date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2018/03/26
| 1,768
| 7,741
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had recently developed a method and submitted as a manuscript to a journal. Out of four reviewers, three accepted the method and asked for some clarifications about the method:- 2 with major revision and 1 with a minor revision. But the left one,say X, has rejected and just written one line in his/her report i.e. "I feel the approach made in this method is not valid."
Editor's decision: Reject
So I revisited all the approaches, discussed with our group leader and co-authors. Our leader is advising to submit to other journal. But I would like to reply to X and the editor that my approach is quite valid. So how can I do it?
Is their anyone who is the superior to a editor?
Moreover, I am wondering how the editor took a negative decision just based on one reviewer's feeling? I would appreciate both the editor and reviewer, if they could have provided some hints why does the reviewer X feel this is not a valid approach.<issue_comment>username_1: You seem to assume that the editor rejected the article because of that one reviewer. That may be true, but my guess would be that that is not (entirely) the case. Reviewers just see one submission in isolation, the editor sees all the submissions, and only has limited space in her or his journal. So the editor typically cannot accept all articles that the reviewers thought were OK. Making that hard choice is her or his job.
Given that and your description of what happened, it is extremely unlikely that any complaint procedure (if one exists for your journal) will be successful.
Think of your options this way: such a procedure will take time, and during that time your article cannot be submitted somewhere else. So you loose time for a very small chance that it will appear in that journal. Alternatively, you could immediately submit is somewhere else, thus increasing the chance of getting published quicker. I know what I would do.
---
**Edit**: Based on @Kay 's comments it seems clearer where the problem is. Kay seems to assume that the review process is a scientific debate. That premise is incorrect. Academic debates happen at conferences or after an article gets published. The peer review process is a mainly bureaucratic procedure aimed at quality control (with strengths and lots of weaknesses). The review process is not suited for an academic debate for (at least) two reasons: The anonymity makes it hard or impossible to directly respond, so there is no exchange, and the reviewer's main audience is the editor not the authors. The comments you get that help you improve your paper are basically a (very nice) side effect of that bureaucratic process, but the main aim is to help the editor decide whether or not (s)he wants to publish your article.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It simply means they are not interested to publish your manuscript based on the reviewers report, maybe due to the following reasons
1. The journal policy may be like that (not to accept any publication if any of the reports is not favorable).
2. They have no place to publish your manuscript (may be choosing the best manuscripts), otherwise, I feel they would have definitely given you the reason and asked for the revision as reported by the other reviewers.
So don't waste your time waiting to get your manuscript accepted in that journal. Choose any other journal and submit your manuscript as soon as possible to get it published sooner than later.
**Edit:** According to the comments, mourning for manuscript rejection is still going on. Let me tell you that academics is the place where you will get a lot of critics, more rejections, and fewer acceptances, and you need to be ready to face the reality.
Go ahead and submit your manuscript to a better journal than you already submitted (if you are so confident that your method is valid.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It can't hurt to reach out to the editor and ask why this paper specifically was rejected. A senior PI once gave me the advice to always do this if you don't agree with the decision making process. Most of the time they don't really have a good reason for rejecting you, and there's a non-zero chance that you'll be given another shot at submission now that they know you won't blindly accept their decision without explanation. Worst case scenario you are still rejected, and spend the amount of time it takes to write an email.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Yes, there is someone superior to an editor - the editor-in-chief. He's usually the best person to approach. If you don't know who to direct an appeal to, simply reply to the rejection email. You should at least reach the journal's publisher, who will know who to redirect the appeal to.
About how to appeal, some publishers even detail the appeal process on their website. For example, here is [Springler's writeup on it](https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/authorandreviewertutorials/submitting-to-a-journal-and-peer-review/when-to-dispute-a-decision/10285586). The key idea is to explain carefully why the reject review(s) is invalid, and include new information or data that wasn't originally in your paper or cover letter. Do not criticize the reviewers or the editor - criticize only their arguments.
Finally about why editors might make a negative decision based only on one reviewer's report, check out the reverse question on why sometimes papers are accepted [even though the reviews are negative](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32397/why-do-editors-sometimes-accept-a-paper-even-if-a-reviewer-recommends-rejection). The short version is that the peer review process is not a scientific one, and reviewers only make recommendations. It's possible an editor accepts an article which reviewers recommend rejection, just as it's possible the reverse happens.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with username_1 that you should submit somewhere else, but you should certainly not do it immediately. You should first do these major and minor revisions that were asked by the reviewers. First, this will make your paper better. Second, if you again encounter some of the same reviewers at the other journal, this will play in your favour, as they will see that they have not worked in vain.
The positive aspects of being rejected are getting more reviewers and editors to read your paper, and getting more feedback. If you are striving for quality rather than publishing to avoid perishing, you should make the most of that feedback.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: If I were in your situation, there are two rather different things that I'd want. (1) I'd want to get my paper published. (2) I'd want to know why one reviewer thought my method isn't valid. Is there really something wrong with the method? If so, what? Or did the reviewer just not understand the method? In that case, might adding a clarifying sentence or two help future readers (and reviewers) avoid that mistake?
For (1), I think the optimal strategy is, as others have suggested, to submit the paper to a different journal. In my experience, editors are very reluctant to reverse a negative decision, even if the reason for the decision was definitely wrong (as happened to me once).
For (2), I think it's perfectly reasonable to write to the editor asking for more information about what the reviewer thinks is wrong with your method. If you've submitted the paper to another journal (or if you firmly intend to do so), then say so in your message to the editor. That way, it's clear that you're genuinely just asking for information (information that I'd say you're entitled to), not arguing about the decision or trying to get it reversed.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/03/26
| 2,704
| 11,166
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in a quite competitive sub-field of computer science. In computer science, we have the publication culture where people publish mostly in the proceedings of different conferences. As in other sub-fields, we have several conferences that are super selective and thus highly prestigious, and a few others that are OK but not so valuable. I am a mid-late PhD student, and I have an extremely poor record of getting into those top-tier venues. I've had at least five rejections in the last years. All my papers are published elsewhere and I am personally OK with that, I still believe that my work has value: it was cited, I got personal praises for the content and quality of my work. The problem is that the attitude of my adviser and some other people in the field is that only the papers from the prestigious venues count, and everything else is "meh" no matter what the actual content of the paper is. Moreover, it seems that one has no future in academia without those publications. This situation makes me quite depressed at times: it devalues all the hard work I have done in last six years of my life and makes me feel like I am wasting my time and should drop out. So questions:
1) Does my lack of ability to deliver those high profile publications at this stage really mean that my academic future is bleak?
2) If I decide to stay in (at least to finish the PhD), how can I deal with being my work massively devalued just to keep myself sane?
P.S. We even have a ranking based on those publications: <http://csrankings.org/><issue_comment>username_1: >
> 1) Does my lack of ability to deliver those high profile publications
> really mean that my academic future is bleak?
>
>
>
In all honesty, within Computer Science it is quite important to have some top-level publications (caveat: I am/was also in a sub-discipline of Comp. Sci. and so I cannot speak for your specific area). Some people advise only going for top-level conferences, and this is why I instead question your premise.
Are you really unable to deliver high profile publications? I think, given the lottery of the reviewers we all get, combined with the quality of your publications in general, that is not likely. Are you resubmitting your papers to high-level venues, or do you soon after move it down a tier? Many people submit and resubmit until the stars align or the reviewers capitulate.
I think it's less likely that you're incapable and more likely bad luck (but there are also other factors orthogonal to the research quality, such as how you sell your work).
>
> 2) If I decide to stay in (at least to finish the PhD), how can I deal
> with being my work massively devalued just to keep myself sane?
>
>
>
Focus on the quality of research and your citations. If these are high-quality publications, just think about the future, as you stay within academia they'll be cited more and more. Particularly as you start getting those more-visible publications and your profile improves.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First, **congratulations**! You've published papers, been cited, and gotten praise from colleagues! You've shown that you can publish, and I don't think your adviser and others would be pushing you if they thought you didn't have a shot at the top conferences and journals.
* Are any of the people who have cited or praised you in a position that you could collaborate with them and/or pursue a postdoc? They have indicated that they know and value the quality of your work, and they might be able to help you raise your profile. That would be a promising path forward.
Academia is full of criticism and critics. It is easiest to give broad criticism, and it takes a lot of interpretation to make that constructive and to separate critical feedback on your work from your self worth.
* One way to deal with the devaluation might be to try it your adviser's way. That is, since you know you can get your ideas published *somewhere*, see what it takes to aim at a higher publication. With your next research idea, plan to spend much more time on revision. Ask your adviser and anyone else who will comment what it would take to hone that into a top publication. Does it need a broader scope? Do you need to deal with more subcases? Is the idea itself too peripheral or incremental? Do you need to explicitly link it to more pressing issues in the field?
* CS tends to have multiple-author papers. Can you collaborate on a paper that your adviser thinks has promise for getting into a top journal? (Either one that your adviser spearheads or one with a postdoc or fellow student?) You might learn more about the editing process they use, and the successful publication might help raise your profile.
* Study how people present ideas in top proceedings and journals. You might not love their style--they may be more limited in length than in less selective venues, perhaps requiring them to be more opaque and more formulaic in order to pack in more results. But you, too, can write in that style if that's what it takes. What else do you see about the abstracts and papers that you can emulate?
* Another way to survive is to think carefully about what you are proud of in your own work and what you value in others' work. This might give you a sense of who you want your closest colleagues and mentors to be.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: First, I must commend you for bravely writing about your experiences and being so forthcoming about your, and others' ("environment"), perception of your standing in the field; especially as a woman, which I think cannot be discounted in this field (even though I am sure you would not want me to acknowledge your gender in this context, and for that I apologise).
Additionally, like others, I first must congratulate you on being able to publish in the area and you should take some solace in that. Your supervisor, and others', attitude towards non-prestigious publications is nothing new, but that hardly excuses it.
In order to better tailor our answer(s) to your needs, I think you should mention two things:
1. As a mid-late student, I assume you are not just "PhD student", but a "PhD Candidate", correct?
At this point in your PhD, you should be a candidate. Most supervisors I've known expect their students to be ready for candidacy within about 3 years of starting. If you are a candidate, I would not so-easily consider quitting.
2. What do you seek to get out of your PhD? "A job"? Tenure? Employment involving the area you're currently doing research?
If I was to use your assessment as the ground truth, I do not know of tenure is legitimately in the cards (who am I to say this, though?). It is possible, but it may take a lot of sycophancy that you may not find ideal. I think completing your PhD (if you're a candidate) would greatly improve your opportunities to do research in this area, and may even help with getting "a job" in said-area.
If you enjoy the research, maybe you could find a way to be a research assistant without feeling the pressure that is associated with completing your PhD? Surely there are positions available either in industry/academia that can fulfill this desire?
* I know this is going to come off as cliché but "Forget what others think of your work". This is one thing I must give my supervisor a great deal of credit for. He cared about publications and their quality, rather than their venue (he always hoped our work could get in top venues, but always prepared the student to be rejected ["that's the way it goes"]). I feel like that is the same advice I should pass on to you, and to help reinforce it I wanted to share my own story:
In my area (also a subdiscipline of Computing Science), conferences are the predominant medium. However, I found much of my work was actually more journal-oriented. Thus, I naturally diverged from the "herd" even though I was fortunate to be at the opposite-end of the spectrum (if we are being blunt with self/environmental assessments of the student).
Humorously enough, much of my Master's Thesis (I wasn't allowed to "upgrade" to a PhD, even though my work had more than enough meat on the bone. Go figure!) was published in a venue that later-came-to-be-known as "predatory" (Frontiers). I had two publications on the eve of my convocation (both Frontiers). However, anyone who looks at the work-in-question will see the handling editor is an extremely reputable individual in the area, which was a saving grace. This is one way I wanted to demonstrate to you that the venue is not as-important as those who shepherd the work from submission to acceptance.
Indeed, I ended up getting another publication from work undertaken during my masters, in a top tier (applied) statistics journal without any previous work in the area. It turns out the editor did some behind-the-scenes "who is this person?" before deciding to send the work out for review, and when they made that decision it was made clear to me they will publish it if I meet the expectations. It took two reject-with-resubmissions, but it all worked out. So do not discount the words of praise with respect to the quality of your work. Sometimes they do (and in my case: did) help.
I hope this demonstrates that, when it comes to legitimate assessments from a reputable individual in the area, quality will always be the number one ingredient. I had no "prestigious" publications under my belt until they gave me my first (and only [hehe ;)] one.
I think your decision to remain/quit should not focus on "coping" with the denigration of your contributions, as I've unfortunately found this attitude to pervade many "intellectual" areas. Quitting does not seem to be a reasonable option given that you're almost (2/3 in the worst case) done your PhD.
What I think your decision should be based on is: your path to graduation (6 years is what my supervisor TYPICALLY expected, though he himself took 9! [caveat: he is a Stanford PhD, Caltech BSc, and this was 30 years ago. it's a challenging area!]), your anticipated graduation date (have you spoken with your supervisor?), your desired role in the workforce with this education, and whether you enjoy your work in the absence of the prestigious publications.
From a personal perspective, I derive great pleasure from my contributions to the subdiscipline (Frontiers included) because it gave me a sense of belonging.
Some people can "save the field", but those people would probably say that the field saved their life. I know that being able to produce good research and being acknowledged for it (no matter what tier of publication venue), saved my life.
I would hope others in the discipline have a similar feeling. I know my inspirations in the field (two of whom passed far-before their time) felt the same way, and I guess it infected me. I think this should be the crucial ingredient in determining whether you finish your PhD.
Again I commend you for sharing your experience; it is not too different from others', and I hope the ensuing discussion will be helpful to all who come across your question.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/03/26
| 1,021
| 4,441
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a single sentence in a homework for a historical overview I mention that:
>
> Video games [in academia] became relevant only after the new milennium. Before that, topics concerning video games mentioned them mostly as an application of computer graphics, but did not as a major part of research, maybe with a few minor exceptions.
>
>
>
I don’t want to linger on this topic at all but I am making myself crazy about how I can prove the correctness of the broad scope of that assumption without performing a whole study on when what paper handled what topic in what timeframe. How do I do that?<issue_comment>username_1: Ah, finding citations to back up generalizations. I know that annoyance, and I'm glad you're alert to it. When I'm editing my writing and find something like this, here's my thought process:
1. Do I **really** need to establish this time frame in the first place? If I can delete this part without negatively affecting my argument, all the better.
2. What would a really picky person respond and how do I deal with that? ("Actually, video games have been *relevant* since Pong!" "OK, I should narrow my claim substantially...")
3. Who would have written about this authoritatively in a way I can reference or quote? (For instance, look for a review article on video games in academia: someone reviewing the field systematically or a long-term contributor to the field could say the same thing with more gravitas.)
4. Is there systematic evidence I could use, such as the founding dates of academic journals that are specifically about video games? (Perhaps the first issue editor's note would say something relevant.)
5. What examples am I thinking of? How can I reference them without claiming to be comprehensive? E.g. "Video games were used in academic studies on computer graphics (see Mario 1987 and Luigi 1993), but it was a major breakthrough when articles began dealing with video games as an art form (e.g. SuperMeatBoy 2013)."
---
More generally, timeline statements should usually be deleted out in the editing process.
It bugs me when my students make historical-ish claims without having a true historical perspective. ("Nowadays, computers are more and more important!") These usually happen in introductions, where people are getting warmed up writing about the topic.
"History" is rarely an interesting hook for a paper introduction, unless the whole thing is a nuanced historical analysis or there are interesting anecdotes that highlight a contrast. ("When <NAME> began working with computers, it was standard practice to X (Knuth p. XYZ). Even though today computer scientists often do Y, implementing X in an object-oriented programming language can help us understand [topic].")
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You could consider softening the assertion to something like the following.
>
> Literature searches indicate that published academic research in video games, excluding applications to computer graphics, is confined mainly to the new millennium.
>
>
>
This replaces your assertion about actual academic research with an assertion about what literature searches reveal. If your field of study allows some informality in writing, then you could further soften the assertion to something like “Our literature searches . . .”, and now the claim is made only for literature searches that YOU have conducted.
I recommend omitting the filler phrases “but did not as a major part of research” and “maybe with a few minor exceptions”. Your previous remarks, and certainly my use of “confined mainly”, does not suggest the absence of minor exceptions. Besides, depending on what “minor exceptions” means, this could be said about pretty much anything, and thus these phrases add essentially nothing but extra words.
If you have access to [ProQuest](http://www.proquest.com/products-services/pqdtglobal.html), which is likely if you have access to a U.S. university, then you can conduct full-text and title searches for “video games” (for title searches, use “TI(put search words here)”). Not all results of such a search will be available to you, but from among the theses that are available to you, there might be some which give historical overviews and/or literature searches that could be helpful, not only with relevant literature and research results but also with examples of the kinds of sentences you’re trying to write.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/27
| 684
| 3,085
|
<issue_start>username_0: I currently have both my bachelor's and master's degree, and have accepted admission into a doctoral program starting this September.
Most engineering doctoral programs allow you to get a master's *while* in the doctoral program. In my case, it only requires taking one extra class and writing a master's thesis.
What are the pros and cons of getting a second master's degree? Would it look silly on a CV to have a master's from two different institutions? If I do not complete my doctoral program, do two master's in the same discipline help with job applications at all?<issue_comment>username_1: To answer the first question asked: I can't think of a single pro to having two master's degrees in the same discipline. Even if the prestige of your second school is far greater than the first, this would be strange and I would imagine it would lead anyone reading your CV to wonder exactly what it was that you were doing with your time. Note: I think it would be generally considered unethical to leave one of your master's degrees off of an academic CV. Leaving it off of a resume of some other kind might be a bit different.
A con to getting the second master's is that, as you say, you would have to write a master's thesis. Presumably you have already done this (or something similar), so doing another one could be viewed as a waste of your time.
