the system.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/10
| 2,671
| 10,252
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper and part of my thesis, and I need some advice to improve the readability of my manuscript(s).
Working in computer science and machine learning, there is a lot of technical stuff going on: I have to write definitions and set the terminology of my work. So, for instance, I have to explain the reader that a *training set* is a set of example on which my system *learns* to model some phenomenon.
Now, please, focus on the previous paragraph. As you can see, I used the italics to stress the new piece of terminology, namely the expression “training set”, and to emphasize some other words, namely the word “learn”.
So, having the same style for these two things, with a different semantics, sounds a little confusing to me (and to my supervisors). And there is a lot of this stuff in my paper/thesis.
How can I improve readability in this respect?
--
**EDIT**. The focus of my question is not if the word "learn" should be emphasized with respect to what it means or not. It is just an example. Idem for the "training set" with respect to the expected background knowledge of the reader. In abstract terms, my question can be generalized to: how to emphasize both the terminology that I am introducing *and* words that need proper emphasis? A more fitting example could be the following:
We call *training set* the set of examples on which a Neural Network learns to model some phenomenon. (omissis) At each timestep, our network has to decide *if* the symbol will be chosen from the first or the second list. In both cases, it has to decide also *which* symbol will be chosen.<issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps you don't need to italicise the word learn: you could just say "a *training set* is used to train the system to model the particular phenomenon".
This means that the italics are reserved for the words or phrases that you are setting the precise meaning of.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Typographical emphasis is typically used for the following semantically different aspects:
* introducing a new term
* titles of works
* referring to a word/term as such
* species names
* stress
* highlighting an in-paragraph heading
* person names
* phrases from another language in English
* …
As you typically only have limited number of types of typographical emphasis available (boldface, italics, small caps, …), you inevitably have to overload at least one of them in any larger work, usually italics.
However, in most works and cases, it is easy to deduce from context which of the above cases applies.
While this may not appeal to the structure-loving scientist in you, this kind of overloading is a common feature of human communication – and compensated by redundancy.
Consider for example the different meanings of the word *that* in the English language.
That being said, if you really think your texts benefits from a clear distinction, you have to get creative in terms of emphasis.
For example, [some philosophical works use a zoo of quotation marks to distinguish different types of referring to a term](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/a/46965/19174).
However, going by your topic, you almost certainly shouldn’t do something like this as it would only make your work more difficult to read.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I’m with username_1 that *learns* doesn’t need to be italicized. Still, the cleanest solution seems to me to be adding a glossary section somewhere. You should certainly have the space in a thesis. If you can’t do it in a paper, you could still have a paragraph in the introduction along the lines of
>
> In this paper, we use *training set* to refer to \_\_\_ ...
>
>
>
and from that point on, never italicize *training set.* Finally, you could try using quotation mark to define the terms instead of italics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with @Solarmike's [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/101875/958), but on a more general point of view, if this is a concern for you then it may be the case that you over-use italic for emphasis. For instance, I realized in the past that I tended to over-use quotation marks and parentheses: since then I try to avoid them whenever I can, and I think my prose has improved. When you re-read your text, try to go over each instance and see if you can remove it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Expect your reader to have some knowledge. Somebody who reads a new paper about a machine learning topic hopefully knows what a training set is.
Reduce the points that are basic knowledge for the target audience and your problem should solve itself.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: You're italicising *training set* and *learn* (sticking to your original example) for the same reaon -- to draw attention to them. So using the same emphasis for both is fine. If you have a long section on terminology, perhaps much of your introduction chapter is devoted to this, you can try paragraph headings:
>
> **Training set**
>
>
> We call *training set* the set of examples on which a Neural Network *learns* to model some phenomenon. (omissis) At each timestep, our network has to decide *if* the symbol will be chosen from the first or the second list. In both cases, it has to decide also *which* symbol will be chosen.
>
>
> The choice of training set is of particular importance because...
>
>
> **Test data**
>
>
> The test data set is *another* dataset. Can you tell I'm making this up as I go along?
>
>
>
But I suggest doing something slightly different: instead of putting the term you're introducing as a paragraph heading, draw attention to it in a margin note. This acts almost as as index to the terminology section. Here's an example from [Ohanian -- physics](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Physics-2v-1v-H-Ohanian/dp/0393958256/ref=la_B001IQW79W_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1515597264&sr=1-7) (an undergrad textbook I keep on the shelf):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/YgTYg.jpg)
This is all in addition to any glossary, as this terminology section will contain much longer descriptions and will be sorted in a logical rather than alphabetical order
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: First of all, your university or target journal may have a style guide which specifies how they want such things to be typeset. So check whether they do, and if so, follow it.
My personal preference is to use boldface for terms which are being defined, and italics for general emphasis. This is because it is pretty common for a reader to need to refer back to a definition, and it is helpful if they can glance at a page and immediately spot the term they are looking for. Boldface is eye-catching and can be immediately picked out from a page or block of text, so it's good for that.
When you just want to emphasize a word, you want it to be noticed by someone who is *already* reading that sentence, but it isn't so important that they be able to glance at the page and jump immediately to that word. In your example, somebody might be skimming the page looking for where you have defined **training set**, but nobody is going to be skimming for the word "learn" which just happens to be *important* in that sentence. So italics is fine in that case.
As illustration, you might look at the following two paragraphs. In which one is it easier to spot the specific word?
>
> Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Curabitur in luctus dolor. Pellentesque orci ante, pulvinar ac leo ut, venenatis commodo tortor. Proin faucibus tincidunt nisl, quis semper tellus ullamcorper ac. Mauris quis tellus eleifend, condimentum diam id, posuere eros. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et **malesuada** fames ac turpis egestas. Donec bibendum auctor tristique. Donec justo odio, commodo id elit vitae, efficitur dictum massa. Phasellus placerat convallis ipsum et fermentum. Pellentesque urna mi, malesuada sagittis vehicula sit amet, auctor sed leo.
>
>
> Phasellus ante quam, convallis eget vestibulum id, rutrum sit amet libero. Duis ultricies ornare semper. Nunc cursus aliquam ultricies. Morbi tellus neque, euismod sit amet tincidunt eu, volutpat interdum massa. Nunc eu elementum massa, sit amet vestibulum metus. Quisque hendrerit nunc feugiat ligula elementum, in mollis felis aliquam. Praesent hendrerit dolor id nulla lobortis fringilla. Aenean non dictum risus, id molestie lectus. Donec id *ullamcorper* nunc. Proin eu risus vitae leo hendrerit luctus. In scelerisque, purus scelerisque convallis imperdiet, leo nibh tempor ante, at ultrices ligula diam a dui. Ut eu risus id justo vulputate sagittis eget et tellus
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Improve readability by not over-using italics for emphasis.