You may likely have to enter a complete list of your degrees on various applications in your life. The only reasonable [*citation needed* :)] interpretation of having two identical master's degrees from different schools is that you failed to finish a PhD at the second school (because the second institution would not have admitted you into a terminal master's program for a master's degree that you already had). Not finishing a PhD is not a particularly negative thing in and of itself, but you will probably be asked to talk about why you did not finish it.
On another note, your second university may not allow you to get a second master's in the same field. You do have to fill out paperwork for these things, and the paperwork may very well ask you to list your current degrees. It's possible your application for your second master's would be denied if they realize you already have the same degree.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It may be reasonable if they are from different schooling systems and it is not widely accepted that they are the same; your new thesis would have to be written about topics you are newly exploring at graduate school.
You might also get valuable experience through writing the new thesis if you didn't have to write anything for the first one; if this will be your first big work in the language of your new institution; or if it gives you the chance to try out working with your advisor. However, that might just mean you should write a big paper, without it officially being a thesis.
Could you get the Master's degree in a related field instead? While it would be more work, that would make you a much more versatile engineer/researcher.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/03/27
| 731
| 3,220
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've receiced double-blind reviews of a paper I submitted a while ago. However, it seems that only one reviewer actually seemed to "get" the point of the paper: They showed flaws in my work but also appreciated some parts and the review was in general very helpful to me.
The others, however, complained about many things which seem nonsensical to me. For example, they complain that paper is "difficult to read" but simultaneously complain about me corroborating my empirical results with seminal studies from 20 years ago: They seem to either be ignorant of these works and their significance or just don't understand this kind of analysis even though it's in a big section with lots of graphs (i.e. a lot of time was devoted to it)... or they just don't care enough to try to understand.
From their tone and the fact that these reviewers missed main contributions even though they were enumerated in the submission metadata, I fear that the last possibility is probably the main factor: not caring or not taking interest in the paper.
**How do I address these reviews which are negative of my work but are in fact not very "good" reviews in themselves due to a lack of expertise and/or caring?** The paper has not yet been either officially accepted or rejected but has very poor evaluations from all but one reviewer; There is a very short response period in which I can address the reviewers' points in writing to the reviewers themselves (I think it's to them, at least), but I'm unsure of what exactly to write to them.<issue_comment>username_1: Having a reviewer fail to understand even the general point of your work is a frustrating, but common, experience. Do you have a chance to respond (i.e. has it been returned for revision, or just outright rejected?). If you do I would attempt to explain, in calm, measured language each point made by the reviewers and why it doesn't make sense and hope the editor sides with you rather than them.
You might like to consider however, that if the reviewers are failing to understand, it is likely that a large section of your audience will similarly fail to understand. In other words, if the venue is broad, then you will benefit most if you write in a way that will be appreciated by the broad audience. Otherwise the editor may reasonable argue that the paper isn't suitable a their "broad-audience" journal, and would be better suited to a more specialised publication.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the referees -- especially more than one -- are not "getting" the paper, then there are just a few possible reasons why this can happen. In order of least like to most likely:
1. The reviewers are not expert enough
2. The author is submitting to the wrong journal
3. The author is not telling the story well enough
The first is rare, but not rare enough. The third is very common.
The proper response to the first two, but for different reasons, is to resubmit elsewhere. For the first, you'd be looking for a journal with a better referee pool. For the second, you're looking for a more appropriate audience.
The proper response to the the third, bluntly, is for the author to write better.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/03/27
| 443
| 1,950
|
<issue_start>username_0: After writing the first draft of my paper, I sent the proof to an expert in my area. He responded my email in a neutral way, something like: I think if your argument is true then it would be nice,... I suggest you may read the paper ... to ...
Now, I would like to acknowledge him in my paper, sth. like: "I would like to thank Professor A for his comments". In my opinion, I should do this to show my gratitude. Besides, this also makes my paper somehow more concrete and professional, I think so.
My question: Do I need to ask Professor A the permission to acknowledge him? Or I just acknowlegde him without asking?
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think it's *necessary* to ask permission for something like this - there's really nothing he could do to stop you from acknowledging him if he did take issue with it, so the permission isn't even his to give to begin with.
That said, you're acknowledging him because you respect and appreciate his comments, and want to formally recognize the working relationship you have with him. It couldn't hurt to send him an email thanking him for his contribution, and mention that you will be acknowledging him in the paper. If he really has a problem with it, he'll have the opportunity to ask you to do otherwise at that time.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is no more necessarily to ask permission to thank or acknowledge someone in a paper than it is to thank or acknowledge someone in everyday conversation.
If you do acknowledge this person, you can send her/him an advanced copy of your final manuscript a few days before submission, or you can wait and send a copy of the accepted or published manuscript later. I personally prefer the first option: if this person feels strongly about your work you might get useful feedback, and if this person does not like being acknowledged she/he has an occasion to let you know before submission.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/27
| 2,536
| 10,785
|
<issue_start>username_0: I personally see no practical difference between dropping out of a PhD program and quitting a regular job, at least considering the way PhDs work in the US, especially in STEM fields, but I'm sure many people will disagree. Please let me elaborate why I think that way, and let me know if I'm being too naive or missing an important difference. I really want to see a difference, but so far I can't find any meaningful one.
At least in the US, PhD students are often employees of the university, they hold a research assistant position, get paid a salary and declare it as taxable income. Most people I've talked with in academia agree that the main point of doing a PhD is working on your own research rather than taking classes, which should just be a complement. That sounds pretty much like what you do at a regular job than what you do in a master's or undergrad degree; you have a main project to work on, and maybe some ocasional training sessions that might be useful for your work. Some people like to point out that dropping out of a PhD program has some sort of stigma attached to it because it means that you couldn't finish something you began. However, I see no difference between that situation and quitting a regular job where you had a long-term project that you realized was going nowhere, had no future or was needlessly stressful, and you decided not to waste your time trying to finish it and find something better. My view is that if you leave a PhD program with no degree, but you worked for some years as a research assistant, you can still write it down in your resume as a research assistant position you had at the university, so it's pretty much just another job for practical purposes, I don't understand why the fact that you didn't get the degree is such a big deal for some people.
Something I should emphasize is that I'm biased in my thinking towards STEM fields and people who enter PhD programs, but have no intention to stay in academia. If one wants to become a professor, dropping out of a PhD program is obviously a big deal, since it's often a requirement, but I'm talking about people who do PhDs mainly to get better jobs in industry. I know some will point out that that's probably a bad reason to do a PhD to begin with, but honestly, I've met many PhD students who think that way, especially in computer science and other STEM fields. Regardless, many people also begin a PhD because they are really interested in working on a specific area and that area happens to be developed more in academia than in industry at some point in time (machine learning is a good example), but they don't have any intention of staying in academia and plan to get a job in industry afterwards. Still, they might get disappointed about the area or the environment along the way, the same way one might serious negative aspects of what seemed at first as an interesting job.
I'm especially interested in reading people who disagree with any of the specific points I mentioned before and why they are not valid analogies between dropping out of a PhD program and quitting a job. If this looks more like an open-ended discussion rather than an appropriate question for this site, feel free to put it on hold, but I'd appreciate if you can point me to a more appropriate site where this kind of discussion can take place. This site is the only one I know where well-informed academics congregate.<issue_comment>username_1: There is one significant difference between PhD positions and jobs: in many cases, a PhD who leaves can get a master’s degree instead of the PhD, depending on the program. However, in some countries, the PhD program is research-only, and the difference between leaving a PhD and leaving a job are similar.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: This answer addresses the idea that the work a PhD student does is just like work at another job, and therefore quitting the jobs should be viewed the same. (My answer suggests that it should be unusual for people to enroll and then quit without there being a serious problem, and also that potentially elements of society might place stigma on that action to keep people from wasting educational resources.) There also seems to be an indication in the question that people should be free to casually start positions as Ph.D. students without the intention to finish the degree. (I may be overstating the poster's view, but that extreme version is what I address below.)
I believe that for an individual, leaving a program or leaving academia can be the right choice for all involved, and that work as a graduate student is valid work experience to list on a resume. However, it is harmful in the long term if people enter graduate school without the intention of completing the degree.
---
A huge part of the compensation for being a PhD student is funding one's classes, training, library access, access to lab materials, potentially travel funding, and access to smart peers and smart professors. It costs a lot to create a learning and research environment.
For instance, a postdoc working a similar job in a lab will get paid more; partly because they need less supervision and training, have more experience, and have more responsibility, but also because the professor does not have to fund the tuition and student benefits for that postdoc. And a professional lab worker should be paid even more.
**If, as you say, being a PhD student is just another job**, then people who do not value all of the parts that support academic success could value those things at zero and realize **they are getting a very poor wage.** They could work at a private lab for the same work--but without the support for learning and autonomous research--and get paid much more for the same style of tasks.
Again, it costs a lot to create a learning and research environment, and **universities are investing in their students' success**. Hoxby has a model of university funding that likens university founders (and later donors) to venture capitalists investing in human capital and in research: <http://www.nber.org/papers/w18626>.
As Hoxby writes: "Because some of the students' returns will presumably be social, the obligation on them can be multifaceted. Those who earn private returns on their human capital can be asked for gifts in the form of money. Others could be asked for gifts in the form of expertise. Others could be asked to use their political influence to sure that the university is treated well by the government. And so on." [Hoxby 2012, p. 19](http://www.nber.org/papers/w18626.pdf)
If people are taking Ph.D. positions as mere jobs, they are less likely to fully contribute to the educational environment, less likely to take full advantage of the costly investment in their educational environment, and less likely to give back to the institution to help it sustain itself.
---
**TL;DR: It is extremely short-sighted to think that students are merely workers. It is to academia's detriment if students, professors, schools, and governments act as if they are.**
(These models and my thinking are largely based on the U.S. system, which the poster addressed. I would be interested in thoughts on how this compares to other funding models.)
---
Note: I do not intend this answer to say that grad students are or are not employees for the purposes of unionization or other purposes. However, I believe this account of why schools fund tuition for advanced students as an uncertain investment helps us understand why the rebated tuition should not be taxed as regular income (as a recent US tax plan suggested doing).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As a student who left a PhD program, I agree overall but disagree on some specifics. We both agree that there should be less stigma around dropping out, that there are very understandable reasons for doing so, and that grad students have more in common with employees than most academics find it convenient to believe. Depending on the work and the time span, companies can invest a significant amount of time and money in a person too. That person can become an integral part of that business, especially if it is a small one, and yet people are not judged for leaving the same way.
However, I think quitting partway through a program, as I did, *is* a bad sign. I would not judge someone personally for it, given my experience, but I might harbor some doubt about them professionally, and I understand why someone evaluating me as a job candidate might think that way.
There are such large personal and financial costs to PhD programs that quitting seems odd. You forego a decent wage, sign away your 20s to school, and very likely uproot yourself to live in some small college town for the next 5-7 years away from everybody you know. Life is placed on hold. After all that it takes to get in, turning away signals uncertainty and a lack of direction.
Like your examples show, leaving can indeed be a measured, calculated decision, but someone would need to explain that this is the case; I would not assume it. I have some explaining to do when I interview, and that's alright. The consequences of my decision are on me. I have to own them.
Going back to the personal, dropping out also feels a lot different. The relationship you have with your advisor can skate the edge between boss and mentor and, very commonly, between colleague and friend. I feel guilty for abandoning my advisor in a way that I simply wouldn't with a boss. I miss my advisor. I miss the other professors in my department. I feel like I disappointed all of them, and I do regret that I wasted their time, but hindsight is 20/20. If I knew the outcome of my grad school experience ahead of time, I certainly would not have gone.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I've always seen a PhD pursuit as a **chance**. An opportunity, for which one'd be willing to surrender, to adapt to, or at least to bear with some of the below issues.
I strongly oppose the feelings of a PhD program as a regular job. Let's look at some properties.
Negative:
* It's never\* just a 9-to-5 job. You more or less dedicate a period in your life to research.
* It's not competitive by salary.
* You are still at campus with all advantages and drawbacks it brings.
Positive:
* It's a unique experience, as quite few students would land in a R&D division right after school.
* You get a title for life and, possibly, a ticket to academia if you succeed.
\*: Some can manage to pull 9-to-5 job at research. Some can commit to this. Many fail, so the success stories might be a somewhat survivors' paradox. I've seen enough reputable researchers who claim that research is never 9-to-5.
Disclaimer: I have a PhD.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/27
| 384
| 1,633
|
<issue_start>username_0: Please give an idea about the ideal length of a brief research statement and its format. Should I write about the research that I have done in my Ph.D. or should i propose a new research idea for post-doc research?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. I have often seen a limit of 2 pages, i.e. one sheet of paper. It depends, though.
2. Write a bit the research done, write more about new research you want to do.
While you are at it, it is important (IMHO) to highlight links to other researchers and outputs (both existing and prospective).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The best thing to do is to try finding examples of research statements written by people in similar positions. Many people put their research statement on their website. From these you can see the style and length that is typical in your field.
Your research statement should discuss both the work you have done and the work you want to do in the future. It should also discuss the bigger picture that links these together.
Generally, less is more. People instinctively write long research statements describing all their work in detail. This instinct must be fought, as no one will read a 10-page research statement. For a postdoc, I think 2-3 pages (not including bibliography) is typical, at least in my area of theoretical computer science. Faculty-level research statements will be a bit longer.
Keep your audience in mind. (I.e. does the person reading this know your area?) Proof read and polish meticulously. And definitely ask other people to look at your draft and give feedback.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/03/27
| 1,364
| 5,942
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing my master thesis in game theory and realized one type of situation where I am often stuck for a long time and feel frustration creeping in. It is, to no surprise, when facing a complex situation: one with too many variables or different cases to look at.
Example setting: I build a model and look at some equilibrium points as results. The different equilibria are conditioned on many parameters such as the income of people, their social ties, their level of empathy etc. My task is to understand these conditions in order to be able to generalize some of the results.
Example being stuck: I a-priori think that the plan to crack this issue is to look at each equilibrium individually and understand the conditions for that case and then move on and in the end put everything together, I know it is going to be annoying but at some point it will just work. Unfortunately, I often fail to stick to the plan when the conditions for a certain equilibrium point are hard to understand, my mind starts to go back and forth, loosing focus and in the end failing to understand the situation at hand. I usually succeed by repeatedly going the same way again and again, but it is very costly.
I know this isn't something specific to me, this happens to many/most people when the problem contains too many cases, variables or causal links.
Do you have tips or resources on how to best handle problems like these?<issue_comment>username_1: **Write notes as you work.** Brainstorm a list of questions, then try to write down answers to them as you investigate. Bonus points if some of them are questions that you would have asked before knowing the term game theory, or if some are ones a six-year-old would ask. It sounds like one of the questions on your list already is, "What conditions produce each equilibrium?"
You've already found the equilibria (do you know if you found all the equilibria?), but why is that interesting? How can you interpret that for someone? So what? (The questions that end up being most interesting or giving you the most to say should be your research questions, with their answers being your thesis statement(s).)
---
Below, I'm taking a lot of liberties guessing about what you're doing and what might be productive. Wherever I assume something wrong, try to use that as a jumping off point. ("That's completely silly! This wouldn't be a complex system because X!" or "Using an agent-based model wouldn't capture Y." or "Existing small world models don't account for Z.")
Depending on exactly what model you're using (e.g. an agent-based model for a repeated game) you may be creating and analyzing a complex system. There might be emergent properties you're trying to capture, and you may want to tune the model to better illustrates that emergence. If you just altered one variable at a time you might get a tipping point model ("Huh, turns out the dividing line for getting cooperative behavior is if everyone starts with an endowment of X.") but just cataloging those univariate effects doesn't necessarily capture emergent behaviors that involves interacting traits or evolving patterns of behavior. (E.g., an interesting emergent result might be: "Generally, increasing equality of endowments or increasing N leads to an equilibrium of cooperation. **But** when you have perfect equality of endowments and increase N, you paradoxically have higher rates of defection." Then you could illustrate how that typically plays out, turn by turn.)
Maybe mathematicians or others who work with complex systems could tell you about classes of functions or models that are thoroughly understood, and you could compare your system to that. My guess is that **systematically recording** the results of your playing around with the model (potentially trying to answer 6-year-old-style questions) will lead to better work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Near the bottom of your thesis draft, add a section along the following lines.
>
> Future Work
>
>
> This investigation suggests several interesting avenues of exploration for future research. In particular:
>
>
> * Does Theorem 3 still hold if the assumption of a perfectly spherical cow is relaxed to allow for ellipsoid cows?
> * Does the albedo of the cow affect the maximum time in orbit?
>
>
> \* Is anybody willing to hire me to research these questions, preferably for more money than I am currently earning as a Master's student?
>
>
>
Every time you have a new idea for something that should be investigated, ask yourself whether it really needs to be explored within your Master's thesis, or if you would do better to put it in the "Future Work" section. Think about how valuable it would be to your thesis and to the field vs. how much work it would require, and prioritise accordingly.
If you're doing interesting research, your work may well open as many new questions as it answers. You don't have to answer them all, or at least not yet! Just ensure that what you *do* cover is enough of a contribution for a solid Master's thesis, and de-scope the rest of it for now.
If your work has an applied focus, I would also advise asking yourself which of these questions really need to be answered in order to solve the problem at hand.
For example, my PhD project involved some issues of fluid dynamics. Modelling them in detail would have required a great deal of work to learn the fluid dynamics, and very significant computational difficulties (modelling a non-Newtonian fluid of poorly-known physical properties reacting to a poorly-characterised force, in a grid likely to require thousands of cells, using mid-90s technology.) I figured out that a static approximation would provide answers which were good enough for practical applications, so I was able to avoid a very long digression.