Text gets *difficult* and very *annoying* to read *if* the author keeps *emphasizing* words that they feel to be *important*. Especially if their emphasis doesn't quite agree with where you'd put it (you'd probably find it more natural if I'd emphasized "very", rather than "annoying", for example).
If you look at well-written, well-edited text, you'll see that typesetting is almost never used for emphasis. Technical and formal writing isn't intended to mimic the spoken word and it's better to use sentence structure or vocabulary to give the emphasis you need. For instance, you could describe something as "crucial" instead of "*important*" or "*very* important".
In the example you give in the question, you don't need any emphasis: "learns" is a verb and we naturally see verbs as important parts of sentences. If you feel more emphasis is needed, then contrast the learning of the training set with the use of other data: "The *training set* is a set of examples from which the system learns to classify data, as distinct from the whatever-you-call-it data that it will be deployed to classify." (I've kept "training set" italicized, since it's standard in computer science to italicize terms at the point where they're defined.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Other options are bolding, different font, quote marks, a colon, or, if you really want to set it apart, a separate line.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/10
| 934
| 3,939
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently taking an Art History course. Today was the first day of class, and my professor informed us that we are required to bring a monetary contribution for a potluck. I wouldn't be opposed to this. However, I was taken aback when she mentioned that we are not required to participate, but if so we would not be getting points for the event, which will prevent us from getting full point completion in her class. What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: I personally make sure to never require my students to spend money to actually do the course (i.e., if my courses require the students to do something that costs money, I find internal or external sponsors for it rather than having the students pay out of their pocket), but I understand that I am coming from the somewhat privileged position of teaching at a well-funded private research university here. I would guess from your question that this is not the case here.
I think you are not fairly representing what's happening here. The deal quite obviously is not really "exchange money for grade points" (that would indeed be very bad), but "exchange money for participation in a didactic event". This really is not very different than a school forcing students to pay for participating in a school trip.
I don't see how it makes a major difference that participation in the event is graded, but of course practicalities matter here. If the event was very expensive so that some students could not afford it in practice, or if the organizer would turn a significant profit from the event, I would understand why you disagree with this. However, as it sounds, this is literally "chip in a few dollars for food", and in this case I don't really think that there is anything unethical going on.
>
> What should I do?
>
>
>
If you are not opposed to the monetary contribution for the potluck in the first place, I don't see how getting some grade points for it changes anything. So, I suggest you contribute to the potluck :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This does seem "legal". You are not getting grade points for sending in money, but rather for participating in the pot luck. I'd like to think this is similar to a field trip. Although field trips are extremely rare in university, I did go on one in my undergraduate class. It was for credit, but we had to pay about 10$ for the school bus. This sounds like a similar situation. If you aren't opposed to paying the money (like you've stated), then just attend.
I once had a professor who cancelled class so he could attend a protest and strongly encouraged all of us to attend as well. That protest didn't really have to do with the class, either. Now I consider THAT as an issue.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> we would not be getting points for the event, which will prevent us from getting full point completion in her class.
>
>
>
I'm not sure if I'm reading the question right. Are you saying that food for the group meal will be purchased, and everyone is expected to chip in to pay for it? And not chipping in would have a negative effect on one's final grade?
If that interpretation is correct, then I suggest the following. Write an email to the instructor, with a very neutral tone, asking if you understood correctly:
>
> Dear Prof. X,
>
>
> I'm not sure if I understood you right in class yesterday. Are you saying that food for the end-of-semester group meal will be purchased, and everyone is expected to chip in to pay for it? And not chipping in would have a negative effect on one's final grade?
>
>
>
If the answer comes back that yes, you understood correctly, then print out the exchange, make an appointment with the department chair, and show the email exchange to him or her. Ask if that's compatible with department practice.
Of course, it's possible she didn't mean it literally. So give her a chance to clarify.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/10
| 763
| 3,235
|
<issue_start>username_0: Before going to graduate school, I had been under the impression that professors were necessarily extremely intelligent. I had also assumed that professors would tend to be smarter than assistant professors or postdocs.
Now after more than 1 year in my research group, I know that I was very wrong.
My supervisor has no clue to assess student work. They even need help to understand basic calculations, and they cannot help me with questions about papers.
My advisor often fails to understand basic content in my own reports after repeated explanations, becoming angry with me over it.
**Questions:**
1. Is this a common situation for PhD students to find themselves in?
2. What can I do to improve the situation?<issue_comment>username_1: No, it is not common.
However, everyone in academia probably will meet someone like your supervisor along the years. Incompetence and unprofessionalism can be found in every corner of society and academia is not an exception.
If you are able, change to another supervisor as soon as possible.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it is common in my environment. The rule. (I'm not speaking about anyone else's environment.) Only very good advisors can overview the work of many students, assess their work, and help them. The majority of advisors have huge groups and have time at most for the formal administration of the group: getting money, distributing the tasks, collecting the results. If they didn't have huge groups, they'd suffer repercussions from the chair, who says, in short, that the department badly needs good people to cope with thousands of students pouring in. So, most professors in charge have no time for science, only time for getting money for supporting their people.
IMHO, there are two things you can do:
* Change the group and/or
* Get a supervisor within your group who has a clue.
* Read a lot yourself, travel to conferences, and speak to other people to get their opinion, i.e., use the *community* ressources.
Beware: each of the above items is easier said than done, and I know this. How to actually carry it out would be a different question, which, IMHO, is outside the scope of the OP.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As far as (1) goes, the answer to this is country specific and probably institution specific.
As for (2), you need a change and should check Hexai's answer for things to do. I would propose another one: Completely switching country/institution. Surprisingly enough it might be easier to go to a new institution /country, even one of higher ranking, than to switch between groups/advisors.
Also in my experience, if you end up in one of the top places, especially in the States, you might still find people that are not interested, but rarely will you find clueless people.
One last warning: sometimes people can be much more intelligent than you give them credit for, especially when you are young. There might be another level you have no visibility to. As climbing to your level made you realize professors are not gods, maybe the next level will make you understand they are not as clueless as you thought them to be either... Make sure you are not miss-understanding...
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/10
| 1,388
| 5,282
|
<issue_start>username_0: Please take time to read this, I appreciate any advice from any Ph.D. student or mentor, an advice from a neuroscience or health science field person is more useful to me.
I am an international student from India, pursuing my master's degree in Pharmacology at a US university (a private university not classified as a research university).