Above all, check in with your supervisor about how much they expect you to cover.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/27
| 730
| 2,797
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently writing my BSc Physics dissertation and I'm using LaTeX with BibTeX so the format of the references is all correct, but there are a number of other papers that I talk about at several points throughout the paper. When referencing one of these papers do I need to include a reference each time I mention it?
Example:
>
> Throughout this paper I will adopt values for cosmological parameters
> obtained by the Planck Collaboration [1].
>
>
>
and later on in the paper...
>
> ... there have been numerous projects attempting to measure features
> of the CMB including the COBE satellite [2], the WMAP [3] and, more
> recently, the Planck Collaboration ([1]?).
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Yes indeed. For several reasons:
* people might not read your work sequentially, from page 1 to the end;
* people might forget that there was already a citation somewhere;
* people don't want to recall all previous citations;
* the context is different and people don't assume that the reference is the same.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The short answer is yes, for the reasons mentioned by username_1.
How sparsely can you cite? If you're talking about others' work, you should make it clear what work you're talking about *at least* once a paragraph. E.g.:
>
> The Planck Collaboration ([1]) produced estimates of cosmological constants using lasers and mirrors. The lasers were really cool and allowed them to precisely measure X as equaling pi. Further, Y was e, and Planck's constant was 7.
>
>
> It also turns out that Z is a complex number, 1+7i. This further implies that our universe is shaped like a donut. The implications go further, suggesting time is periodic. [1]
>
>
>
Having the citation at the end of the paragraph means that every single fact in that paragraph is sourced from that paper. If you are interspersing your own calculations or implications, then you would have to put the citations back at the sentence-by-sentence level.
If your work is in conversation with one main work, then you may have a case for giving them a nickname for that section only, instead of constantly citing them.
>
> In this section that follows, I closely review the 2012 paper by the Planck Consortium [1]; for convenience, I will refer to that work as PC.
>
>
> ...
>
>
> PC further found that Z is complex. I question that assumption based on my calculations. If we start with PC's assumption of ..., then necessarily ...
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: As the others already mentioned: Yes you should. I know, that it sometimes could disturb the reading but as Massimo said, somebody may just read a part and not your whole dissertation and may want to know the citation there.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/03/27
| 1,062
| 4,691
|
<issue_start>username_0: As an undergrad, I took a wide variety of courses, but focused on one or two fields and took advanced courses only in those, and those fields are my strengths. I intend to do a PhD, but now I'm applying for Master's programs, and I actually want to focus on the fields that I received little to none education in my undergrad on, and the subjects that I wasn't very good at. What I want to do for my PhD is more directly related to the subjects I'm stronger at, but a knowledge in those I'm not very strong in would be significantly useful too.
To me, that sounds totally acceptable, since I want to fill in the gaps and learn something new, rather than repeating what I already have a good knowledge on and possibly going a little deeper in it, especially as I took quite a few graduate-level courses in the fields I focused on.
I am wondering if that's acceptable and sounds reasonable to admission committee and graduate schools too. Given that they probably have applicants who are actually applying for what they have a strong background in, would it make sense for me to compete with them with this justification that I want to improve the weaknesses in my background by throwing myself at those fields and "learn to love them", or should I just apply for what I'm stronger in and try to improve my knowledge in other fields through self studying?
(Please note that by "field", I'm actually referring to subfields within a major field. So it's not that I've done Management and I want to study Dance Performance, it's more like PDEs vs Algebra, which would mean applying to Applied Math vs Pure Math.)<issue_comment>username_1: This is not unreasonable. It is a common observation that there are fields that have accumulated a large amount of tradition and rigour and are difficult to learn outside of a university course. While studying, you can afford to learn things that are not immediately useful, but this will be much more difficult when you have a particular job to do.
In terms of admission or recruitment, wishing to get a broader education and diversify your skills is a perfectly valid motivation. You aren't expected to become a one-trick pony.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I always liked Physics which I was not very successful and clearly it was not one of my strength. I was accepted in Physics major in undergrad. Before the end of the first year, I realized I am not suitable for the major, then changed it. I was not as hardworking as I should have been but I was unable to understand certain things.
Noting that if you study hard enough, you can do anything unless you have a disability but it is very difficult to study very hard. If you trust yourself about it and feel you can do it well, go for it. (I trusted myself in Physics at the time)
Alternative to what you say is to apply for the field you know and take many courses from the subfield so you will improve both skill.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are in the U.S. context, you could also consider taking post-baccalaureate classes; some schools allow you to enroll in one or two undergraduate classes at a time. This might widen your options and allow you to focus on just a few things you want to review or brush up on. However, it would probably not allow you to access graduate-level courses, so this would be a better option if it really is a weakness as opposed to just not your strongest area.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: **Your reasoning is excellent and I would suggest you stick with this approach:** All educational programs exist to increase the knowledge and skills of the student, which presupposes weakness relative to the outcome of the program. Remember that you need to convince the admissions committee that *your undergraduate record is strong enough to justify admission* to the Masters program, but at the same time, it is your intention to focus on up-skilling in your areas of weakness, with a view to becoming sufficiently competent for entry to a PhD program at a later time. There is no contradiction in these two things - your existing set of skills from your undergraduate program might legitimately be considered to be strong enough for entry to the Masters program, but weak in comparison to how you will come out (this being the entire point of education).
In terms of assessing postgraduate applicants, this is generally the kind of student I would prefer --- one who is able to look at his/her existing skills in a realistic way, identify weaknesses, set goals for improvement, and be proactive in plugging those weaknesses to achieve goals. Would that there were more students like this!
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/28
| 3,675
| 14,834
|
<issue_start>username_0: Everyone grows old, grow less dexterous and energetic, lose cognitive ability, and so on. In most jobs these don't matter that much since one doesn't need to be the best, and "good enough" is good enough. However, academia is unique because it lives and dies on ideas. Without ideas, there is no funding proposal, and with no funding proposal, there is no money, no students, and no job.
This sounds like a very difficult situation for academics: they grow less and less able to come up with good ideas, but still have to compete with the legion of younger researchers at the peak of their mental capabilities all coming up with ideas. Furthermore, younger researchers are also in better shape physically, and can put more energy into their work.
How do academics deal with growing old in a job where growing old directly impacts one's ability to perform?<issue_comment>username_1: All people deal with getting old(er) in some way, but I can think of a few aspects that are unique to academics.
One way to keep up the performance is to gradually shift from hands-on work to advisory work. It is clear that an aging professor can't keep up with the hours invested, enthusiasm, desire to prove oneself, etc. of a PhD student or junior faculty. However, our older guy has participated in a lot of academic craft (writing papers/grants, advising, doing research, reviewing, etc.) over the years, which can give a significant edge to junior people around him. Guiding others can and does produce scientific breakthroughs even though the senior professor didn't think it all up by himself. Further, it also educates the next generation of researches which also an important and challenging job.
People outside of academia are usually obligated (with exceptions, of course) to retire at a given age. On the other hand, a professor has the possibility to attain the emeritus rank, which lets him be an active member of the academic community theoretically until the end of his life. This partially offsets the time investment of PhD studies, postdocs, etc., if the argument is that people in academia have fewer "productive years" as opposed to people who start off right after undergraduate.
Finally, professors are usually respected members of their communities, so even if some of them perform less in their later career, there are always other duties they can excel at. For example, focus on teaching or department duties or writing books.
In my opinion, none of these options is inferior to the "pure research" track and I feel that many come naturally as personal development. In other words, I don't think aging professors find it necessary to outright compete with their younger colleagues, but rather mature into other roles that benefit the academic community.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are a number of ways senior academics have their careers shift, and some assumptions in your question aren't necessarily valid.
>
> In most jobs these don't matter that much since one doesn't need to be
> the best, and "good enough" is good enough.
>
>
>
You're asserting this isn't true for academia without much evidence. There are plenty of professors who settle into modest but respectable careers, teaching a few courses, having one or two long-term grants, etc.
>
> However, academia is unique because it lives and dies on ideas.
>
>
>
I don't think this is unique to academia, and you don't just need a *volume* of ideas. You need the ability to execute on those ideas, and experience helps with this - indeed, experience may help filter ideas that seem promising but are likely dead ends, unproductive, etc.
Even if your volume of ideas declines with age, as long as you still have some over a threshold of "I have nothing to work on now", it might not matter.
>
> Without ideas, there is no funding proposal, and with no funding
> proposal, there is no money, no students, and no job.
>
>
>
Senior researchers, with established labs and track records, have an easier time getting funded, not a harder time.
>
> This sounds like a very difficult situation for academics: they grow
> less and less able to come up with good ideas, but still have to
> compete with the legion of younger researchers at the peak of their
> mental capabilities all coming up with ideas. Furthermore, younger
> researchers are also in better shape physically, and can put more
> energy into their work.
>
>
> How do academics deal with growing old in a job where growing old
> directly impacts one's ability to perform?
>
>
>
Even if all your assertions are true, their careers aren't over. They may become chairs or deans, identifying, recruiting and mentoring those "legions of younger researchers". They may use their prestige and reputation to bring those younger voices into their projects, either as members of their labs, collaborators, etc. Or, in many cases, they take a step back and focus more on the trajectory of the field as a whole, thinking about slightly broader and grander ideas where the perspective of someone who has been working on the same thing for decades is valuable.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> How do academics deal with growing old?
>
>
>
I will answer based on my observation of one researcher maturing over the last 25 years, and of several researchers who are in their 70s.
Contrary to the attitude you expressed in the question, in fact the creativity, skills and engagement are still there. I think the keys to a successful transition are
* make sure to pace yourself
* avoid situations where you won't be able to hear well
* don't get stuck in certain ways of communicating and collaborating -- be open to others' preferences, even if it means learning to use a new tool
* learn to cope with degrading memory skills -- for example, develop organized ways of making and retrieving notes
* be honest with others about your limitations and any health issues you may have
* make more of an effort than you used to with personal hygiene and keeping your wardrobe reasonably up to date (this refers to both condition of clothing and stylishness)
* keep in mind that as people age, they tend to become more sensory avoiding; so, push yourself to expand your sensory world. Example: if noise or bright light bother you, force yourself to be in them sometimes, because an avoidance policy will just make you even more sensory averse.
Staying involved in research, at a pace that feels right to the individual, is one of the main things that seems to make life fun for the older researchers I know.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As (not entirely facetious, at all!) counterpoint to the other answers and comments:
Clearly, "getting older" (whatever this means precisely) is construed as a bad thing, with mostly bad side-effects, by the question, and as an under-current in the answers, even if they push back slightly.
As in my earlier comment, it might be interesting to reflect on the reversed assumptions and corresponding question: "How can young people have any hope of doing meaningful research, being adequate scholars, and competing in the academic marketplace, when they are so immature, inexperienced, ignorant, and naive?"
(I would seriously claim that, although the previous is presently a rhetorical question, it reflects enough reality to bring the question above to more-or-less a "dead heat", I think.)
That is, population X may reasonably imagine (if they are optimistic) that the traits they imagine that they have are exactly what makes them superior (in some useful sense) to other tribes/populations/clans, and can have discussions about how those other populations (purportedly lacking these signal distinctions) can bear their own existence, survive at all, etc.
I've heard all too many times the idea that (in math) "well, when you get old-and-tired and can't do research any more, you can always teach". Toooo many assumptions here, especially that people who lack the energy or interest to continue research "can always" teach. E.g., I'd claim that if they were not good teachers before, loss of energy and interest wouldn't help... (Of course, such comments are in a mythological context where "anyone can teach", but "only the special ones can do research"...)
It is true that in current contexts there is an aggressive identification of "research" with "funding" and "entrepreneurial spin-offs" and "technology transfer". I cannot speak for engineering departments and such, but this is clearly not the model of *all* departments in universities. Some departments are caught in the middle, e.g., mathematics, where there is a seductive possibility of playing short-term, big-money games (as opposed to small-money, quiet, long-term scholarly games).
I do not claim to understand the arc of personal scholarship, nor the gamut of "economies" of grants and such across disciplines, but it *is* relatively clear in my experience that there are many scenarios where I'd be very much more interested in hearing a scholarly opinion from a decades-long experience than from a glib newcomer. Sure, newcomer rebels can be interesting, but the context is complicated.
So, my facetious-rhetorical response is "What? I'm getting older?" (Sincere!) And, then, "Wait, what, all this time I thought I was finally figuring out how to do stuff, I'm being declared ever-more-incompetent?!?!"
:)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Your question sits on a *very* flaky premise, namely that professors tend to get *worse* at their job as they grow older. You write:
>
> they grow less and less able to come up with good ideas, but still have to compete with the legion of younger researchers at the peak of their mental capabilities all coming up with ideas. Furthermore, younger researchers are also in better shape physically, and can put more energy into their work.
>
>
>
Physical energy isn't very important in most fields. Being able to work many long hours at a desk job is more a function of family commitments, hobbies, stress resilience, and how long you have already been doing this than of physical fitness. If you see some older professors work less than their pre-tenure colleagues, physical fitness is likely a tiny aspect of why this is the case. More importantly, there are also plenty of tenured professors who still work their behinds off, so it certainly can be done if a senior faculty member still feels the drive.
That older colleagues have less good ideas than younger ones is a very questionable premise. I argue that people's ideas tend to get *better* as they get older, as they have seen more research projects (failed and succeeded ones) and generally have more experience in the field to draw upon. Personally I have certainly observed my ideas to get better (as in: more out of the box, and at the same time more feasible) over time, but I am also not exactly reaching retiring age yet.
>
> Without ideas, there is no funding proposal, and with no funding proposal, there is no money, no students, and no job.
>
>
>
Again, I think the premise that younger people have an easier time accessing grants is flawed. In my experience the *inverse* is true: it is awfully hard to get funds and students when you are still young, unexperienced, unknown, and generally a wildcard for most funding evaluators;; once you get older, more well-known, and more experienced in writing grant proposals, getting access to grants becomes much easier. That you sometimes see older professors have less grants than younger ones is not because they wouldn't get one anymore, but rather that they don't necessarily have the *need* for a grant. If you have reached a career stage where you primarily focus on teaching, writing books, or other outreach activities, you probably don't need nor necessarily want a big grant that funds a bunch of PhD students that need advising.
So, to answer your question:
>
> How do academics deal with growing old in a job where growing old directly impacts one's ability to perform?
>
>
>
Very well in general, as getting older (more senior) typically influences job performance positively if at all. It's no wonder you often see even retired professors still hang around in the office. They like the job and are often highly valued in their team.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: While older colleagues may not be able to work longer hours, as their graduate students do, productivity, in general, [does not show much difference based on age](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33612506/).
There is also a [distinction between conceptual and experimental creativity](https://qz.com/1606423/the-two-types-of-creativity-peak-at-very-different-ages/). The former peaks young (la30-40) and later peaks much later (50-60).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: The main problem with growing older in academia is the expectation that you will move from active research to a research management role, and e.g. promotions criteria (mostly based on grant income) are likely to mean it is a career limiting step not to do so. Unfortunately being a good researcher does not mean you will be a good research manager, so this may result in you becoming *less* productive and having far less job satisfaction as you spend a lot of time and effort getting other people to do work that you would have enjoyed doing yourself (and in more extreme cases, could have done with less effort than would be required to supervise someone else). This is sometimes an example of the "[Peter Principle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle)", where people get promoted out of a role in which they are competent to one where their competence is marginal.
I personally don't think that growing older makes you less effective as an active researcher. I'd be interested to see peer-reviewed research on the topic, however I suspect that there will be a selection bias involved because of the expected career progression of academics towards management/administrative roles.
*"This sounds like a very difficult situation for academics: they grow less and less able to come up with good ideas,"*
citation definitely required!
I think this is unlikely to be true. Most ideas come from combining ideas from diverse fields, so it becomes easier to come up with good ideas as you become more experienced, and you waste less time on the dead-ends because you can spot the signs that it isn't going to be a productive line of research rather earlier. The successful research managers tend to be the ones coming up with the ideas for their group to work on (as well as having the admin/management skills to make the group productive).
BTW I was in my early forties when I wrote my most cited paper. Hardly a young whippersnapper!
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/28
| 454
| 1,983
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in computer science, working in theory. I was recently reading a research paper, which was submitted to a tier-3 conference last year.
It gave me some idea (which may not work), which is a kind of incremental, but yields a significant improvement of the run time.
The only problem I am facing right now is where I should submit this research paper. Although idea is not big as per me, my colleagues are saying it is significant and I do not realise as I have been working on this for three months. This is not related to my PhD project. I asked my supervisor and he said it seems okay to him.
**Question:** Is it possible that an incremental work on research paper may get selected for a top conference? I have hard time deciding to which conference I should submit. I have little experience as I have already published two research papers but that does not seem to help much.<issue_comment>username_1: If the work is significant and a good contribution, then it should get selected to a related good conference. The selection also matters if the conference you are submitting is related to the area you have contributed.
>
> I ask my supervisor he said it seems ok to him
>
>
>
What do you mean by ok? If he agreed to submit to the good conference then go ahead and give a try.
Nothing wrong in giving a try to submit it to a top conference and if you are unlucky then submit it to a lower grade conference.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's possible, in the sense that there's a non-zero chance of acceptance. A couple of factors strongly contribute to this chance: How well can you explain the significance of the problem? How big is the novelty delta, for example, are there some entirely new concepts? How big is the runtime improvement? How rigorous is the evaluation?
In essence, you need to write a very strong paper, which is naturally easier for some contributions than for others.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/03/28
| 477
| 2,135
|
<issue_start>username_0: We are currently reproducing several papers in a specific sub-field of computer science under different experimental conditions. When we submit the paper, we will be required to declare people who may have conflicts of interest. Most of the original authors of the papers we are reproducing are aware that we are doing this work.
**Should we declare the authors of the original papers that we are reproducing as conflicts of interest?**
Arguments in favor:
1. Reviews may not be blind, as they know we are doing the work (review is double-blind)
2. We may be "stepping on some toes" by showing that their results do not hold up when reproduced under more realistic circumstances. Conversely, as Wrzlprmft notes, we may be biasing others in favor of accepting, if we show their results to be correct.
Arguments against:
1. They are best suited as reviewers. If we name all of them as conflicts of interest, we will have excluded more or less every expert in the field, thus making it much less likely that we will get a reviewer familiar with the field
Is there an established guideline for this kind of situation (in CS or other fields)?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know about general guidelines, but since the pros and cons are both reasonable, I would delegate this issue to the journal's editor.
You could mention it in the letter to the editor (and even list your pros and cons) but leave the decision to them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your reasons for declaring conflicts of interest are valid, so I would suggest not worrying yourself over the rest. It's the journal's responsibility to find reviewers. In any case, I don't think any journal is obligated to choose reviewers based on the authors' perceived conflict of interest. These are usually only suggestions solicited.
By not declaring some authors and declaring others, you would be guilty of partiality and possible malpractice. By not declaring any, while you know they exist, you might be doing something unethical.
In summary, save yourself worry, go ahead and declare all authors involved in the study.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/28
| 1,118
| 4,877
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am having the following trouble. Within a collaboration I was asked to prepare and pre-characterize some samples. I did so and sent the samples along with a report on the characterization results.
A year later I received a first draft of a paper: some paragraphs related to the collaborators experimental technique some copy paste of older papers of his. I thought I could safely ignore this as it was just meant to signal "we are working on this!".
Next thing I get (four months later): Mail from the submitting author
>
> Congratulations, paper accepted!
>
>
>
I asked him to send me the draft: Nothing!
Six weeks later, after having met one of his PhD students at a conference the submitting author sends me the proof from the publisher for proofreading. I come up with six pages of corrections (ranging from basic logical errors in argumentation to manipulative data representation), sent it to all coauthors (I assumed the others also might not have seen the manuscript before) and received zero feedback.
Paper was published two weeks later with most of my grammatical and semantical corrections incorporated.
I asked my boss (also co-author on the paper) how to deal with it. His answer: "Take it as one more paper and forget it!".
However, I do agree with this attitude. Now the tricky part: I never agreed on the authorship nor explicitly disagreed (hoping to bring the paper in a decent shape and considering the amount of work already put in). Should I adress the editor asking to withdraw my name arguing that I basically had not seen the paper? Or should I also point out the obvious flaws which might lead to a complete rejection?<issue_comment>username_1: The most effective and natural method would be to simply ask, possibly explain your situation if needed, to the editor or publisher of the paper.
If you have more issues with the publication, you are free to mention them, but this is mostly orthogonal to whether you want your name on the possible publication.
It would also be a good idea to inform your co-authors of this decision, as they may take it badly if they aren't notified.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I do understand your issue with the paper that was eventually published: you are an author, but you don't agree to *what* was in it. So neither accepting nor rejecting can be the answer here. In other words: you might not be asking the right question. Instead, I would do what one does to criticize any paper one wants to criticize, i.e., I would do what everyone does daily in scientific communication: publish a second paper with all you have to say.
Consider two scenarios: in the first, author A publishes a paper and author B disagrees with it; in the second one, author A publishes a paper and years later author A him/herself wants to change his/her own view on it. In both cases, the initial paper would be the object of a critique made in a second paper, right? After all, he/she couldn't simply "change" a paper published earlier (maybe days or weeks in your case, maybe years in author A's case). So it's the same here. I'd turn those 6 pages of corrections into a paper (a "reply" do the first one). You could do it by yourself or with any (or all) of your coauthors, but you can (and should, in my opinion) always do it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: It's more complicated to act now if you didn't do it right away, but to me the big problem here is that these people submitted a paper with your name on it, without asking for your permission first.
Once you notice that a paper has been submitted, or accepted, or published, with your name on it, and you didn't give permission for this to happen, my opinion is that you should contact the submitters immediately, let them know that you hadn't agreed to this, that this is not acceptable, and that you need a copy of the draft to decide whether you are OK with the paper bearing your name. If they don't answer (as is the case here) you have every right to request them to remove your name from that paper that you didn't saw. If they don't do it, you should escalate to whoever is publishing the paper and let them know that the material has been submitted without your consent and you don't want your name associated to it.
(Let me clarify that working with people on stuff, even circulating early drafts and exchanging feedback, does not mean that you implicitly agreed to these people submitting without your agreement. Just because you agreed to the general idea of publishing something with these people eventually but not agree with the publication of a paper in its current form. The actual submission of the paper for publication shouldn't happen unless all authors have had a chance to confirm that they were OK with it, e.g., with the choice of venue, with the current shape of the draft, etc.)
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/03/28
| 1,270
| 5,471
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m not a native English speaker but my reading ability is good. However, when it comes to academic books, I feel that my comprehension is slow. What strategies or methods can I use to help me improve that? I am in the field of computer science.<issue_comment>username_1: You are not alone. Even highly educated native speakers find academic books hard. For the reasons for that see <NAME>'s book *Learn to Write Badly* (Cambridge University Press, 2013). It might amuse and comfort you.
Assuming you have to read a whole book, the strategy I suggest is to go through the thought process that the author should have gone through before putting pen to paper by asking yourself the following questions in the order given:
1. **What single big question is the book trying to answer?**
You would hope to find that stated very early on in the book, in an introduction or preface. Sometimes that may not be clear: that is not your fault.
2. **What is the answer?**
Sometimes considerate authors tell you the answer just after they have told you the question. Frequently authors are not considerate in that way. A good place to look is any chapter headed "Conclusions".
3. **What in outline are the author's reasons for that answer?**
Chapter headings might provide an answer to that, but sometimes you will have to dig a little deeper, skimming the beginnings and ends of the chapters themselves.
Don't be afraid of skimming the book to try to find the answers to these questions. Until you can answer them, simply ploughing through the book will be hard and unrewarding work.
4. How does the author support each of the reasons given?
To answer that you will probably need to do a bit of ploughing, but don't expect to understand all the detail first time through. Keep constantly in your mind where the book is going, that is Questions 1-3 above.
When you have done all the above you can go into as much detail as you need to master the author's whole approach.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Many textbook publishers, authors, and editors go to a great amount of effort to create useful review questions and exercises, as well as designing the chapter outlines and summaries for readability.
If most of the issue is language-related, you could try a few of the following strategies:
* "Pre-learn" vocabulary: Look at chapter summaries/vocabulary lists and looking up definitions of key words (in the book's glossary, ideally, or in a dictionary/online).
* After reading chapter summaries, go to any examples in the text first, especially if they use code or math or process diagrams. Because these are less reliant on language, you may be able to get the overall idea quicker, then read about it.
* You can check your comprehension, if you're not sure about it, by doing exercises (especially those with answers in the back of the book) or trying to answer review questions. (Your professor may have recommendations for places to find good questions with answers to check on this material.)
* Talk with other students and professors about the material. If you write out answers to the book's review questions, others may be willing to look over and discuss what you wrote.
Even if you what you're reading isn't specially structured for learning, you may be able to do some of the above. On top of that:
* Become more familiar with how researchers talk about the subject by listening to online talks and going to on-campus talks.
* You could look for materials in your native language that cover similar material, to help you understand some of the shades of meaning in the concepts. For instance, you could search for your course text on Google Scholar, look at the list of works that cite it or the list of "related works" and see if any are in your native language.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Here are some additional ideas
\*read the preface-the preface provides an overview of the entire text. It explains the purpose, intended audience, features of the text, and often a summary of each chapter. Students are in such a hurry to read the often don't know why they are reading and understanding the purpose helps.
\*read the objectives/questions in each chapter-most academic texts have objectives/questions that are addressed in the chapter because explaining what you will teach before teaching it is a tenet of western instructional design. If you know what to expect in the chapter it is easy to follow the flow of the text. Again many students skip this to read without purpose.
This pattern of sharing objectives before details applies at the chapter level as objectives and at the chapter section level as main ideas for paragraphs. Academic writing is a most always deductive in nature.
\*summarize-you can try to write a summary or try and explain the text to someone who is a non-academic. The best thing I ever did to understand my own studies was to explain to nonexperts. It really forced me to see the point in simple language. If you can teach it to a novice then you know it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: At least in mathematics, but also partially in CS, there are quite visible "levels" of the book.
1. The general concept.
2. The basic ideas, the "what".
3. The details, the "how".
You might want to read a book multiple times, first gasping the "what". In mathematics there is a very clean separation in definitions and theorems (the "what") and proofs (the "how").
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/03/28
| 1,682
| 7,414
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am teaching a course in a college and assignment homework on a regular basis. Usually I collect all homework in the class and later my student secretary grades all the homework and return them to the students through the mail room. If a student did not turn in the homework at all, a zero will be given.
There is a student who claims to have turned in two homework but got zero for both. I am checking with my secretary and is awaiting for his reply. Likely he will tell me that he does remember anything about her homework. Also I have asked the student to check her mailbox, and it is quite likely that she could not find her homework there.
Another piece of information: I suspect the student is dishonest as sometimes her quiz answer is identical to the student sitting next to her. But since I never caught her red-handed, this should not be used as an evidence.
Now assuming that no evidence can be found regarding whether she turned the homework or not, there are at least three opinions for me:
1. Give her full marks for the homework, assuming that it is I or my secretary who misplaced them.
2. Give her zeros, ignoring her claims.
3. As a happy medium, change her homework status as "excused" so these two particular homework will not be counted toward her grade.
I have done Option 1 in the past, but only to find out later that the student who made the claim turns out to be a very dishonest student and likely she lied to me and benefited from lying. What would you suggest me to do in this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: Since you have no way to show that the student didn't submit the homework, it's simply your word against the word of the student. Furthermore, there were lots of homework assignments from various students, so it would presumably be easier for you to forget receiving the homework than it would be for the student to mistakenly remember submitting the homework.
If an unbiased third party considered this and assumed honesty from both sides, I think that they would conclude that it was more likely that you had lost/forgotten the paper than that the student had remembered submitting a paper when she, in fact, had not done so.
If this happened with a student taking a class from a TA or faculty member under my supervision, I'd tell the TA or faculty member to "excuse the grade" and adopt a system for homework submission (e.g. use a learning management system) that provides independent confirmation that the homework was submitted.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Quiz her about the homework, e.g. "How did you solve this question? What method did you use? Which equations are relevant?" If she did do the homework, she should be able to answer these relatively easily. If she can provide good answers, then award her full marks; otherwise give her zero. The fail case would be if she didn't do the homework but still manages to answer these questions - but if she can do that, she's already mastered the course material, so full marks is still accurate even if it's not fair.
To avoid this in the future, if the learning management system suggested by username_1 isn't possible, you could provide a physical receipt as well (similar to the receipts one gets at a store).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would need to know your grading scheme, e.g. how many homeworks in the semester, the weight the homework average has, to give very specific suggestions. But in a general sense here are some thoughts:
* If there are a lot of small homework assignments, then it can be helpful to announce that the two lowest scores will be thrown out. The idea here is that the homework score functions to *raise* students' grades.
* The syllabus can define a decreased maximum score for late submission, for example weight 90% if one day late, weight 80% for two days late, etc.
* It sounds like the fundamental problem is the cheating on the quizzes. This is the thing to focus on. If the student is not demonstrating academic integrity, then you need to catch her in the quizzes/exams. Set her up so that she CANNOT cheat; and if she is unprepared, she will do badly; but there will be no gray zone of he-said-she-said. Get a larger room. Get more proctors. If necessary assign this student a specific seat where she is physically unable to see anyone's work.
* Do not have her come in to be grilled on the homework assignment. There was a similar question about half a year ago (but about an exam, I think), and this was the consensus.
* You might want to set her up to deliver her homework in person to a department secretary who is at her desk 9 to 5 every day except for lunch, with the secretary making a photocopy and writing a note on the copy stating the date and time of delivery, with her signature.
* Philosophically, it may help to go back to your own first principles of pedagogy, whatever they may be (this may require some thought). For example, perhaps you believe that with the right support and some honest effort, all students can learn your material; and they key is to find, for each student, a way for them to demonstrate the knowledge and skills they've acquired.
* It might help to think about why she might be trying to cheat and lie her way through the course. It is required for her degree program? Are there no alternatives to your course, that would enable her to graduate? Nobody likes that kind of pressure....
* If there's a chance she is trying to learn your material but is getting frustrated for whatever reason, you may wish to set up an intermediate due date, by which you will require her to submit a first draft of the homework, and come in to office hours to help her see her way to improving the draft.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: ### Consider improving your submission system
As other answers have pointed out, there is no ideal resolution to the present problem --- you simply are not going to know whether the homework was submitted or not. Consequently, the most important thing you can do here is to **improve your submission system** so that it tracks submissions. This will not solve your present problem, but it will prevent it from happening again.
These days, there are online submission systems that can be used to track homework submissions and make submission records available to both the student and teacher. Alternatively, you can use email submission, where there is a clear record of the sending and receiving of email. Alternatively, for physical submissions you can adopt a "locked box" submission system where you have a box for submissions that cannot be accessed by students and you immediately record the submissions that are present in it whenever you remove them from the box. Finally, if you particularly want to stick with physical submission in-class then you could create a list of students with "tear-off" submission receipts; as you collect the work you could tick off each student and provide them with a submission receipt, which means that both parties have a record of submission.
All of these methods require some work, though the online methods are fairly simple given that almost all work is done electronically nowadays. There may be some initial time-investment in setting up such a system and getting used to using it, but it is likely to be useful in the long-term to ensure you do not encounter this situation again.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/03/28
| 1,747
| 7,350
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am planning to write a journal article about real-world algorithms solving a practical problem for an IEEE Computer Society transactions journal. The section outline currently is as follows:
1. Introduction
2. Related work
3. Problem definition
4. Simple algorithm for a simpler problem that cannot be scaled up to the real problem but is very interesting from mathematical viewpoint
5. Several mathematical observations from the simple algorithm
6. Simple algorithm that can be scaled up
7. Good, slow algorithm, as used in literature
8. Implementation details of our version of the good, slow algorithm
9. Another good algorithm from the literature and some improvements to it
10. Even more improved version of the Section 9 algorithm
11. How to deploy Section 6 algorithm for worldwide use
12. How to deploy Section 9/10 algorithm for worldwide use
13. Results and discussion
14. Discussion about one important point that could be claimed to invalidate the results but in reality doesn't
15. Conclusions
So, there are 15 sections. In IEEE double column style, the text is now 7 pages + references + biographies, but I expect it to grow to 10 pages + references + biographies because some of the sections are empty currently, their text not being written yet.
Now, my question is: do I have too many sections? I have intentionally kept the sections concise, not being too wordy. So they explain things just once and expect the reader to understand. So, the paper is not overly long.
The paper is quite conclusive because it explores 4 different algorithms and manages to optimize one of them to be fast enough to be used in practice. I don't want to remove any content because it would make the paper less conclusive. The results are important as well: the best algorithm as optimized by me runs over 60 000 times faster than equivalent prior art algorithm in the Section 3 problem.
I don't see any simple yet good reorganization into subsections: for example, Section 5 really has to be immediately after Section 4 so that the reader doesn't forget the important things from Section 4 when reading Section 5. So I can't combine Sections 4-10 into subsections of an algorithm section, because in the middle there would be a mathematical observation section unrelated to algorithms. In theory, Sections 11-12 could be combined to be subsections of a deployment section, but that would save just one section number. Another way to save one section number would be to do this:
13. Results and discussion
* 13.1. Results
* 13.2. Discussion
* 13.3. Discussion about one important point that could be claimed to invalidate the results but in reality doesn't
After really hard work, I came up with the following barely acceptable outline having less sections:
1. Introduction
2. Related work
3. Problem definition
4. Simple algorithm for a simpler problem that cannot be scaled up to the real problem but is very interesting from mathematical viewpoint
5. Several mathematical observations from the simple algorithm
6. Scalable algorithms
* 6.1. Simple algorithm that can be scaled up
* 6.2. Good, slow algorithm, as used in literature
* 6.3. Implementation details of our version of the good, slow algorithm
* 6.4. Another good algorithm from the literature and some improvements to it
* 6.5. Even more improved version of the Section 6.4 algorithm
7. Deployment
* 7.1. How to deploy Section 6.1 algorithm for worldwide use
* 7.2. How to deploy Section 6.4/6.5 algorithm for worldwide use
8. Results and discussion
* 8.1. Results
* 8.2. Discussion
* 8.3. Discussion about one important point that could be claimed to invalidate the results but in reality doesn't
9. Conclusions
Is this 9 section outline better?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you improved it a lot with the 9-section outline, because:
* It is much easier to communicate the tiered the structure of the paper to the reader, which makes readers and reviewers much happier.
+ It is easier for readers to scan through and understand the main outline of the paper, instead of having to figure out for themselves which points are more closely related.
+ It is easier for your to preview the shorter outline in words near the beginning, than if you're thinking of it as 15 sections.
* It may slightly save you space, because subheadings likely take up less room than main headings.
Here are two additional potential revisions to further streamline:
* Change point 5 into a subpoint under point 4. It's still about that simple algorithm. (As I just saw, lighthouse keeper also advises this.)
* Shorten the title for 8.3. (Obviously, you're giving a generic version, but it could be done briefly by saying "Addressing Entropy Concern," replacing "Entropy" with a reference to whatever issue thoughtful reviewers may anticipate as a problem.)