Hopefully, I will graduate in May 2018. I have a serious and never-ending interest in doing research in the neuroscience field. I planned to do Ph.D. in neuroscience and took care of all requirements.
My undergrad was in Pharmaceutical Sciences from India, I made an evaluation of my undergrad transcripts and converted into US GPA score by WES, and it is 3.23/4.0.
My maser's GPA as of now (3 semesters) is 3.64/4.0.
GRE: 151 Verbal, 153 Quant, 3.0 Analytical writing
TOEFL: Reading - 27, Listening -29, speaking -20, writing -28 (Total - 104)
I don't have any published research papers yet.
I wrote a cohesive Statement of purpose explaining my research experience in my master's program and also my future research interests and mentioned the names of potential advisors that I searched in the respective university faculty websites.
Sent all documents before deadlines.
I applied to a total of 10 Universities, they are:
Univ of Alabama Birmingham - rejected
Univ of Texas Austin - awaiting decision
Rockefeller University -awaiting decision
Univ of Illinois Urbana Champaign - rejected
Univ of Iowa - Awaiting decision
Univ of Kansas - selected for an interview, but got rejected few days after the interview
Univ of Michigan - Awaiting decision
Icahn School of medicine - rejected
Univ of North Carolina - Awaiting decision
Yale University - rejected
So, I got rejected from 5 universities, out of which one university interviewed me but rejected later. Now, I am waiting for the decision from 5 more. I feel that my confidence levels are dropping already.
I am not worried about falling, I have failed many times at many things, and I am sure that I will apply next year or in two years to the same program.
But one thing I noticed was, many of the Universities that rejected me replied: "because of so many extraordinary applications, we could not give admission to an excellent application like your's".
I don't know whether this reply from them is generalized one or specific to me. But I don't know how to be the extraordinary applicant. One bad thing in my application that I am aware of is my GRE. If there are any experienced Ph.D. students here, please suggest me what to do.
Thank you<issue_comment>username_1: You're being rejected because you're applying to top universities where the other candidates are better. You're getting beat out on both GPA and GRE.
All but two of the schools you listed are [R1 universities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_research_universities_in_the_United_States#Universities_classified_as_%22R1:_Doctoral_Universities_%E2%80%93_Highest_Research_Activity%22). These are the top universities in the country and will be very hard to get into. You also have a medical school, Icahn, on the list, and that also will be hard to get into, simply because it's a medical school and all of them are always deluged with applicants. You only have one R2 university, Rockefeller, on the list.
For a top school, you pretty much have to expect that successful PhD candidates will likely have a 3.8 or better GPA and GRE scores that place them in the 80th percentile or better. Your 3.2 UG and 3.6 master's GPA is low and your GRE scores are very low.
Consider applying to some more R2 schools or even, possibly, some R3 schools.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To add on to username_1's answer, what to do next (assuming you are rejected everywhere):
1. Send in your applications earlier, to more schools (preferably include more that are not R1 universities).
2. Develop a better understanding of neuroscience as a whole. Write to professors who work on things you're interested in, ask them what they're doing, ask them how to get into the field, ask them for papers to read. This will help you even if you don't eventually apply to the universities they're at.
3. Take more courses at your current institution, with the aim to improve your transcript. Retake the GRE for the same reason.
4. Work with a professor at your current institution on a research project. If you do well you'll not only get a good reference letter, you can quote that in your application.
5. Get some real-life work experience, preferably in neuroscience or a field that provides transferable skills.
Of the five options above, #4 will probably improve your application the most (if you do well). #5 is the most drastic but also the one most likely to change your life. It'll give you fundamentally new experience and might actually cause you to decide that you don't actually want to do PhD study. However, it's hard to convince an employer to hire you if you're only going to stay for a year. If you take this option you might have to delay PhD studies for 2+ years.
Ultimately remember that getting rejected everywhere is *not the end*. You can improve your application and try again next year. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/10
| 652
| 2,808
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in the process of sending the response to reviews to a journal. It looks like it will take some days for the revision.
In the reviews, the associate editor had commented the following
>
> Finally, I would appreciate if you could submit your revised paper by Jan 12, 2018. If you cannot meet this deadline please contact us (<EMAIL>) to request an extension, otherwise your paper may be withdrawn.
>
>
>
I was wondering if it was OK to write to them asking for an extension or should I somehow submit the revision by Jan 12?<issue_comment>username_1: Ask for an extension. This is quite common in case more extensive changes/analyses need to be done.
Submitting a subpar version would waste their and their reviewers’ time, and may even end in a desk rejection for you.
When asking for an extension, shortly explain why you need more time (ideally, related to the reviews you got – show them you are working on the paper), and make a good estimate on when you will be able to resubmit. You don’t want to ask for several extensions during the same round.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You quote the associate editor specifically asking you to request an extension, so it’s a bit weird that you’re not taking them at their word. What I take from the wording is that not submitting by Jan 12 would cause them inconvenience, and you should take that into account in how much effort you make trying to finish it by Jan 12, but they will accommodate those who request an extension. If you don’t keep in touch with them, they won’t know whether you’re still working on it, and they may withdraw your paper if you don’t keep them apprised of its status.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The associate editor specifically said you can request an extension, so absolutely feel free to do so. There is usually no harm with such a request and it will not affect the future decision; the journal wants to publish your paper or they’d have given a reject decision. It’s really easy for the desk editor to extend the deadline – just modify a box in the editorial management system. In fact it’s possible the desk editor will simply grant the request without checking with the editorial board.
For context, journals usually give these deadlines because they want to keep the author thinking about the manuscript, and are hoping for a timely revision. The last line about your paper possibly being withdrawn is because there are authors who, after a revise decision, decide not to revise their paper but do not inform the journal. If you exceed the deadline your submission gets marked as inactive. When the journal decides to do spring cleaning and remove all the inactive submissions, that’s when your submission might be withdrawn.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/11
| 621
| 2,507
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in an office space shared by 3 professors. We have bullpen style desks and around 75% of them are full. The lab is somewhat spacious.
One of the first-year PhD students (not my advisor's student) brings in her friend with her to the lab everyday. They hang out mostly, often taking naps and such. The friend uses the lab microwave and has lunch in the lab everyday. They are generally very quiet and not disruptive. The friend is not a PhD student and as such not a member of the lab.
Would it be rude to ask this person to not come to the lab? I've spoken to the rest of the people in the office and they don't care at all, but it bothers me that they are treating the lab as their living room (given that they are here from 10 AM to 8 PM, most of it involves sleeping or using their mobile phone). What would be the right thing to do here? Do I just ignore them or do I ask the person to leave given that they are not doing, nor will ever do research for any of the 3 professors.
Has anyone faced a similar situation before?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't say anything to them yourself. You don't own the lab. Discuss your concern with your adviser and let it be their problem. If your adviser decides it's okay, try to live with it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I will mention that while username_1's answer is fundamentally correct—this is an issue for your advisor, as well as the other PI's in charge of the office space, not you—there is one issue worth elaborating on.
In particular, it *is* an issue if someone who isn't part of the department is using the department's facilities, because of the liability issue if something were to happen. For those grounds, it would be especially helpful to mention that one of the people coming into the space is not actually authorized to be there at all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: While I am a strong advocate of the relaxed atmosphere the academic environment affords, it is worth considering the outward appearance. While a first-year student might be forgiven for taking a nap in a lab once or twice after hours, I can't think of a good reason this should be accepted during normal hours, let alone *at any time by someone not affiliated with the lab*. This makes your lab appear like hang-out space rather than a place of business, which it really is.
This is your place of work, and you (along with your colleagues) fought for that space. Establish some guidelines and enforce them.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/11
| 1,045
| 4,342
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Context**
About a year ago, I left a research team that I was involved with as a student for approximately 2 years. During this time, I did a variety of unpaid internships and paid scholarships as well as doing a year long research project for my degree with them. Throughout the 2 years, I was working with them towards writing and submitting a paper about the work I was doing.
After I had finished my degree, I asked to stay on as a member of staff. Whilst they were interested, they unfortunately could not offer me a job so I had to look elsewhere as I couldn't simply work for free forever. I soon after received a job at another institute and made plans to leave. Before I left, the paper we were looking to submit was in its final stages of completion. I had written a fully referenced draft, completed all of the figures and done all of the stats on the data. We were planning to submit within weeks of me leaving.
*Note:* I had left on excellent terms with them and they were very happy for me that I had managed to find work.
**Issue**
However, it's now been close to a year and things still have not moved. I've emailed them 4 times in past year (at least 3 months inbetween each email), telling them how things are going in my new lab and to ask if we can have an update about the paper and also asked if there's anything I can do for it such as re-analysing data or re-working any figures. They reply with either "currently a bit bogged down with grants/other papers/etc" or "we're aware of it and we'll get something to you soon".
I've tried not to pester them about it and I'm concerned about crossing a line by contacting them incessantly. I'd like to remain on good terms with them.
***How should I approach this situation?*** Should I let it go and be pleasantly surprised if they contact me? Do I risk annoyance by contacting them further about it? I'm aware that yes I did leave and no it may not be in their highest priority, but it's still a publication for their lab. There is a mutual benefit for us.
I have also considered the fact that perhaps it is not as complete as I had thought and that they need more data. But insofar they haven't communicated anything of the sort to me.
I'd really like to have my work published. Not just for ego reasons, but I will be most likely applying for some pretty competitive PhD scholarships this year so would also like to have at least a first author publication under my belt.<issue_comment>username_1: It's naturally to everyone's benefit to get the paper published. However, it may also be the case that your former PI and co-workers may not have the time and focus to work on it themselves.
Perhaps the best way to get things moving again is to change your question. Instead of asking a variant of
>
> Will the paper be submitted soon?
>
>
>
try asking them what will help them:
>
> I know you're very busy. What can I do to help get the paper submitted?
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It seems unlikely that significant work is going to get done on this paper in the near future. If you have all the necessary files, it might be best for you to request to take care of the submission process yourself.
You'll need to be the driver here, since you have the most interest in getting this paper published. Figure out what venue you would like to submit to, and then say something along the lines of "You're so busy, let me take this off your plate. How about we submit this to X? If you have no objections, I'll get started setting up a submission on their platform." Send them a PDF of the draft, and give them a deadline by which to give you requests for modifications.
Most likely, whatever vague improvements they keep considering will turn out not that critical, but either way this should finally get you some concrete feedback on the draft.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Instead of trying to solve it through email, you could try to arrange a meeting with them (can be via telephone/skype) to discuss how to continue/finish the paper. That way they will have booked half an hour or an hour, and might have more time for you.
In that meeting, make a plan on things that are need to be done, who is going to do what, and by when. Also decide who is going to submit the paper, and where.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/01/11
| 1,648
| 5,849
|
<issue_start>username_0: Assume that <NAME> has published a paper in 2010 where she has developed a model or a theorem or a similar result, let’s say, that it relates to growth.
Now assume that <NAME> is writing another paper in 2015, where she refers to the model/theorem from her paper in 2010.
Is it acceptable for Jane to write something like the following?
>
> Doe’s growth model (2010), implies that ...
>
> Doe’s growth theorem (2010) implies that ...
>
> The Doe growth model (2010) implies ...
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: No, this would be odd and appears presumptuous.
In your own paper you would write something like "Our growth theorem (Doe 2010) implies..." or "Our previous growth theorem (Doe 2010) implies..."
It is up to your peers to refer to it as "Doe's growth theorem".
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In general no, but it could be.
a) If "Doe's growth model" has become standard nomenclature in the field, it would appear odd to keep referring to it as something else. One should at least add a note saying that this model is well known as "The so-called Doe model (referring to people calling it that)".
b) If Doe made her model along with Cane and Dower, and is now writing a paper with two other people, it would be ok to write in third person:
"The growth model introduced by Doe et al. (Doe, 2010)"
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes. It is even mandatory sometimes.
When preparing a paper for double-blind peer-review, references to the authors' prior work must be anonymized,\* hence, it is perfectly reasonable to write "Doe's growth model" and "Doe's growth theorem." Moreover, it is expected that you do so.
\*[MJeffryes](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31487/mjeffryes) better describes the purpose of anonymizing references:
>
> The point isn't to remove the references, but to refer to them in a
> way which doesn't make it blindingly obvious who the author of the
> manuscript under review is. If you say 'Our growth model' then it is
> clear that the author of the cited paper is the anonymous author.
>
>
>
---
Double-blind review isn't used in all fields. E.g., mathematics, as noted by
[the L](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9656/the-l).
---
[Programmer2134](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/61602/programmer2134) rightly notes that
>
> you can always send "doe's growth model" to the peer reviewers, and then change it before publication to "my earlier model (2010)"
>
>
>
and [lighthouse keeper](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48413/lighthouse-keeper) rightly adds
>
> [the above answer doesn't consider] the more involved question of how the final version should look like
>
>
>
In my experience, many anonymized references remain anonymized. I'd speculate that this is possibly because it requires additional time to change them. (Yes, it can be easily achieved with `\ifanon Our \else Doe's \fi growth theorem (Doe 2010) ...`, but that requires additional time too.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This is, unfortunately, a case where English grammar can be tricky and exactly how you phrase things is going to matter.