Someone in your field may have better comments about whether the information you want to pack in here is all too much to effectively demonstrate in a 10-page paper. In particular, the simple, unscalable, mathematically interesting algorithm might not be as related to the rest, if you must cut something.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The nine-point list is certainly much better than the fifteen-point list, but it should still be reduced further, with some sections being incorporated into others. For an article this short (7-10 pages) it would probably be excessive to have sub-headings, and you could easily deal with these matters under the main section headings. The section names should be short and clear; you should avoid excessively long descriptive titles. It is okay to incorporate multiple results under a single generic section without giving sub-headings for each particular item of discussion. For an article with only 7-10 pages, I would suggest that it is reasonable to encapsulate this in five or six sections. If you want to get it down to its bare bones, I would suggest something like the following:
>
> 1. Introduction and literature
>
>
> * Introduce the problem
> * Set out relevant literature and related work
> 2. Problem definition and scalability issues
>
>
> * Define the problem
> * Introduce your simplified algorithm and discuss scalability
> * Differentiate this algorithm from your problem to discuss the difficulty of the problem
> 3. Scalable algorithms
>
>
> * Discuss each of the scalable algorithms
> * Compare these as they are discussed
> * Discuss deployment of these algorithms
> 4. Results and discussion
> 5. Conclusions
>
>
>
You mention in your post that one of your difficulties is that you introduce mathematical results that are important to the problem but unrelated to the algorithms. If this is the case, that stuff should be introduced in the section on the problem definition, in order to elucidate the problem. If you are concerned that the mathematical parts could interrupt the flow of the paper, you could consider framing some of these a "Remark" (often presented like a theorem, in its own little paragraph).
Ultimately, what you seem to want to do is to present a problem with a simplified algorithm and some math results to elucidate it, and then discuss four more complex algorithms in greater details. The should be able to be achieve in something like the above structure.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/28
| 298
| 1,269
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've read posts from journal editors on Academia Stack Exchange that the first thing they do is check the word count of submitted articles.
How do journal editors check the word count of submitted articles, considering that authors may submit articles in pdf format with numerous tables and figures?
To check my own articles, PDFs produced in LaTeX, I open my PDF, select all, then copy-paste into Microsoft Word. This method overestimates the number of words since it includes all page numbers and all numbers inside tables, but I prefer it to TeXcount (<http://app.uio.no/ifi/texcount/online.php>) since it includes references and bibliography.<issue_comment>username_1: One way to do it is
$ pdftotext paper.pdf | wc -w
This command works on most Linux systems and what it basicaly do is convert the pdf to text then count the words.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect that in many cases where the authors submit a PDF and the editors do not use Linux (as may be the case in many disciplines, including most arts and humanities disciplines), that an exact word count may not be obtained. Instead, an approximate word count based on the length and formatting of the manuscript can be determined.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/03/28
| 276
| 1,108
|
<issue_start>username_0: I do not understand NSF grants.
Does the researcher make any money from them? I mean, if they spend 10 hours a week working on the project, are they compensated? Can they be compensated directly from NSF funds? Not to sound greedy, but let's say I'm a tenured professor who's perfectly capable of doing outstanding research on my own. What incentive would I have to try to get a NSF grant, if it's just for my department to distribute to other people to work with me? I want some money.<issue_comment>username_1: One way to do it is
$ pdftotext paper.pdf | wc -w
This command works on most Linux systems and what it basicaly do is convert the pdf to text then count the words.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect that in many cases where the authors submit a PDF and the editors do not use Linux (as may be the case in many disciplines, including most arts and humanities disciplines), that an exact word count may not be obtained. Instead, an approximate word count based on the length and formatting of the manuscript can be determined.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/03/29
| 869
| 3,583
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a final year student (B.Sc.) I wrote a paper, but didn't keep my supervisor as co-author since he hadn't contributed at all (in research and paper-writing). I am about to submit my paper to a journal(single-blind peer review).
Does the chance of being accepted a paper to a journal increase if one of the Co-Author is Ph.D./Professor ?
Should one keep his thesis supervisor as co-author for above?
I mean, is there a chance that the reviewer will consider my paper a bit differently/lightly/neglectfully ?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know the policy of your University. But I know mostly in universities, a PhD student can not conduct any independent work beyond his thesis. So if the work is under your PhD thesis, then you must have to keep your supervisor as a co-author. Not only that, but you must need to discuss with your supervisor before writing the paper. So please be confirm your university policies before submitting this as a single author.
If your university allows to do such kind of independent research during work time or after office hours or weekends, then you can submit it as a single author. Keeping your supervisor as a co-author will definitely increase the chance of acceptance if he is a well known person to your research community. Moreover, he may change the structure and write ups in your manuscript because he is experienced, so definitely it will increase the acceptance. On the other hand, if you thing neither he is well known nor he will improve the structure of the manuscript, then go ahead as a single author. By the way, single author papers have high values than the papers with co-authors.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Does the chance of being accepted a paper to a journal increase if one of the Co-Author is Ph.D./Professor ?
>
>
>
No, not under normal circumstances. Some reviewers may like a paper just because one of the authors is a great guy, or the paper is coming from a great institute - and a reviewer might suggest to accept a paper even if he doesn't understand it - but this should not be the rule.
>
> Should one keep his thesis supervisor as co-author for above?
>
>
>
No, one should only keep authors that deserve authorship. There are likely reasons why you should have your supervisor as co-author on the paper. He might have helped you in other ways, and this way, made a significant contribution to your work (discussions for example). However, you should not add someone as author to please them, to make a better impression, or anything else.
>
> I mean, is there a chance that the reviewer will consider my paper a bit differently/lightly/neglectfully ?
>
>
>
No (except in cases described under the first question). However, it is not unlikely that you - as bachelor student - don't have the experience and overview of the field, the methods, and the art of paper-writing, to create a publishable paper on your own. If you do - congrats.
I would suggest you
* think carefully about if your supervisor didn't contribute after all, and
* discuss the matter with your supervisor.
He might not even want to be on your paper (because he didn't contribute, or because he thinks it's not good enough). If he does want to be on your paper, but you don't agree with his arguments, you might want to come back here and check other, related questions, for example this one: [Should you include your main supervisor as a co-author?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/75514/should-you-include-your-main-supervisor-as-a-co-author)
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/03/29
| 2,628
| 11,240
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my PhD thesis, I often used the first person singular during the description of the problem and the discussion of the results. One comment from the reviewer states that because I did not use the third person, the entire thesis must be revised accordingly.
I understand that in a journal article one should use the third person to describe the problem and discuss the findings. However, I always supposed that one can use the first person in a PhD thesis because I saw many researchers doing so. Could anybody give me a suggestion about how to deal with the reviewer who doesn't accept my choice to write in the first person?<issue_comment>username_1: There is an annoying truth here: What's OK in a PhD thesis and what not largely depends on the reviewers. Some people in academia have a huge inflated ego and prefer things to be done as they suggest, and the reviewer in your case is possibly among those people. You don't want to fight with them on this kind of issue.
If the reviewer has other comments that tend to create additional work without clearly improving the thesis, you may consider exchanging the reviewer.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: [There is no steadfast rule](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11659/using-first-person-or-third-person-in-papers) that applies across disciplines, countries, fashions, and personalities.
Do what makes your reviewers happy. Their demand is annoying, but not utterly unreasonable. More importantly, they decide over your defense and thereby your future.
This is not something worth fighting over, and certainly no reason to change supervisors.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: A lot has been covered by other answers, but I just wanted to add something that came up while I was working on my thesis.
The faculty at my university always suggested that in the "Contributions" section (of the Introduction), you list your contributions in first person. For example, "I was responsible for implementing X on Y and testing Z", "I authored a paper in IEEE Transactions on ABC" and so on.
For the rest of the thesis it was passive, but that one section was handled differently. Of course, discuss this with your supervisor and reviewers first.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As a side point, It is very convenient to use the term "we" in a draft of a paper, in the off-chance that an additional author joins for one reason or another (someone you consult makes a significant contribution, two articles with similar content are independently published on a pre-print server, and a joint paper is in order).
Also, some boiler-plate introduction of terms/notions can be almost copy-pasted between projects, some with one author, some with several. Changing all 'I' to 'we' must be annoying.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: We think that they can either suck it up, or keep using they as it clarifies very much the thesis.
And by they I mean you, by we I mean they, or something like that.
**I** wrote my PhD thesis by putting "**I**" everywhere when the norm was a vaporous "we, the people". I wrote it, together with MY brain and, most importantly, MY ego. The dog did not type it either, though we could be all-encompassing.
I find it ridiculous to use a metaphorical *"we"* or *"they"*, or *"the neighbour"* when talking about one's own work. We should share their salary, while we are at it.
Now your question is whether you can do something or not, which is completely up to the jury or referrer. Sure you can. And sure they can make your life miserable.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: 1. Writing style is not a big deal. If you have a strong and reasonable opinion about style, you have a good chance to defend it, because people won't care too much.
2. Depends on the country, but I think in general, not all reviewers get to approve the final version of your thesis. Some suggestions of those who do not, especially suggestions about style, can be silently ignored.
3. If "third person", as in "he" or "she", is actually what you meant to say then it does not seem common in the West, which makes it more likely that you can just ignore this suggestion.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Despite this academic's personal embrace of first person writing, many respected colleagues despise even a hint of first person narrative. In their honor, here are a few ways writing improves without the first person.
* Phrases like "I think that" and "I believe that" often sneak into writing and water it down. Excising the first person can make the arguments bolder, as well as more readable.
* Even in presenting results or discussion or a conclusion, "I find that..." might already be implicit. For instance, replacing, "I find that the sky appears blue," with "The sky appears blue," yields a stronger topic sentence for the paragraph. Again, sentences can gain authority while becoming briefer.
* More broadly, the best writing tells a story. However, the narrative that is often closest to an author's mind is their own journey through the topic. Only exceptional circumstances make that autobiography a compelling narrative to frame a research paper. Instead, "storytelling" should almost always give the reader insight into the research, perhaps by highlighting an incident captured in and illuminated by the data, or a metaphor to characterize molecules' motion, or as the puzzle of why X commonly happens after Y.
As other answers here emphasize, if that committee member cares enough about this point and must approve the final draft, then editing it is the wisest course of action. If there are hints (from that person or others) **why** they care, that may allow for compromises that meet those objectives without a full edit, or it may at least make the time spent editing out "I"s feel less bitter. And upon reviewing sentences in the thesis that use the first person, if patterns emerge, editing only the frequent, most problematic contexts (such as "I think...") may appease that reader.
(This answer uses neither the first nor second person, without relying on the passive voice. It is possible by (occasionally) relying on the impersonal pronoun, using gerunds to discuss action without having to identify an actor, and making inanimate things into grammatical subjects. It makes for an annoying writing experience, and hopefully such edits will not be mandatory after all for the thesis in question.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: In my opinion, avoiding first person and sticking to passive voice is beneficial for two reasons, one philosophical and one practical.
Starting with the practical - parts of the thesis are likely to be used as a base for subsequent journal articles. As the OP says, journal articles have a fairly set format. By sticking to the same format in the thesis, a lot of redundant writing effort could be saved. It would also be a sort of dry run- one can identify problematic/ambiguous phrases/paragraphs, which are to be avoided in later manuscripts.
On the philosophical front, any piece of scientific writing should, IMO, primarily convey scientific results and secondarily the methodology used by the researcher. Certainly, researchers deserve credit for novel methods followed, but this shouldn't overshadow the results/inferences. I believe passive voice acts as a safeguard against this.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: With due respect - everyone's answers here are mostly irrelevant. The suggestions, ideas and perceptions we here on Academia.SX have on this issue are not the authoritative answer you need to get you past the review.
You need to talk to:
1. Your advisor
2. The administrator in charge of the "thesis phase" of PhDs in your department or your graduate school
They have some or lots of experience, respectively, with this situation, and will tell you what you should/must do when faced with such a demand from a reviewer. They may also contact the reviewer on your behalf if they believe s/he is wrong, or to explain the regulations to him/her etc.
Note that it might even be the case that you're *expected* to use the first person, and other reviewers will get annoyed if you switch. So you can't just cater to one person - you need to check what the default is.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_10: I am in favor of clear writing and against the academic attitude. All that said, I would still go ahead and write it like a normal journal article. Use the third person and the "we/our" for most of the results. After all, you will probably add at least your advisor to the co-author list of papers coming out (or have already done so if you already wrote the journal articles).
Just scanned my thesis, which was mostly stitched together chemistry papers. Not like a European one where all it is, is the papers themselves. But pretty clearly taking different papers and with some minor edits changing them into chapters (e.g. combining redundant methods). I was pretty much either talking about the chemicals or using the passive voice or saying "our" for discussion of interpretation and such. But these were sections where I had co-authors, professor at least.
I did have one minor area (other than acknowledgements) where I used first person and got no static for it. Within the Intro, after giving a review of previous work, I discussed the research objectives (in a one para section called that) and used "my" in context of "my goals changed during the student. Initial my goal was X; subsequently it was Y. Didn't get any static for this--it was a helpful para to explain why the chapters to follow in the thesis were connected.
There are a lot of other areas where you can cut the crap and be honest (for example, I shared some important lab safety learnings and equipment construction that was helpful to subsequent students but really fit in a thesis more than a results journal article. I did that on purpose because the main audience was/is future group members.
But I wouldn't make a big deal of the impersonal style. Some of it is good (keeping attention on the chemical, not the researcher). Some of it is bad (pompousness, or not taking responsibility). But overall, it's not worth worrying about.
Get the union card done. Thesis is pass-fail and very little read. Don't mess with it too much, just wrap something up, get a job and boogie. Defense committees can be very accommodating as long as you have published well (already showing ability to make solid contributions) and have gotten someone to hire you!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: One quick solution could be to find another example of a thesis that has already been approved by your institution which also uses first person singular. If there is a precedent it might justify your use.
I remember that one of my reviewer comments about "aesthetic" language issues like this which I ignored: the reviewer suggested that I had not used a real word, I provided a link to a dictionary definition of the word, stated that it was a matter of preference, and that I would keep my original choice of word. (I do not claim that all comments can be rejected in this way, but my point is that it is possible.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/29
| 762
| 3,043
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am talking about computer science. Recently I did survey on my own i mean informally. I find out that there are some researchers who were able to do PhD in same area in 4 year as compare to other researcher who did their PhD in 6 or 6.5 year's in the same research area. Is it depends upon the duration of the PhD of supervisor or it depends upon the country etc.
**Question** : Why does a PhD take a longer time in some countries? What factors affect this? Does it affect the research quality? I mean if I am taking more time I should have more quality research.<issue_comment>username_1: Many factors that vary systematically between countries may affect time to graduation.
Here is an incomplete [list](https://www.admissiontable.com/how-do-you-compare-pursuing-a-phd-in-europe-vs-a-phd-in-usa/):
* In the U.S., grad school starts with studying for an MA degree; in Europe, an MA is a prerequisite to joining grad school
* whether or not PhD studies include classes
* availability, generosity and length of funding, vs. necessity to earn a living while working on the PhD
* incentives to delay graduation vs. incentives and opportunities to join the labor market as soon as possible
* quality of supervision and extent of leeway to pursue own interests and potential dead ends.
I'm not aware of any empirical studies testing each factor's relevance.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Why does a PhD take a longer time in some countries?
>
>
>
The most important factor is funding agency policy or lack thereof. Some funding agencies provide funds that cover a fixed period of time. Some issue penalties when a student exceeds the time limit. Local traditions are a secondary factor. Students often take as long as their funding situation permits them to take, even if they would earn more by graduating sooner.
>
> Does it affect the research quality?
>
>
>
It definitely affects the research quantity. A longer PhD leads to more results. Students who take a long time and do not have a lot of results might not have received the degree if they had less time. Research quality is a matter of opinion, but quality probably increases a bit with time.
My advice: get the shortest PhD that will get you where you want to be at the end of the PhD.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Just to add a few cents to username_1's answer with a background of computer science in Germany:
* In the US, a PhD is more regulated then e.g. in Germany. You are more focussed on one topic. In Germany, you often start in a broad range of topics and you'll have to find your specific topic in your first year.
* You often have other assignments like project management, writing grant applications or supporting grant applications, giving lectures, etc. This distracts you from your thesis, but will give you many management skills you'll need in your post-doc phase or in industry.
* Sometimes you are a victim of circumstances, e.g. partners not delivering stuff, sickness, family issues, ...
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/03/29
| 260
| 1,074
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had several interviews in December-February in R1 universities for tenure-track assistant professor positions in a life sciences field.
I was told that they would get back to me in March, so I emailed them and some have not replied back and some said to wait some more.
So, I was wondering if this is normal to wait for that long or "the ship has sailed" and I'm not getting any offers :(<issue_comment>username_1: Commiserations -- the job search is tough.
If they haven't gotten back to you by the time they said they would, it most likely means you are not their first preference candidate. They probably have already made an offer and are waiting to have that accepted or rejected. You could still get an offer as their second/third/fourth/etc. preference.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Sometimes, you **never** hear back from a committee.
I applied for a position and had an interview *three years ago*, and have not had so much as an acknowledgment that the interview even take place, let alone a rejection notice.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/03/30
| 1,289
| 5,246
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm always baffled that the preamble in introductions in scientific papers is pretty much always the same for papers dealing with the same topic. And yet, no two papers have the same introduction, since doing so would be plagiarism. Even worse, one cannot even copy this preamble from papers one has already written, as paper reviews are anonymous, so reviewers cannot know whether the author is plagiarizing or copying his/her own work.
At the same time, this feels like a huge waste of time, akin to writing essays in high school, where you have to paraphrase and write X number of words just to fill in the page.
Talking with other academics, this is pretty much a pain point for everyone, which not only annoys the writers, but also the readers, who must skip useless text every time they begin a new paper.
I guess a simple reference to a specific introduction is not enough, as a paper needs to stand to its own (if it even makes sense in this context), but why is it so ingrained that such text must be written and rewritten, ad infinitum, in a Sisyphean effort?