It is often seen a presumptuous to name something after yourself: "Newton's Laws" and "Hawking radiation" and "Rayleigh scattering" are retrospective judgements of significance by the community. Claiming a similar name is an assertion in advance that your work will be at a similar level of significance.
The problem, then, is that if you say "Doe's growth model", it is ambiguous whether that is intended to be a construction like "Hawking radiation" or whether it just means "the growth model that happens to have been developed by Doe."
This potential problem can be avoided by rephrasing to avoid the parallel construction: "the growth model by Doe et al (2010)", or better yet, "the growth model presented in (Doe, 2010)." The point here is that the significant item under discussion is the growth model, not Doe, and the sentence should be phrased to make that as clear as possible.
Finally, note that these sorts of phrasings can work both for double blind review and for review where the authors' identities are known: even when the identity of the author is known, the important thing should be the relationship between the work, not the fraction of authors that are shared between two papers (unless you are specifically trying to talk about independent co-discovery).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Writing "Doe's growth model" or "Doe's growth theorem" suggests that the community has agreed to name Doe's results this way. When this isn't the case, drop 'growth' and write "Doe's model" or "Doe's theorem".
This solution works when later works are written alone or with co-authors. It also generalises to the case when the original work was co-authored, e.g., "Doe et al.'s model" can be used by Doe et al. (same co-authors), and by Doe and new co-authors.
---
This solution was inspired by a [previous one,](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/101936/22768) which notes writing "Doe's growth model" or "Doe's growth theorem" is "odd and appears presumptuous" and suggests that "[i]t is up to your peers to refer to it as 'Doe's growth theorem'."
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: You can also use "The author's growth theorem" or "The author's growth mode"l if you want to avoid using your name.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: The best researchers I know find another name for the concept. <NAME> often speaks about "assertional logic", while it's "Hoare's logic" since many decades for everyone else, for example. I suggest that you do that same, e.g.,
>
> The Main Growth Model (<NAME>, 2010) implies that self-advertisement need not pay off.
>
>
>
Invent a name. ("Main" above is simply a placeholder.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/11
| 1,115
| 4,529
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wish to provide codes and data to reviewer along with manuscript at the time of submission. I can upload the codes on a public repository, but it will bring it in public domain, I want to provided the codes only when the paper is accepted.
What is the standard practice?
My search directs me towards repositories: [Dryad](http://datadryad.org/), [Figshare](https://figshare.com/) and [Zenodo](http://help.zenodo.org/). Which one of them provides secure code upload OR limited access?<issue_comment>username_1: As others have mentioned, some venues offer an option of submitting additional material.
If not, you have two options.
1. Include your username_3 as a single file into your submission in the PDF/A-3 format. (I do not recommend this option that much, though, since special software is required.)
2. Put your username_3 on a public site as a password-protected archive. Most compressors such as zip and rar allow you to encrypt and compress. Put the archive on a public site but give the password only along with the submission. E.g.
>
> Bibliography
>
>
> [S18] <NAME>., *Example username_3s*, 2018, <http://www.example.com/example.zip>, protected with the password *<PASSWORD>*.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The presented method is a little bit more complex but, in my personal opinion, very close to an optimal solution as it solves additional issues. Since you may have a CS or related background, this may be technically viable for you.
This question has two components:
1. How to permanently publish material
2. How to limit access to this material during review
The first question is especially difficult to solve since the costs, URLs, and availability of services like Dropbox may be subjected to change. Perhaps not this year, but let's say in a few years. However, you want your material to be available permanently but cannot update the URL in the paper.
Limiting access during review is solved by using an encrypted file or by some sort of login/password, before downloading is allowed. If you have several large datasets, the "encrypted file" solution is often not viable, since you do not want to have a link for each (encrypted) dataset in the paper (e.g., you have 10 datasets, each 50MB => 10 links). In this case you also do not want to have a large 500MB file that someone has to download, just to look into a single dataset.
All in all, I was not satified with the available services and solutions since they did not guarantee that the URLs are permanent and the did not have a "login" feature.
I came up with an own solution:
* The URL in the paper points to one of my (personal) URLs. This is also safe in case of changing institutions. However, you can still have your dataset at some other domain, the URL in the paper is just a forwarder/redirect. If the location of the data changes, you can simply update the target of the forwarder/redirect.
* During review, I uploaded the files to a server and enabled a simple login (htaccess-based). The files are all listed in this folder, but to get access to the folder you need the login.
* In the paper, I added the following note:
>
> We provide supplementary material at
> <https://science.[mydomain].de/paperXYZ>
>
>
> The material includes all required scripts for experiments ABC and XYZ.
>
>
> **Restricted access during review:**
>
>
> **Username: review Password: [<PASSWORD>]**
>
>
>
I explicitily state that the restricted access only applies to review, so we are willing to publish this data together with the paper.
While this comes with some effort, this method worked very well during review and also afterwards as the paper is publicly available, now.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: **Edit:** This gives away the reviewer's identity. (Not Suitable)
I am not sure if this is the standard practice but it might be of interest to you:
Assuming you have a CS (or related) background and also that your reviewer also would be in a CS related field:
[GitHub](http://github.com) does provide the ability to have private repositories. You can also add collaborators, to whom you want to grant access to, via their GitHub username or email. (Also, GitHub also provides free private repositories for as long as you are a student. See [GitHub Student Pack](https://education.github.com/pack))
If you are not a student, you can use [BitBucket](https://bitbucket.org/), another version control system that offers free private repositories.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/11
| 471
| 1,866
|
<issue_start>username_0: As far as I understand, it is commonplace for editors to invite M reviewers when N < M would suffice. After N reports arrive, they take a decision and inform the authors. What happens to the N+1st, N+2nd, ... referee reports that arrive after the decision has been taken?
As a referee, I have only been told “thanks, we won’t need your report anymore” a very small number of times, and as an author I’ve never been told “look, there’s one more report for you”. So I wonder what happens in practice.
EDIT: I have in mind journals, not conferences. A conference is more driven by deadlines, probably.<issue_comment>username_1: From my experience, things happen differently. Comments do highlight it correctly.
Initially, N reviews are solicited by the editor. If they disagree (or, I have to assume, some reviewers miss their deadlines), more reviews are solicited. I've been reviewer #5 few times.
Typical values for N are:
* 2, with third as a tie-break – a typical grant application review scheme;
* 3, with 4 or even 5 as a tie-break - seen more often with journal papers.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, typically the editor doesn't make a decision immediately after N reviews arrive. Instead (s)he waits for all the reviewers who've agreed to review to complete. This way the only chance of having surplus referee reports is if a reviewer agrees, does not submit by the review due date, editor makes a decision, and *then* the reviewer submits. This is rare, and gets even rarer the longer the editor waits after the due date.
If it does happen, and the original decision was 'revise', we write to the authors with "here's another review, please take that into account in your revision". If the original decision was 'accept' or 'reject', then the review is effectively wasted.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/01/11
| 2,399
| 9,267
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been a Computer Sciences student for 4 years now, give or take, and my experience with emailing teachers/professors (teachers from now on) has been either of two cases:
* they reply to my entire email
* they read the last sentence or paragraph and reply to that.
Generally, if a teacher fits in one of those categories, they always respond like that.
However, for me it's quite frustrating to receive an email back (within 5 minutes, an hour, a day) with a reply, to only one point, and then having to mail back with my other questions, removing one question at a time.
To note: my e-mails are always very respectful, neatly written, and without spelling or other mistakes.
What can I do to get a higher percentage-of-questions-answered-per-email response?<issue_comment>username_1: Professors are busy and receive a lot of mail (> 50 per day, not counting mass-mailings). It's rational for them to skim past the salutations and introductory parts until the end, where you usually find "the gist". Obviously, this filter is fast but imperfect.
To ensure that you get a response to all of your questions, write very **short** and very neat emails. Also make it as clear as the day what you want the respondent to **do**. Finally, don't bother asking questions to which you can simply look up the answer:
>
> Dear Professor Foo,
>
>
> this is about our discussion after the last seminar on FooBar.
>
>
> 1. Should I hand in my essay before or after the last session? I couldn't find this on the syllabus.
> 2. I was also wondering if you could recommend a textbook on BarBaz.
>
>
> Kind regards
>
>
> Foo Baz
>
>
>
There really isn't more you can do. If you still get partial responses, write another mail about only the remaining items (as you do).
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I've encountered this issue both in and outside of academia. I have found success in only asking one question per email/text/post/IM. This ensures that answers are not diluted, and no questions are missed.
I will usually not send further questions until the previous one has already been responded to. This keeps me from being "spammy", and also helps in case one answer changes the nature of my follow-up questions. It also keeps my questions "modular", in case I want to rotate my questions between profs, TAs, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. Keep it short. Bear in mind that professors have lives too and verbosity costs them time. (Moreover, it's hard to handle long emails on mobile devices, and yes, professors use those too!)
2. In the *first* line of the email, state what you need and when. For example, "Hi Professor, I have three questions on the assignment you set for ECON302. Would you mind answering by Wed, April 4 so I have time to complete the assignment? The questions are below. Thanks."
(Regarding #1, as a very long time email user I've noticed a cultural change in what an email represents. Used to be like a memo or letter. Now, it's more like a text message. I'm sure the rise of mobile devices has something to do with it.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This is a very common form of miscommunication. Simply reiterate your initial questions, eventually with a better emphasis of what is being asked.
Also, it is possible that your teacher has decided to ignore your question, simply because they don't fall into the category of the questions meant to increase your understanding of the material. Such questions are:
* Is there any problem if I won't submit my homework until 10 AM?
(I was very tempted to reply that if no homework is submitted by 10 AM, Planet Earth will cease its axial rotation, but luckily for us, the Sun is already on the sky at 10 AM).
* What shall I do to increase my grade?
* Can I get a better grade?
* Can I get a better grade, please?
* What grade I would get if I would spend one hour more each week on your topic?
* How much an absence is going to penalize my grade?
* If I don't make my homework today, and I couldn't handle the difficult homework 4 weeks ago, can I still get a full 4?
* I need a 4 for this class. (I was tempted to answer: and I need a program to perform sub-second 265 bit prime factorization, will give you a 4 if you procure me such a program).
Therefore, odds are that if the question is either administrative (and covered by the Syllabus) or grade related, it gets ignored.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I've been guilty of this kind of thing.
The emails I receive can be roughly taxonomized into two categories:
A. Those I can quickly answer while waiting in line at Starbucks, sitting on the bus, waiting for a late thesis proposal to start, etc. These emails usually get a very prompt answer from me.
B. Those that will require me to sit down and dedicate large amounts of time to a reply. These go into a priority queue and I have the best of intentions to try to answer them quickly, as soon as I first answer emails from the funding agencies and school administration; finish that grant proposal or paper due next week; finish that late paper review the editor has been harassing me about; write that recommendation letter for that other student; answer my colleague's email about a discrepancy they've found in one of my old papers; prepare the lecture for username_2orrow class, .........
So, I'm standing in line at Starbucks, and get an email from you with a list of questions:
>
> 1. When is Assignment 3 due?
> 2. I'm having trouble on problem 6. Here are 3 pages of poorly-written work. Can you help me find the problem?
> 3. Are we allowed to work in teams on problem 7?
>
>
>
Now, I *could* treat the whole email as a Category B, and get back to you with complete answers to all three questions in a few hours, days, weeks, ...
Or I'll fire off a Category A email answering only parts 1 and 3, under the assumption that you'll ask me again about part 2 if it's important to you, or with the intention (perhaps misguided) of remembering to answer the last part sometime later.
What's the fix?
1. Try to send emails containing only *one* question per email;
2. If you must include multiple questions, make sure they're all Category A questions;
3. If you get back a reply with only a partial answer, email about the missing parts again.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: Do one of the following:
* Send one email per question or request (often impracticable since it feels like nagging to get 5 consecutive emails from the same person, and related to boot).
* Try coming to office hours or even scheduling phone calls if that's an option.
* Start your email by an "executive summary" of sorts, e.g. "I'd like to ask two questions and make a request", then explain whatever you need.
* End your email by saying you would be glad if they could answer your N questions or respond to points 1 through 3 above or something to that effect, so that if they just read the end of the email they'll have to go read more.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Don't forget to observe whatever guidance your instructor has provided about communication. Personally I don't like responding to individual emails from students about things all students would benefit from knowing, and I ask students to ask questions on our online forum except for personal issues. Still, I get many broad emails filling up my inbox, so they get a lower priority.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: **TL;DL:** Be very concise. Add a TL;DR sentence in the beginning of the email.
---
>
> they read the last sentence or ***paragraph*** and reply to that.