EDIT: Please note that I'm talking about just the preamble of the introduction. It makes sense that overall the introduction needs to be tailored on your specific contribution. But often papers start with a brief description of the field/topic it contributes to, the field's practical applicability, and possibly some related work that makes the field look good. The preamble is just the hook needed to place one's own contribution in an overall context (also to explain the topic to somebody who may have stumbled upon the paper), but at the same time there is no real requirement that it be rewritten new every time. So why?
As an example, consider, as posted in a comment, this preamble:
*Hedgehog hunting is an important problem in ecology. While the typical procedure consists of a) tracking, b) sniffing, c) aiming, d) shooting, e) desugaring, f) acquisition, the role of the spikes in sniffing did not come into the spotlight before the seminal work of Whippet et al. (2007). In this work we propose a radically different approach to hedgehog spike treatment by invoking desugaring before sniffling.*
But if I wanted to write about using metal spikes, you see that the first sentence wouldn't really need to change. And such preambles can usually take a whole paragraph or two, which makes the rewriting annoyance pretty big.<issue_comment>username_1: At a fundamental level, every new paper is (or should be) presenting something new, whether it be new results, methods, experiments or even summaries or reviews. The paper would be redundant if it didn't present *something* new.
The 'introduction' or 'motivation' section follows the title and abstract as the next link in the chain to motivate people to read your paper in its entirety. Since it's *your* paper that you want to motivate people to read, it doesn't make sense to copy the words intended to motivate people to read some *other* paper.
There may be parts that overlap with prior work (and [other answers](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/103018/85564) on the site suggest methods to deal with that), but if you want your motivation section to relate to the **novel** elements of your paper, it needs to be recast for each new paper.
Your question (especially *per* your update) is why this boilerplate text can't be either copied or left out altogether.
When I'm presented with a paper, I am not always motivated to read it at first, so it doesn't help for the author to jump straight to the equations or experimental results, etc. What *does* help is to start with **common ground**. This is the job of the preamble. You can't leave it out altogether for the same reason libraries include the first part of each book's Dewey Decimal Number on every book - it's needed when the work is separated from the collection.
As for copying, it's a matter of skill in the craft to keep it concise, yet useful:
>
> No one prevents you from copying a few sentences from your previous papers. Except that perhaps page/word limits will encourage you to jump as quickly as possible to your actual contribution. – [<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107296/why-cant-motivations-in-a-papers-introduction-be-copied#comment280501_107304)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think copying a few sentences or a paragraph from your own work constitutes self-plagiarism, which is discouraged/prohibited, depending on the field/journal. So it shouldn't matter whether the review is single- or double-blind.
Now, take a moment to consider the positives in this. The OP mentions inconvenience to the writer, which is often valid. However, writing the preamble in a different way, adding a new update or turn of phrase can make the paper more engaging for readers and increase recall value. If there already exist a lot of similar papers in the field, this helps your work to stand out, and additionally, can hook new readers from related-but-not-identical fields. I think the preamble adds to the character of the paper, so in best case, it is time/effort well invested. In the worst case, well, there is no choice, so lemonade from lemons.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/03/30
| 590
| 2,524
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a junior economics major who wants to get a masters and then possibly a PhD. I know that math background is a very important component of economics grad school admissions and so I'm also minoring in math. The problem is is that I haven't taken either real analysis or an upper-level linear algebra course yet (I did take an undergrad linear algebra course over the summer and got an A in it). While I have the GPA needed to get into most masters programs and I expect to do well on the GRE, I'm afraid that my transcript as of my junior year isn't very reflective of my math abilities. During my sophomore year I was in a really bad place dealing with both anxiety and depression (I know everyone uses this excuse, but I have the doctor diagnosis to prove it) and I got a C in my calc 2 class and a B in vector calculus even though I could have gotten an A.
Since my math background is so important for econ grad school, should I even bother applying before completing these upper-level courses that will better showcase my ability to do the math that economics grad school requires?<issue_comment>username_1: There are lots of programs where important classes are not taken by students until their senior year, largely because of the design of the major. Also, in most cases, if there is a "capstone" course, it's not taken until the final year, and grades would not be ready until after applications are due. However, this has not proven to be an obstacle for students applying to grad school, because the people making the decisions are cognizant of such organizations, and take this into account when making their decisions.
So don't worry too much about applying with your senior year courses missing—most of your peers will be in a similar situation!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The Director of Undergraduate Studies and/or your advisor in your major & minor would be helpful for this. The Econ DUS could advise you on what kinds of schools may be interested, and the Math DUS and/or your linear algebra instructor may be able to mention your struggles in a recommendation letter and endorse your demonstrated aptitude for math.
Doing well in a calculus-based econometrics class will also allay concerns.
Do practice for the GRE. It has a lot of formulaic questions about ratios, which go a lot quicker once you're used to them. Unfortunately, I don't remember it having calculus-based problems, so you could not directly use it to make up for your grades there.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/03/31
| 224
| 940
|
<issue_start>username_0: I served as a judge in a science competition for high, middle and elementary school students. I am confused if I can put this activity in my resume. Also, I do not know in which section I need to include if I can put this on my resume.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: What is this resume for?
If it's for a job judging science competitions, put it on there.
If it's for a job herding goats in Peru, leave it off.
Anything in the middle, use your experience in judgement to decide if it's relevant.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Typically, such activities would be listed under "service activities" in a CV or "other professional activities" in a resume. However, I would argue that such activities be limited to "ongoing" professional activities. Something you did just once probably should not be listed on your resume; an activity you do year after year probably should.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/03/31
| 567
| 2,084
|
<issue_start>username_0: Astronauts aboard the ISS help perform plenty of experiments during their flight. Do they get listed as co-authors for the research they help conduct?<issue_comment>username_1: [Here](https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/results_category) is a page collecting research performed on the ISS, with citations to published papers. And [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_International_Space_Station_crew) is a list of ISS crew. The first few papers I checked from the [2015-16 report](https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/iss_annual_results_highlights_2017_singlepage_11-9-17.pdf) didn't have any crew members among their authors.
This seems reasonable to me. Normally authorship is based on making an *intellectual* contribution to the project: designing experiments, analyzing data, and so on. I wouldn't particularly expect the astronauts to be involved that way - I'd assume they are mainly just carrying out the procedures designed by other researchers. It's an important role, obviously, but it's not what authorship is intended to recognize.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is an anecdotal non-answer to a somewhat different question, but I know of [one scholarly paper](http://www.mathematica-journal.com/issue/v7i3/special/) that was authored by an astronaut, <NAME>, in connection with his experiences aboard the Mir Space Station in 1997.
The full (and quite fascinating) story that led to the publication of this paper is told [here](https://plus.maths.org/content/right-spin-how-fly-broken-space-craft) and [here](http://www.mathematica-journal.com/issue/v7i3/special/transcript/html/) (and, most memorably in my opinion, [here](http://www.msri.org/web/msri/online-videos/special-productions-events/the-right-spin); sadly this excellent video is not freely available online, which is a pity because I play it for my students every time I teach a calculus class and they find it pretty inspiring, which suggests that other math instructors could benefit from doing that as well).
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/01
| 2,315
| 9,934
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have applied to and been offered admissions to a masters program in a U.S. university, but I'm still waiting to hear back from some other places. The deadline to accept is before the 4/15 national deadline for funded graduate programs (as the program I've been accepted to is not funded).
I've expressed my situation and my concerns, and my intent to enroll in the program unless I am offered admission to a funded program. However, the admissions staff claims that what I'm suggesting (withdrawing my acceptance at a later date) is unethical, and that I must commit to or decline the offer from their program by their deadline. There were also unwilling to give an extension.
While I understand that it's not good to cancel on anyone in any case, I feel that I am not acting unethically this way, and that actually they're acting unethically on their part! If I understand correctly, they likely do have a waitlist of some kind and still can offer my place to another students even if I withdraw. However, if I decline their offer, there is no way for *me* to change my mind!
So, is it ethical to make students make a decision before they've even heard back from all places they have applied to? If the admissions staff are not willing to change their mind, what can I do besides withdrawing from their acceptance at a later date anyway?<issue_comment>username_1: Ethical for them to have this deadline. Also ethical for you to cancel the acceptance of an unsupported position if you later get an offer for a supported position elsewhere. Doing this would burn bridges only between you and the admissions folks (not professors) but keep in mind they have backup students waitlisted to account for cancellations.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The [April 15 Resolution](http://cgsnet.org/ckfinder/userfiles/files/CGSResolution_RevisedMarch2018.pdf) technically applies only to offers of financial support, not to offers of admission. There’s no clear-cut rule saying a school can’t require an early answer for admissions, saying it’s unethical to do so is a difficult claim to make. To my mind, it’s definitely poor form and suggests that the program is either (a) quite prestigious and doesn’t need to worry too much about yield or (b) rather noncompetitive and desperate for enrollees, but they’re risking rejections as well with the hardline approach they’re taking. (Funny how extreme cases in different directions can take the same approach!)
However, given that the program in question is *unfunded*, it's completely unreasonable for them to expect you to commit irrevocably to an offer of admission, particularly since they are effectively not committing any additional resources to offer you admission. I would thus feel no moral qualms whatsoever in withdrawing my acceptance if another, funded program were to make an offer before the April 15 deadline.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I concur with the other answers that for an unfunded program there is no ethical issue for you withdrawing if you obtain a funded position, although you will definitely burn bridges as noted. However, there may be complicating circumstances.
In my case, I applied to schools A, B, and C. All three were a part of the same university system but different locations and aside from the overarching administrative structure the schools considered themselves relatively independent of each other. My first choice was school A. I interviewed at all three and first received an acceptance from school C, my last choice. I had seven days to respond, and accepting their offer of admission would automatically withdraw my applications at schools A and B. Within that time period I received an acceptance from school B and an offer of a small scholarship from the overarching university, transferable to any of the schools to which I had applied. I politely declined school C, but again I had only seven days to accept or reject school B's offer. As before, accepting the offer would have withdrawn my application to school A, my first choice. In the end, I declined school B also, prior to receiving an acceptance from school A, but I definitely do not recommend that strategy without thorough analysis of the risks.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I have another perspective on this. They are well aware of what they are asking for and the implications for the students. In fact it seems obvious that they are deliberatly forcing an early decision for that very reason. My question then becomes, if they are acting this way now how will they act after the students have enrolled? Is that really a school that seems like they are putting the quality of the education first or are they more likely to squeeze as much money from you as possible? If you have to ask if your prospective school behaves ethically at the first contact I would be very sceptical to their entire business. Granted, I'm from a country where all education are free so YMMV.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: TL;DR: "What else can you do...?" Ask admissions officers at schools you're waiting on so you might get more information. There may also be value in asking faculty you know well.
I make the **assumption that faculty at that masters program would have little power/incentive to change the commitment deadline for the OP** in this case; any comments with evidence for or against this assumption would be useful.
---
You have two pressing questions: is what they are doing ethical, and what can you do? (I now address the ethical question at the end.)
Since that program does not want to budge, you could politely inquire of one of the programs you are waiting to hear from. If you explain this situation, saying that you take a commitment to a school seriously, they may be able to address whether you still have a reasonable chance of admission to their school this year and/or whether you are likely to hear a decision by the masters program's deadline.
Because of the April 15 Resolution, the other admissions offices are probably not bombarded with these questions (I assume). An administrator would probably feel free to say that they cannot answer the question if they do not want to or cannot answer. This approach is unlikely to yield a definitive answer unless there is a yes or a no they are about to send out, but it might give you more information before you send a deposit.
If you have a good relationship with a faculty contact at a school you're waiting to hear from (e.g. a recommender or someone you have extensively talked with about potentially working with them), you could explain the situation and ask if they have any advice. You may get no response (faculty are busy), generic advice (such as you're getting on this site), or advice with inside info ("Well, you're near the top of our list..." or "This was a strong class of applicants this year, so it would take a lot of luck for this to happen..." or "We're really not sure yet what our class will look like, and we don't usually know further until much closer to April 15.").
Unless you have an extremely good relationship with a faculty contact at this unfunded masters program (for instance, they were your undergrad advisor as well), it would probably do little good to ask advice of a faculty member there. You'd be questioning your commitment to their program (which would not be a great way to start a relationship with someone there if you do attend). Faculty may have little control over the present workings of the administrative process, and/or changing the rules for you might set a precedent that harms their program.
---
Ethics:
I believe I'm in agreement with the other posters on what your course of action should be, though everyone phrases it slightly differently. **If you do not have all your information, it is OK to accept the offer but back out later.** It's within the school's rights to demand whatever they want, as they are not bound by the agreement for funded graduate programs, but that their demands are somewhat coercive toward someone in your position and that it would be best (though beyond what is ethically *required* of them) to give you more time. (Especially so because they did not make this timing conflict clear when you applied.) Given the existence of a deposit payment, you are not obligated to remain enrolled if a far more beneficial offer comes along: they have made this a financial obligation on top of/rather than one of honor. (In the U.S. mortgage crisis, the people who were worst off were those who felt *morally* obligated to continue payments on their "underwater" mortgages, while more financially savvy people cut their losses and walked away.)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: **There are no rules or standards, so they can set their deadlines however they like.**
However, they cannot tell you that accepting and then withdrawing is unethical---the lack of established rules applies the same way. This is especially true if, as I suspect, they are discouraging that behavior for their own convenience.
**If that statement was driven primarily by their own interests, it is disingenuous or deceitful---and therefore unethical.**
So, overall, I would say that the deadline itself is not a problem, but they crossed the line when they insisted that you cannot withdraw.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I have nothing to add to the ethical discussion of other commentators. However, if you want to get a better understanding of why these short-deadlines occur, and the 'game theory' behind them, it is worth reading some of the works of the mathematical-economist [Prof <NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_E._Roth). He has written a [book](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0544705289) about this, and there is also a [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDQm1Yk6b9o) of him talking about the subject.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/01
| 718
| 3,072
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a manuscript A, ready for submission, that describes a method for characterizing topographic features (computer sciences). I also have another manuscript B, ready for submission, that uses the method from the manuscript A where I extract the features I want and do some statistical analyses to explain the topographic variations (geosciences). A and B cannot be merged, and I consider to publish them in different journals since they treat different topics.
Should I submit A and B at the same time, but mention in B that I use a method from A? If yes, what should put as in-text citation?<issue_comment>username_1: Is there a compelling reason to submit both simultaneously? In case (I hope this doesn't happen!) there is an oversight in A, and the reviewer asks for modifications to the method, the results in B may no longer be valid. So it would be better to wait for acceptance of A.
If you must submit both soon because of deadlines etc, you can cite A as "journal xyz- submitted" (i.e. 'submitted' in place of volume number etc). This does happen now and then, but in my field (materials science), most journals discourage it.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'd consider sending at least A to arXiv, then you'd have something to cite in B. The local culture is very different about preprint in various fields, but computer science is IMO quite Ok with arXiv preprints.
Another idea would be to submit A as is, but in B submission also to supply A manuscript as additional material for review.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a very normal thing and no big deal. Just cite the other one with whatever the citation format is. Obviously you won't have a volume number or page numbers and add "In preparation." Or "Submitted." Or "In press." (Whatever applies.)
Note: that some reasonable portion of such prospective citations don't ever turn into articles or go into alternate journals or whatever. But such is life. No big deal. You are being as honest and accurate as you can at the time doing the citation. It is still possibly useful to a future researcher for years in the future, who may want to look for related papers when looking at the one paper. You are doing the best you can.
---
Note 2: There may be very good reasons to have separate papers like this. For example if you discovered and characterized a new important chemical with new apparatus, you may want to go into lots of detail on the chemical but not in detail on the apparatus for a chemicals journal...and then the converse for an apparatus journal. In addition, sometimes work has natural break points (chemical A and chemical B discovered with some connection) where it is really better for the reader to get an LPU (least publishable unit) on A and one on B. It's a judgment call and some people think it is done to pad count, but I actually prefer LPU papers because they are a bit more readable and focused. You can do a review paper later that combines some of them. Also LPUs are faster to get out.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/01
| 847
| 3,466
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am preparing for a timed post-graduate test (for example, GRE, GMAT etc.). I get hung-up on questions where I don't immediately find a path, and then beat myself over not doing it fast enough while I am still on the question. This further increases my time on the question by taking focus away from the problem at hand.
Additionally, the above gets compounded with thoughts of inadequacy- "I am dumb" etc. etc. This adds to the time guilt and takes away from thinking clearly about problem solving.
If you've had a similar experience, what did you do during test taking to overcome it?<issue_comment>username_1: I would suggest getting used to self-proctoring practice exams within a certain time limit. Keep at it until you figure out how to determine when it is fruitful to skip a question. Come back to it later when you have an ah-ha moment or finish the exam. As for worrying about spending too much time or self-depreciating yourself, try to minimize it. Remember your successes. Take time to build up your confidence both inside and outside academia and strive to do the best you can do.
Think of every difficulty as a chance to be humbled, and use that outlook to find wisdom in the experience. In grad school, I'm sure you'll encounter this same feeling just by speaking with people whom are your senior.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've done the GRE with a decent score.
Here is the deal: you ought to realize that the type of difficulty you are facing now are the real test in there. No one cares if you know triangles, but can you conquer the stress of the test? That's what you will be training.
So, here are some tips. You can score greatly on the gre by skipping some questions and, actually, it is almost mandatory that you guess some. Why? Because answers for which you don't know the solution (or a reasonable path to the solution) are subtracting time from questions you know how to do or for which you can work out a solution in a reasonable time.
So, do practice :
* Assessing whether you know the answer right away after reading
* Assessing whether you can reasonably work it out in a short time. This is the hardest bit, and it's a bit trying to answer and a bit guesstimating.
* If you can't, can you reduce the answer pool by a couple of patently absurd answers ? If you can, then guess and move on. This is a crucial skill: a question that you get right half of the time is worth half a point. Don't think it is worth half a point on average, think that is worth half a point, period. In fact, by saving time and energy for other questions it is worth much more than that.
* if you can't, skip it and don't waste other time on it (unless you have spare time at the end).
* Find a strategy that works for you to minimize aggressive thoughts: it might be de escalating with a recurring mental joke ("Well, I guess I **will** be a baker in the end, at least dad will be happy!"), it might be just pushing back ("Not now brain, test!"), it might be focusing on the content ("Sure, brain, but what's the sum of the angles of triangle again?"). If you find this hard it's because it is. But remember : this is a skill just like multiplication, you have to train that too and you can and by training it will improve!
Let me add that these kind of thoughts you are having are rather normal, but depending on the severity of your aggressive thoughts you might want to have some counseling.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/01
| 653
| 2,639
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated with a PhD after 2 years (I was very efficient) and even though I have already received my degree and moved out of town, I'm still getting a stipend deposited into my bank account. I contacted my advisor about it but my advisor didn't reply at all, so I don't know what to do about this. Is there a minimum funding requirement or something like that? Or is it just a mistake? What to do now?<issue_comment>username_1: Contact your department, CC'ing your advisor.
It happened to me once: I was paid over the summer by my department even if I was out of the US for an internship at a company research lab in Europe.
I came back in September and found additional money in my US account. I told our administrator. she figured out what happened and she told me that in case I had already spent the money, the department would have found a way to ensure things would get straighten out with the university.
I still had all of it, so I just wrote a check to the university to return the money.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: This is like someone giving you wrong change or the bank crediting you money incorrectly in your checking account. You need to not spend it, let someone know and give the money back. Two reasons: (1) ethical--don't take money that doesn't belong to you, when given in error and (2) they will likely find out about it and want it back (and legally you have to give back a check or direct deposit sent in error).
Don't contact your professor, contact the payroll or whatever person like that. Make a call and send a letter.
P.s. If your current job overpays you in error, how are you going to handle that? What would you answer if this hypothetical was asked on a job interview?! You know the answer. [This isn't even really an academia question. This is a "what do I do if someone pays me too much in error" question.]
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is there a minimum funding requirement or something like that?
>
>
>
This happened in my case. There was a total amount of money dedicated to a project, payed in the form of a stipend. I finished the project earlier but the money continued to come.
Of course you should contact the relevant authorities (the ones who provided the stipend) and inform them about your case. This may be an error, in which case you are likely to be asked to give the money back (what happens depends on many parameters), or you may be in the lucky case I was in.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Contact university finance, your chair’s office, or bursars office. It is very likely you’ll have to pay it back.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/02
| 1,196
| 5,094
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am looking to publish a paper in computational biology. However, I have no affiliation (I have been affiliated with some institutions in the past, but am not currently affiliated with anyone now). I am also looking for a journal that will publish with no charge as I am low on funds.
I understand I should be able to publish a paper when my work is evaluated solely for its quality. However I have been unable to find any non-predatory and at least semi-legitimate computational biology journals that use double-blind review and are free to publish in.
I will submit my manuscript to bioRxiv, but would really like to publish in a journal. I am unsure how to proceed - should I try and submit to a single-blind journal and mark my affiliation as "independent scholar" or try some other way to publish to a double-blind computational biology journal?<issue_comment>username_1: Yeah, sure, just submit. You don't have to be at an institution to submit something. Is uncommon but not vanishingly rare. If you are worried about your work being stolen or your contribution downplayed than watch out. But realize this can happen if you are at an institution also.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, you have the following options:
* Write up and publish your article as an independent researcher. If your work is theoretical and mathematically provable then, there is a high chance that the lack of affiliation doesn't affect the way the editor approach your paper. However, if you are using a large volume of data and providing surprising results, then there is a high chance that your lack of credit (if I may assume it.) discourages the journal from publishing your work. The fact is that most of the journals cannot dig down and verify the reproducibility of large-scale analyses so their best bet is relying on the credential of institutes.
* Approach a PI in a related field to review your work and see if he can provide some feedback/comments on that. You can revise your manuscript based on your mutual discussions and add some potential experiments up and then publish it together. You probably would save a huge amount of money as you can depend on their funding resources.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It can't be denied that there is some sociological element in the peer review process, so the list of authors, their qualifications (some journals require this), the institution- all these shouldn't matter, but sadly they sometimes do. This is not to discourage you, but rather so you accept the finite probability that this could work against you.
Double-blind review is also not immune to this, because the editor will have your details, and he/she could also develop a negative opinion. So my suggestion would be to not look for too many double-blind journals, and submit to the wide range of single blind, free publishing journals one by one. Remember, this element is based on probability, so if you are willing to try several journals, you are automatically improving your chances (not to mention, potentially getting helpful reviews).
Another possibility is to work on the paper with someone you have been affiliated with in the past, and submit it as a joint publication. If that works out, some of your misgivings will be taken care of.
In any case, please don't hold back and not submit, getting a chance to publish is a universal right, even if you're not presently at an institution.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The review process can be political, but I think you are overestimating the risk of people rejecting your work out of hand because of your (lack of) affiliation. Bioinformatics actually has a couple of famous independent researchers, like [<NAME>](https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=RzVMRc0AAAAJ&hl=en), who developed MUSCLE. I think your odds of getting work published as an unaffiliated single author are actually much better in computational biology than in most of the life sciences.
As far as price goes, reputable OA journals often waive publication fees on a need-based, case by case basis. You request a waiver at submission and will get an answer within a week or two. Here's a link to info about fee waiver requests for [PLoS](https://www.plos.org/fee-assistance#loc-fee-assistance-programs) and [BMC](https://www.biomedcentral.com/getpublished/article-processing-charges/open-access-waiver-fund). Out of OA journals, I would consider PLoS Computational Biology and the BMC journals (BMC Bioinformatics, Genomics, etc. as appropriate for the topic), and maybe Nucleic Acids Research if your work fits their call for research.
You could also submit to Bioinformatics and not pay for the immediate OA option (the default is to embargo the paper for several months), though having your work be easily accessible could help it be more widely disseminated, especially as an unaffiliated scholar who is presumably not routinely presenting about the work. Also you would need to be more careful about self-archiving since in that case the bioRxiv policy is different.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/02
| 3,689
| 15,842
|
<issue_start>username_0: Warning: The following are stupid questions. (Read in Kiefer Sutherland's voice)
**Question 1** Is it weird or stupid to apply for a research assistant post at some university or research institute, and not a company in industry, with the purpose to gain research experience to boost profile for graduate studies, and why/why not?
* I think it could be weird or stupid for the same reason why you shouldn't [mention potential graduate study plans during job interviews](https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/2417).
* Then again, my understanding of research assistant posts is that they wouldn't be for long term employment as is the case in industry, say, "research" analyst jobs in industry. Rather [research assistant posts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_assistant) are usually on temporary contract. So, yeah, I am just doing this with the intention to apply for a PhD because I'm apparently not yet good enough to get into a PhD program.
* Based on what I've read online, this is the baby version of a postdoc, so postdoc is to faculty applications as research assistant is to PhD applications.
**Question 2** Who are the usual applicants of research assistant posts?
* I can't think of any applicants for research assistant posts besides people exactly in my situation: wants to go to grad school, is waiting in some process of grad school applications (for the application period to start, for the results of application to come out or, for those already accepted, for the semester to start) or wants to boost profile for grad school. Please enlighten for other cases.
**Question 3** What's the difference between a research assistant post and an internship in industry?
* I think I recall seeing some research assistant posts that pay as much as a full time job in industry, so I'm guessing research assistant posts are not necessarily simply academic versions of internships in industry. I think things like [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/78356) are academic versions of internships in industry. But my understanding is that they are both short-term. I guess a research assistant post would be analogous to a temporary contract job in industry.
**Question 4** To confirm, if research assistant posts are indeed on temporary contract or short-term, is there indeed a risk for someone to quit their regular full time industry job hoping that a research assistant post will boost their grad school application profile?
**Background:**
* Since I graduated master's in 2015-6, I started work as a maths teacher at a branch of a company that is something like Kumon. [I guess I haven't done research there.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/98146)
* I'm waiting for results for [PhD/MPhil applications for 2018-9](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/81571/). I already got rejected for one (well technically I'm not on the list of applicants who got initially offered admission, so I guess I could still be accepted if others on the list back out), and I think I'll be rejected for others.
* ETA: Not sure if this counts but I actually got accepted for an interview a few days after the deadline (early December 2017) for one university but the PhD position given to me by the professor said something like "experienced in XX" which I don't have. I'm still waiting to hear back from the university.
* For 2019-20 applications, I am thinking to boost my profile by, among others, working as a research assistant, either full time or part time. In the former case, I'll have to quit my job. In the latter case, I think I can downgrade to part time.
The following are related questions:
[How can I improve my research experience for PhD application?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1136/how-can-i-improve-my-research-experience-for-phd-application)
[How to boost academic profile for Master's application](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/71169/how-to-boost-academic-profile-for-masters-application)
[How to gain research experience after master program?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8106/how-to-gain-research-experience-after-master-program)
[If I cannot get sufficient recommendation letters, what can I do?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20323/if-i-cannot-get-sufficient-recommendation-letters-what-can-i-do)<issue_comment>username_1: You're mostly on track with your questions, and I wish you luck as you wait for your results and consider your career path. These answers are all in the U.S. context.
Q1: I like your analogy that (externally advertised) research assistant role : PhD student :: postdoc : faculty member. Several friends did research assistance for professors after undergrad and it (seems to have) helped them with their graduate applications. (I'm not sure how much they needed help. It also shows their commitment and gives them a chance to work with a professor whose work they're interested in, putting that prof in a good position to write a recommendation and/or to be a supervisor in graduate school.) Other friends did this while considering whether to get an advanced degree, and then they decided to go in a different direction, or they used experience working as a lab research assistant to go to a related professional school. (The friends I'm thinking of offhand have done this in history, economics, psychology, and chemistry. I am not sure whether the title was exactly "research assistant.")
I agree with other posters that you should look carefully at the content of the job to know whether it will be useful and to make sure you are interested in it. Then again, even fairly limited roles give you exposure to the research. For instance, many research assistant jobs may involve you administering surveys or scheduling lab time or transforming a stack of subjects' completed forms into a usable dataset. All of these give you valuable insight into the research process, but they are not glamorous and hopefully are not the full extent of your job. (If you find these wholly "grunt work" positions, then your suggestion of doing this part-time may be a good one.)
The most interesting and substantive parts of research assistance (writing in-depth literature reviews, designing research hypotheses, etc.) are the ones that lead to authorship. I would not be surprised if these were saved for students. I would not expect co-authorship from a position like this unless you build a very good relationship with the professor, make key intellectual contributions as new projects develop, and explicitly ask about authorship while a new project develops. But being good at a routine job such as accurately coding interview transcripts could convince the professor to give you more responsibility over time.
Q2: The most typical applicant would probably be recent graduates of that same institution. They're already local, may know the professors, and are more likely than the general public to be searching the university's job listings.
Q3: Internships in industry tend to have more structure to them, often with an explicit emphasis on training and perhaps trying to recruit the person to work there full time. Do not expect that your social/emotional/learning needs will be considered as a hired research assistant; you will have to be assertive to get what you need. The contractor mindset seems like a good one to expect.
Q4: Switching to be a research assistant is a risk, but if the industry job is not aligned well with the PhD program that you desire, then it will not move you toward that doctoral program. It sounds like in your current job you have taken initiative and learned new skills (per your linked question)--both essential for being a researcher. However, unless the topic of your dissertation will be about math education for students similar to the ones you're teaching now, I do not think that further experience in that post will help your PhD application.
If you do not get into a funded program this season, I might suggest two things:
1. Ask your recommenders or previous professors how competitive they think your application is, and think carefully about your fit with both the programs you're interested in and the jobs the programs would qualify you for. If you are still extremely interested in this path, then
2. Selectively look for research assistant positions.
* For each school you applied to, see if those departments are posting any positions you're qualified for.
* If not, politely reach out to professors whose work you're most interested in: say that you're extremely interested in their work, such that you applied to the program, and that you're interested in gaining research experience, and do they anticipate that they might be hiring anyone to assist with research, as you did not find any current postings on the [relevant university job board]? (Email subject should foreshadow, e.g. "Expecting any MA-level researcher openings?") These emails are a long shot, but one of them may pay off.
* You can apply for such positions at schools near where you are now, even if they are not of the same tier that you are applying to: working with a professor at a non-doctoral institution could still get you good experience and a good recommendation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Q1: Is it weird or stupid to apply for a research assistant post at some university or research institute, and not a company in industry, with the purpose to gain research experience to boost profile for graduate studies, and why/why not?
>
>
>
Not at all. In my field (biology), this is quite common, the only reason not to do it is that you think you can get admitted without it and are trying to save time. However usually the experience is also very valuable in learning what research is like and whether you even want to do it, or whether you like the field. In other STEM disciplines it also seems to be very common. I've heard of it happening in social sciences (psychology, sociology, history) as well, but I'm not sure how things are exactly there. Usually it's up to the PI if they want an assistant or not. There is a lot of variation there. Some PIs love it, some have zero interest. But there's no easy way to tell, and asking rarely hurts.
You should absolutely mention future grad school plans, firstly because many PIs strongly prefer people who are planning to go to grad school (they're seen as more motivated, there is less commitment as opposed to an indefinite employment contract, and hiring assistants in this way is seen as part of a professor's responsibility to future generations). I am not sure if the same can be said for people who seek similar posts in industry - most of my personal acquaintances have worked in university or national institute labs, not in companies. However, honestly it would be naive in this day and age for a company to expect 22 year old BS grads taking a lab tech position and be fully committed "lifers" - and if they really want you to not run off to grad school after a year, they should put it in the contract.
I'd say it's very different from a baby version of a postdoc. Postdocs are often expected to independently come up with hypotheses, design experiments, locate and order equipment/materials as needed, write grants and submit manuscripts to peer-reviewed journals. Rarely they may also teach and mentor others. As an assistant you will most likely be part of a postdoc's project - duties may range from mechanically doing some simple technique over and over (like running gels or feeding mice) to semi-independently doing a small part of the postdoc's project under constant supervision (but ideally you would always be expected to demonstrate good understanding of the science in discussions, even if you are doing pretty monotonous experiments). You may be expected to help write small parts of the paper, such as methods sections for experiments you did. Should you end up with a PI who encourages independence, you might design experiments or even provide feedback on equipment purchases, and if you are really lucky and hardworking you may even have the opportunity to submit a first author paper. But that would be exceeding everyone's expectations; needless to say, it will look very good on your application.
>
> Q2: Who are the usual applicants of research assistant posts?
>
>
>
I can't say for sure since I've never been in a position to hire such people. But based on experience and what I heard, the vast majority are either undergraduate students or recent grads planning to apply to a PhD program. Sometimes there are premeds but academics look down on them. There are occasionally people who don't necessarily have future plans, and are just curious about science, or maybe they want to do something related like patent law and decided to get a taste of what it's like in the trenches. I've never heard of anyone doing it just to pay bills, those people will usually have very long term positions (which may sometimes be called "technician", "scientist" or "assistant" etc).
>
> Q3: What's the difference between a research assistant post and an internship in industry?
>
>
>
Interns are *usually* expected to be short-term (3-6 mo) and part-time (<20 h/wk). The internship will often be coordinated with the university, and may be required to complete the degree, and result in a grade or certificate. These days governments try to crack down on unpaid work, but in practice there may be an (arguably unethical) expectation that interns work for free. Assistants should be longer term (>1 yr) and paid (and thus officially employed and eligible for benefits - interns sometimes "just come"). But the terms aren't too reliable - the goal of the posting is usually marketing first, accuracy second.
The linked post is for an MS student, those can often become involved in their PI's side-ventures depending on how things go. Usually it wouldn't apply to assistants both because their contribution is smaller, they are less independent, and they will soon begin a PhD program where they will be too busy to follow up. It can happen, though, if the professor really likes the assistant and the assistant isn't totally committed to going to grad school right away.
>
> Q4: To confirm, if research assistant posts are indeed on temporary contract or short-term, is there indeed a risk for someone to quit their regular full time industry job hoping that a research assistant post will boost their grad school application profile?
>
>
>
Anyone can quit a job any time. Nobody can make you show up. That's one of the few aces employees have in their deck against employers. However, grad applications give a lot of weight to recommendations. The experience you have won't be as well regarded if there isn't an accompanying letter from your boss praising you to the high heavens and saying in detail what a great job you did and what a golden grad student you would make. Obviously if the boss is pissed off at you for quitting out of nowhere, obtaining the letter might be an issue. However, if you worked with your boss on this, discussed your plans ahead of time, did whatever you could and the boss was still unreasonable the admission committee might take that into consideration. Sometimes there are people who did a stint in a lab and did good work but for some reason their supervisor really didn't like them so when they submit the letters and none of them are from this place they worked at. Then you have to sweat a little explaining all of this in a positive way while writing your SoP and other materials, bragging about how great your experience was but at the same time stepping around the fact that clearly you got your boss so mad you couldn't even get a letter from them.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/02
| 451
| 2,040
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a review paper and I came across a literature in which measurement of force is given in pounds and likewise for other quantities. In all the other papers, only the SI system of units is followed. Should I use the units used by the author or should I convert the measurement values to SI units?<issue_comment>username_1: To avoid confusion and to ensure the comparability of the results, you should use uniform and consistent units throughout the paper. You can write a note explaining that in the original paper the authors used pounds, furlong per fortnight etc.