>
>
>
There's your problem. As others have mentioned academics are incredibly busy and receive ~100 emails per day. Most of them won't have the time to read *paragraphs* of text.
How to solve this:
1. Learn to be very concise. Most emails can be shortened to less than a paragraph. It's understandle if you cannnot do this easily right now but you can improve.
2. Add a [TL;DR](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Too_long;_didn%27t_read) part, just how I added in this answer, especially if your think that it's important to explain a lot of details. This is what I do with my supervisor and he appreciates it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> What can I do to get a higher percentage-of-questions-answered-per-email response?
>
>
>
Your post here is a good example of what you are doing wrong: it is too verbose and contains a lot of information that is not necessary for answering the question. Here is how short you could make it without sacrificing anything important:
>
> I am a student. When I email professors, often they only reply to what I said in the last sentence or paragraph. My e-mails are always respectful, neatly written, and free of mistakes. What can I do to get a higher percentage-of-questions-answered-per-email response?
>
>
>
This illustrates the principle that **the email should have as high a signal-to-noise ratio as possible**. I think this will go a long way to improving the response rate.
The suggestions made in other answers to number your questions, and to limit the number of questions to the absolute minimum (ideally, one per email) are also excellent.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/01/11
| 3,021
| 12,810
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will give some background. I am from a third world country, and I am doing my math PhD in Europe. During high school and university years I participated in many maths competitions, and even got to the pre-national team. (I mention this just to show how interested I have been over the years with the topic.)
Here is my problem: my education is not the best. I would say it is mediocre at best. By education I mean the whole system of the country. I pretty much had to learn everything on my own during those years, starting from Analysis. So, even though I took courses, they were meaningless, because the level was very low and in many cases the professors were not experts in the field. On top of that, the interaction with other students was almost null, I was very ahead of all of them.
Despite that, as I said, I studied very hard to get to where I am now. However, I have to admit that due to this personal training, there are many topics that should be basic with which I don't feel comfortable about: ODEs, PDEs, Numerical Linear Algebra, etc. This is due to time constraints because I feel capable of learn anything.
To summarize so far: I have been a lonely man in a cave with a book for the last 7 years. That being said, I managed to get some decent knowledge in the area I am currently working in.
Fast forward to the PhD program. As usual in Europe, there are no courses involved: only research. And there is were my conflict lies: I am very unsure of myself because I think that everyone has a better education than me and hence they are better prepared. Another issue is that the institute were I am is very small and hence there is no ‘big purpose’: no one seems to care about you. Also, the institute is not well known, so that I am also afraid that the ‘brand’ issue will affect me later.
I feel like I don't belong there, and that I could do much better if I go to another Program that starts the courses from the beginning. However, the way I am doing it right now has got me very demotivated and it is starting to affect my research: I have been here for a year already and so far I am only at the middle stage of a first paper. The paper is not that strong, because after I got the results I found that someone has done it before (I lost months on this).
I guess that what troubles me most is the fact that, due to lack of data, I can not compare myself (main source of motivation, in a healthy sense of course) with the rest of my peers and that is the main reason for my insecurities. The comparison is in the sense of me being sure that I am roughly at the same level of my colleagues. I know no other way to do this other than taking the same courses and tests. This comes naturally with a program in which one take courses on the first year but, as explained earlier, I didn't have this interaction with really good students. Due to this, I am thinking of quitting and starting all over again somewhere else. Also, I don't think this is a case of the Impostor Syndrome: I am sure that with proper training I could get far, I just haven't had the opportunity to take a bunch of graduate courses.
Should I proceed?<issue_comment>username_1: How did you manage to get into a Phd-position if you think that you have a lower education. In most departments that I know it is really hard to become a phd-student. Do you think that you get there because of a rate?
Another point is that on one hand you think *"my education is not the best"* and on the other hand you think that *"Also, the institute is not well known, so that I am also afraid that the ‘brand ’ issue will affect me later"*. Why do you think that a well known and popular institute should accept you, if you think that your knowledge isn't even good enough for the small unknown one?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the European programs I have been involved in, there is no (or a very minimal) fixed curriculum students need to go through. However, students do follow specific courses to learn specific techniques. Typically/ideally the student discusses with her/his advisor what is needed for the project, what is needed for her/his future career, and where the gaps in her/his knowledge is, and how to fill those gaps. This is the kind of discussion you need to have with your advisor.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The university's name is not nearly important as your contributions. If you believe you have the talent required for a top university, but you say you don't have the education, then get the education.
Doing research requires you to be able to self-educate and then use that knowledge to push the boundaries and discover new solutions -- whether it is by inventing the method yourself or applying other people's methods to these problems.
This whole case sounds like you need to step back and evaluate yourself honestly. Then, buckle down and learn the things you think you need to know. You've already done the hard part of getting accepted, now do the harder part of making a plan and sticking to it. Talk to your adviser, figure out what you need to know, make a plan to learn it, and make sure you keep your eye on your research goals while doing so.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I suspect your intuition is correct. I'd either take the extra time during summer to get to the level of expertise of your peers, or drop out of a PhD program, and re-enter as an undergraduate at the same school to arrive at the level of beginning PhD students.
That's perhaps a bit extreme, and you should consider a serious discussion with your advisor about something that approximates this trajectory.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Changing topic, advisor, or university came to the mind of every PhD student facing serious problems. Still, most students must tackle their problem and get their research done. After that, you can wrap up and write the thesis and you are done.
Having a PhD without major detours is a good sign. You can move around to prestigious names during your post-doc time. Maybe you can stay a couple of week within your PhD program at another institute.
In general, you don't need to know everything, just your topic. You can still learn about ODEs and numerical methods once you need them. If you are good in your topic and have above-average contributions, everything will be fine.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Anyone who answer this question might be expressing his/her opinion that must be biased towards his/her own experiences. Mine, for example: I was starting a cientific initiation in algebra and automata to achieve a master's degree in computer science.
I was working at a federal university as a technician, not teacher, and my "dream" at the time was to work as teacher and do R&D. But after sometime I knew for sure that it was only to gain a 30% raise in my wage due to degree's incentive given by institution where I worked. I was starting a 4 year (or more) study just for 30% raise? Does it makes sense?
Afterwards I realized that I should be happier working with my REAL dream as a DBA. Then a friend of mine invited me to join he in a company and we opened up a Database Administration startup. It was 2 years ago and I can't say that I would be happier with just a degree more into my resume. My income today is far better than 30% raise and my challenges are new everyday.
So, you must think what makes you happy. Do you think yourself as a researcher or a teacher in the future? The PhD will add something pleasure in your life? Does the area (math) you choosed is really what you like to do?
Work in something you love and you will not work a single day in you life.
Best wishes from a "third world country" too (Brazil).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm not from mathematics, but your progress sounds reasonable to me. Midway to a paper after the first year is pretty good. That you missed closely related work is unfortunate, but not unusual: it's more or less the first time you are doing a real literature search. Ideally, your advisor should have checked that too.
I would caution against thinking that just because classwork is *mandatory* in other places, it will be *good* or *useful*. The classes offered at postgraduate level can vary wildly, and are often a motley collection of the research topics of the professors who get assigned to teach one. In my department, most of the postgraduate courses are too far from my work to be of practical use, and the one class I think I really could benefit from is taught by a professor that everyone has warned me to stay far away from.
The classes don't have to be mandatory for you to attend them. Especially when it is for your own learning, rather than for a grade, it is quite easy to just sit in on classes that you think you could benefit from. At the beginning of the semester, look through the classes offered at your local university and attend the first lecture of any that interest you. If it seems useful, talk to the professor at the end and ask if you can sit in informally. Usually there will be no problem, although if the exercises are only accessible through an online platform requiring students to be registered, like moodle, you may need to ask for access or for the prof to email you the materials separately (or you just find your own, different exercises).
This way, you can find out if extra classes would really be of as much value to you as you think they would be, without going to the drastic step of abandoning your PhD first.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: As someone who studied in a third world country, then did a PhD in US and came back to the country, I have a few comments to this question.
The first is about the quality of education. Funding for science in a country like mine is unpredictable and doesn't have a long term objective or a specific target. The bureaucracy makes you wish you were in a Kafka novel. As a result, the few existing specialists always contemplate leaving. I know I do. A large percentage of faculty and research staff gave up on research and they stay there just to game the system. Their bad attitude infects future generations of students and many of them simply leave the academia utterly disgusted. The same people get really upset if an outsider comes in with a strong research record and tries to make a serious research group. One of my colleagues (who happens to have the strongest research record in my institute) was forced to leave though he has two projects running right now, because he was upsetting the balance of the force.
Second, about getting a proper PhD education in my country. This is not possible. A good student like OP would be isolated. Since many people don't understand the subjects they are teaching, most students are weak and have a hard time self-evaluating. They are also much more insecure than the students in Western countries.
Someone like OP find themselves alone. I know I did, and it still has negative impact on my career. It is very important to break the isolation if you want to get proper education and make a significant scientific contribution. Yet, isolation is very beneficial to the weak professors who don't want to be exposed as frauds by discussing to their peers abroad. There is a ton to discuss about the issue, but I only want to say that my institution and university in my town are completely disconnected from the rest of Europe. We simply don't have PhDs and postdocs coming and going, we have a 10k/year travel budget for a 50 people department for a whole year, no subscription to main journals in our fields of research, and I could go on.
In conclusion, this is not the environment in which a good student becomes a good scientist. I had my own student who was in OP's situation and I advised him to leave and get a PhD at a serious institution where he has constant contact with peers at his level and scientists who do science for pleasure. He could learn a lot of my own trade by staying, and do quite well at my institution, or go abroad and become a real scientist. And guess what, he's abroad now and already has two publications with his new group, while I'm still fighting with a paper from last year by myself.
To list the advantages of going:
* more motivated and diverse peers
* more predictable funding
* more travel opportunities (conferences, summer schools)
* better access to literature, labs
* much more qualified professors
* more likely to get into a good research group
* more and higher quality seminars
* more opportunities at the end of PhD (if you pay attention).
The main disadvantage is that you may lose touch with people at home and you have to re-make your friend network which is crucial for your well being.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/01/11
| 979
| 4,242
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first year PhD student at an American university and since I was not satisfied with my present department, I had applied to a few universities last semester (it was my first semester here). My recommenders were all from my previous university and no one in this university knows I applied. I recently received an interview call from one of the universities I applied to. It is a 2 day program, the first day being the interviews and the second day for the faculty presentations and interaction with current students. Unfortunately, the second day clashes with a major exam for a core PhD course I am taking here.
I asked the official of the interviewing university as to what I should do and she said that I could ask for a make up exam in order to attend the second day as well. My question is, should I? My fear is that the instructor could tell about this to other people in my department (or she may actually be bound to do so by some school law?) and that could seriously jeopardize my situation here. I did like the PI for my first rotation here, and might want to join his lab for my PhD in the event that I am not selected by the interviewing university OR I do not like the interviewing university after visiting it.
I thought that I could go to the instructor of this course and ask her if she discuss a matter with me confidentially (keeping the matter confidential at least till the end of this semester), and then ask her about the make-up exam. Is this a good idea?
Another option is to not tell her anything and miss the 2nd day, since the interviews happen on the first day. That way no one would probably know, although I will miss the crucial part of the faculty interviews and student interaction which is so important for me to make my decision.
Is there something else I should consider that I am missing? Any help could be life-saving!<issue_comment>username_1: You don't have to tell your instructor why you want to reschedule your exam. Just tell her you have a conflict with a personal matter and ask if it is possible to take the exam on a different date.
She might say no, but if she does, then she would probably have said no even if you had told her the real reason. Usually exam makeup policies are either "flexible" or "no makeups except for medical reasons or conflict with another course". Attending an admissions event at another university isn't any more compelling as an excuse than "generic personal business".
If she does say no, then you're going to have to choose between the two. It probably makes the most sense to attend the interview and then come back for your exam, skipping the second day of the event. It's probably not wise to skip the exam - you don't want to get bad grades if you are looking to apply elsewhere.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: At some point you need to dance with the one who brung ya. Meaning, you made a commitment to your current university; your current university made a commitment to you; and another PhD applicant didn't get your slot or your opportunity.
If you were applying to a new university during your first semester at your current university, you didn't give it a chance.
The grass is only greener from afar. If you are not miserable, not being mistreated, not being given fewer opportunities than your peers, you should give it a chance.
You should not ask your professor to keep your secret. It's unprofessional, sneaky, and makes you look like a risky bet - both for the program and your future project/lab.
There is no place/project/lab that is perfect. Your best credential is your integrity and your relationships. Word travels fast, everyone in your field likely knows everyone else in your field, and it's highly likely that during this new interview process you will be asked about your current position and why you want to leave so soon. You will be left with the choice of saying things about your current program and professors that will send up red flags about you and will certainly get back to them, or just saying you are looking for a better project and/or greener pastures. Either way, you look like a risky candidate, and your current university will also consider you a risk.
Upvotes: 3
|