And of course, yes, use the SI units. Nowadays all non-SI units are defined in terms of SI units. However, don't trust random sources for the conversion factors: an up-to-date and recommended source for conversion factors is the [NIST Guide to the SI, Appendix B: Conversion Factors](https://www.nist.gov/physical-measurement-laboratory/nist-guide-si-appendix-b).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I echo username_1's answer that the most important thing is to be consistent: **if you normally use SI units in your article, then you should definitely convert the units from articles that use other systems to the same system as the rest of your article.**
However, although this wasn't your actual question, you should not assume that you must always use SI units by default. Although that is indeed the almost universal standard for scientific journals, it is not necessarily the case for non-scientific disciplines (and you didn't specify which discipline you are talking about). In particular, some American journals (probably even some scientific ones) seem to permit non-SI units (for example, the published article you found with non-SI units, though that might possibly be an older article). So, the question of which units to use actually depends on the standards of the specific journal in which you are publishing. You should consult the guide for authors or ask the editor if you have any doubt on this point.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/04/02
| 507
| 2,285
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a Master's student. I have one problem. I have regular meetings with my research supervisor, but during the discussions he takes me in the wrong direction. This often leads to him coming to the wrong conclusions about my work.
For example, he will read half of a statement and try to conclude something (wrong) from that half statement. I try to correct him but he doesn't listen. So far I have not seen any benefits for my research. How can I deal with this situtation? I know it is research and some times we need to go in the wrong direction.<issue_comment>username_1: To avoid confusion and to ensure the comparability of the results, you should use uniform and consistent units throughout the paper. You can write a note explaining that in the original paper the authors used pounds, furlong per fortnight etc.
And of course, yes, use the SI units. Nowadays all non-SI units are defined in terms of SI units. However, don't trust random sources for the conversion factors: an up-to-date and recommended source for conversion factors is the [NIST Guide to the SI, Appendix B: Conversion Factors](https://www.nist.gov/physical-measurement-laboratory/nist-guide-si-appendix-b).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I echo username_1's answer that the most important thing is to be consistent: **if you normally use SI units in your article, then you should definitely convert the units from articles that use other systems to the same system as the rest of your article.**
However, although this wasn't your actual question, you should not assume that you must always use SI units by default. Although that is indeed the almost universal standard for scientific journals, it is not necessarily the case for non-scientific disciplines (and you didn't specify which discipline you are talking about). In particular, some American journals (probably even some scientific ones) seem to permit non-SI units (for example, the published article you found with non-SI units, though that might possibly be an older article). So, the question of which units to use actually depends on the standards of the specific journal in which you are publishing. You should consult the guide for authors or ask the editor if you have any doubt on this point.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/04/02
| 1,067
| 4,358
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I currently have a job in software that I really enjoy, however I've always wanted to do research, so I applied to a PhD program in CS to study formal methods and security. I've accepted an offer from the school I wanted to go to and met my adviser who seems amazing and I have full funding for 4 years. Its a great situation to be in. I had accepted the offer after weighing all my options, however now that I've actually accepted the offer, I've been having cold feet. I was given a generous raise & bonus at my current job (that I didn't quite expect) and I really feel like I'll be giving up (or at least delaying) so many things in my life (housing, hobbies, traveling, etc.). Also, I'll be giving up the security that having a good salary affords (for example, I've had to take care of my mom a few times when she needed emergency surgery and being able to just fly out on a moments notice is really comforting and something I'll lose).
I feel like I made a mistake by not just pursuing the PhD after undergrad, but at the time I didn't know what I wanted to research so I felt it would be inappropriate to go without a clear goal/specific research field in mind.
So I guess, my main question is how should I go about making a career decision when it comes to the PhD? I was so sure I wanted to do this, but its felt wrong ever since I hit the button to accept the offer. I'd love to do research in formal methods, but I feel like I've borderline been spoiled by having a well paying job after living extremely frugally as an undergrad (had like 0 money & support structure during that time) and I don't know if I have the mental stamina to go back to that life. If you guys have gone from industry to a PhD program, how did you make that decision?<issue_comment>username_1: I was in industry before returning for a PhD (in neuroscience). I don't know that I regret it, but I do often wonder what my life would have been like if I stayed in industry. For me, one determining factor in returning to school was that I didn't enjoy working on other people's questions. As a software developer, I was always solving the client's problems. As a scientist, I was working on things that interested me (and my advisors).
Factors you might want to consider:
1. If you decide not to attend, how upset will your future advisor and school be? Will you be burning bridges?
2. Could you work for a few more years (maybe saving some money) and then decide to get a PhD?
3. The salary for a CS PhD is generally not that bad. It is not the same as being a penniless undergrad.
I think you should talk to your advisor and let them know how your are feeling. That will give them a chance to provide advice, and also gives them a heads up that you are having 2nd thoughts (which seem totally reasonable to me). If they react badly (which they might do), that is a sign that this relationship might run into trouble anyway over the course of the degree.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Not sure what the answer is, for you. I will say that the school will get over it. They have people not show up periodically. You don't need to go into detail, just send them a letter saying you have personal issues and need to defer/cancel. You might burn that school, but it won't be an issue if you want to go elsewhere.
In terms of the human consideration and the road not followed, it is hard to say. You may find yourself regretting ditching the school if you pass on it! Such is life. Not sure how to give you the magic answer.
I would probably lean towards staying with the job. I left 7 years post ug to do a Ph.D. Did fine and had a little extra money and experience to make it easier. But still not sure if it was right call. And I had a little more personal motivation than you--getting over not marrying girl I should have, needed to leave the state.
Maybe try talking to some people at another school? I think talking to the school itself will be a fiasco (or to your job). If you talk face to face, they may be able to have an intuition if you "belong" more in research or job.
My bias would be to stick with the job unless you are stuck professionally. If you are getting promoted, that is good sign. But of course, you will never be able to follow each half of the fork in the road, such is life.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/04/02
| 722
| 3,019
|
<issue_start>username_0: What's the difference between these newer computational science PhD programs and PhD programs in the traditional math, physics, cs, and engineering depts?
From checking out a few of these CSE programs online, it seems that they are *programs*, and *not* departments, in general, so that the programs have faculty with different home departments.
The interdisciplinary nature of these programs sounds appealing but I wonder if it's better to land up at a traditional engineering dept or a math dept, etc.?
For example, here's some material from Stanford's CSE program:
>
> Ask Big Questions.
>
>
> Solve Big Problems.
>
>
> Doctoral Program We develop innovative computational and mathematical
> approaches for complex engineering and scientific problems, attracting
> talented PhD students from across the globe. Advised in research by
> more than 50 faculty from 20-plus departments, PhD students are
> immersed in a wide variety of fields including statistics and data
> science, machine and deep learning, control, optimization, numerical
> analysis, applied mathematics, high-performance computing, earth
> sciences, flow physics, graphics, bioengineering, genomics, economics
> and financial mathematics, molecular dynamics, and many more. PhD
> graduates find outstanding positions in industry and national
> laboratories as well as in academia.
>
>
>
The last sentence seems that the CSE program is more aimed to prepare their PhD graduates for work in industry, with academic jobs not being the primary goal.<issue_comment>username_1: In interdisciplinary research the course works you opt need to be cohesive to help you develop an in depth understanding of the scope and application of the undertaken project.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: With interdisciplinary programs, you gain different skills and may have to prove your skills more if you want to do work that falls into a traditional discipline. You have fewer boundaries and less structure (pro & con). You have more room for creativity and innovation but have to work harder to get your ideas accepted/noticed. You learn a lot of skills translating across different disciplines.
Also, you will not have peers doing the exactly same things you are. You're less likely to fall into comparison traps, because everyone has a separate path, but you are also less likely to have really strong study groups and similar support systems (e.g. ones with the same people across classes and across terms).
Further, it's good you noticed the "programs" vs. "departments" distinction. If most of the people whose first allegiance is to the program are junior and/or adjuncts, then you may have a much tougher time being prepared for academia through this program. If you want to be more competitive for academia, you would want to explicitly build relationships with tenured professors and get a disciplinary Master's degree or certificate (often possible at Stanford on the way to a Ph.D.).
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/02
| 1,140
| 4,889
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am the lead co-organizer of a symposium at a technical conference later this year. The abstract submissions are now closed, and I'm working on slotting the talks into sessions. With the number of abstracts we have in hand, I'm planning to spread them across three sequential sessions in a single chronological track. In the event it matters, the symposium scope is intentionally very broad, so the speakers in any given session may (justifiably) have little interest in attending the other sessions before/after the one in which they're scheduled.
There are a handful of research groups that have each submitted two abstracts to the symposium, with different presenting authors. All of the abstracts are in-scope and distinct from one another, so I plan to accept them all.
**What is the etiquette regarding scheduling of such talks, submitted by the same research group but with different presenting authors?**
Should I specifically aim to schedule them close to one another in the agenda? Should I intentionally interpose talks from other groups? Or, does it not really matter?
From the perspective of the *presenting research group*, it would seem most convenient logistically for the talks to be grouped together in sequence. That way, the whole group would have the option of attending just the relevant small chunk of the session, with the rest of the morning/afternoon more free to attend other talks.
From the perspective of a *symposium organizer*, though, it would make more sense to separate the pairs of talks, in an effort to make it more convenient for the speakers to just stay in our session track, rather than bouncing back and forth between our session and others.
It's also entirely possible I'm just overthinking the matter.<issue_comment>username_1: You have to plan the symposium from the audience’s perspective, not the individual research group’s.
Presenting multiple talks from the same group back-to-back or even within the same session can become tedious, even if the work is nominally “distinct.” If I were planning multiple sessions, I would avoid putting abstracts from the same group in the same session, but instead spread the pairs out evenly among the three sessions (if possible).
If your sessions are thematic, I’d still try to separate the talks within the session, so that the talks are not back-to-back, but perhaps “bookending” the session or nearly so.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I second [username_1's general advice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/107427/14017):
>
> You have to plan the symposium from the audience’s perspective, not the individual research group’s.
>
>
>
However, I derive a somewhat different conclusion from it.
First, order/group the presentations based upon their content, irrespective of who contributed them or who will present, e.g.:
* Order talks in such a way that concepts are covered first, more concrete examples later.
* Group talks by the presented area of application.
* Possibly (if it is well accepted in the field that difficulties of works vary and more complex does not necessarily mean "better") order talks by increasing complexity.
* etc.
Only then, if there is still some question about ordering or grouping, you may want to look at who are the contributors1. In that case, I'd prefer grouping works whose authors are connected, as that might allow to
* shorten parts of the introduction (the personal introduction if it's the same author, the introduction of the context of application for talks related to the same project)
* lessen the burden on the audience to wrap their minds around totally different contexts of application (all of which may be alien to the audience, despite being familiar with the discussed conceptual questions on a more abstract level)
* get used to one style of presentation (at least if it's the same presenter)
* reduce some confusion among listeners who may try to associate the talks with some external factors in their minds and might then wonder why they remember only (w.l.o.g.) four groups/presenters/projects for five talks. Seeing the two talks by the same presenter in direct succession makes it more obvious what is going on and may thus render it easier to form a mental image of the session structure.
---
1: I am having a hard time picturing a scenario where being *from the same research group* (in the sense of a research group as a team working together at one (w.l.o.g.) university with one professor as the lead) could be relevant in any way. Two contributions by either *the same presenter* (a very special case of "from the same research group") or *from the same project/grant* (which can, however, involve entirely different research groups from different institutions and parts of the world) seem like a more relevant case in the context of this question.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/02
| 897
| 4,011
|
<issue_start>username_0: [**This**](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/14971/84565) question contains this:
>
> 2. After months of work as an RA in a research group, at the end of the semester, my adviser informed me that he was not satisfied with my research and would not continue to fund me.
>
>
>
I am just curious, how do supervisors determine that a phd student is not doing great? What factors do they consider?<issue_comment>username_1: Professors are not always the best mentors yet a good one is a good people manager who has had training in Positive Reinforcement by Dr. <NAME> as we all did at work in the 80's. The process involves setting objects, measuring results and getting constructive feedback with consequences for negative results after retry.
Start by writing your own measureable objectives following guidelines from your boss, review with him/her with a timeline and testable criteria, # of critical problems, and performance metrics etc.
Measured accompishments, can be self-rated and compared with boss for discussion on defining clear expectations , refining goals and strategies for improvement.
It can be simplified into Time , Performance (multi-tasking), Quality and Cost Savings for a performance expected that is expected with some level of experience... or exceeded in more than one significant way
Then there are soft skills such as being; reliable , self-reliant, innovative, creative and networking in a way to save time yet not over-burdening , being resourceful, positive attitude towards self and others.
Learning how to learn is the hardest for some to accomplish. yet this is the main goal in Univ, as in industry the practise becomes more diverse and also more focused. e.g. learning how to condut a business plan or lab report or Design Specifications with a Design Validation Test plan and report using structured concise yet simple results to prove validity of the specs and accuracy of the results.
A perfect design is one that only meets "all of the necessary specs" such as Cost, performance, quality and reliability under any environment expected. Climatic, Mechanical, Electrical, Chemical. etc. ; benign or to extreme.
Yet with a faster learning curve gained from experience of failures of others and self by learning solutions and constant reading. This is the fastest way to grow under pressure.
I suggest to request 15 minutes of your bosses time to discuss expectations and you return with this understanding in writing in measureable concise results.
You may also solicit colleague review feedback as everyone is your customer as you are to them for information. Having it in writing for your own learning process is a tool for self improvement.
If it is worth doing, it is worth documenting, but critical issues should always been done in person.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: As a postdoc, I have supervised only Master's students. To determine how they are doing, I typically pay attention to three different aspects:
* Ability to learn. Can students learn new skills (experimental or computational techniques)? The more advanced a student is, the more independence I'd expect here.
* Understanding of subject matter. Does the student understand how their research fits in the broader research field, and why they are using the techniques they are using? Can the student come up with better ways of answering their research question/come up with a better question to answer/find the good question to ask?
* Ability to prioritise. How easily does the student identify and work on the most important sub-question to answer? As a project comes close to being finished, can the student keep up a strong pace to deliver final results as quickly as possible?
I don't have a rule to determine when someone isn't doing good enough - I have never had to make that decision. Probably that decision would come when I find that, despite feedback, someone isn't improving on these aspects as I think they should.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/02
| 972
| 4,289
|
<issue_start>username_0: Since this is a longer story, let me first give some background:
We submitted a publication to a journal in the field of engineering. The article remained on the status “with editor” for more than two months. Our inquiries with the editor-in-chief and through the publisher’s contact form were not answered. When we contacted the assistant editor, things got moving and we got a “major revision” with rather positive, but brief comments from two reviewers. The editor-in-chief handled the manuscript. We addressed all of the comments very carefully and resubmitted.
The next day we received a desk reject from the editor-in-chief as the handling editor. They said our article was out of scope and had a lack of novelty. Both of these issues have not been mentioned by the previous decision letter or the reviewers’ comments. On the contrary, one of the reviewers specifically commented that the paper was on scope in this journal and the results would be useful for researchers and practitioners.
The journal does not have a formal way to appeal, and the author guidelines state that editor decisions are final. The editor-in-chief did not react to our request to clarify how our manuscript could have become worse, i.e. out of scope, after the revision. Due to a number of constraints, it is difficult for us to go to another journal.
If we would have gotten a desk reject on the initial submission in a useful delay, I would have accepted the decision. But I find it unprofessional to reject a revised manuscript on those grounds.
Given these circumstances, how should we proceed?<issue_comment>username_1: **Case:** There are two persons involved here. The assistant editor thought that your article should be given a chance of peer-review. However, it might have been possible that the Editor in chief was not at all keen on passing the article for peer-review in the first place. Since, you revised the article and submitted again the editor in chief this time thought to stop it as it was probably not suitable for his journal.
**Reason:** This happens when the editorial assistant (office guys) handle the responsibility of assigning the assistant editor for manuscripts. For example, many journals have area wise editors e.g. Asia, Europe, ... The area of a manuscript is based on the area of the corresponding author.
**Suggestion:** Submit elsewhere. Since, you have revised the article carefully, it should be accepted somewhere.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Something out of the ordinary clearly happened. It's not professional to reject a paper as being out of scope after it's been revised. My speculative guess is that the editor-in-chief is not very active, and the assistant editor was trying to keep things moving on her own initiative. The letters you received might well be automated emails with automated signatures by the editor-in-chief, i.e. the EiC didn't actually handle your manuscript. However this is pure speculation, and can be completely wrong.
Suggestions on what to do now: if you received a personalized letter from the editor-in-chief saying your paper is out of scope, don't bother appealing the decision and submit it elsewhere. Otherwise, you can write back to the journal to check if there was a mistake, pointing out that one of the reviewers did, after all, say your paper was within scope + useful to the field. I would not be very hopeful, but it's an option.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a strange situation.
It is possible that the desk rejection was a mistake. I once received an email with two good reviews attached, telling me “Your paper is not accepted.” While my co-authors and I were boggling about this, I received a second email from the editor, profusely apologising for the typo. Since mistakes can happen, you should send a short note to the editor saying that you were surprised that your paper was desk-rejected as out of scope after it had already been peer-reviewed and revised, and ask them to confirm that this decision was correct.
If they really have rejected your paper in this ridiculous way, shake the dust from your feet and send the paper somewhere else. In that situation, I wouldn’t waste my time sending any papers to that journal in future.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/02
| 1,542
| 6,438
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently wanted to read one conference paper and one journal article. The conference paper is named [Division by invariant integers using multiplication](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Division+by+invariant+integers+using+multiplication). By clicking on the "All 9 versions" link on Google Scholar, I found the [full paper](https://gmplib.org/~tege/divcnst-pldi94.pdf) on gmplib.org.
The journal article is named [improved division by invariant integers](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=improved+division+by+invariant+integers). It is also available at [several](https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/945a/7e2e603c81be8d79145ead2c30dc035e797b.pdf) [sources](https://gmplib.org/~tege/division-paper.pdf) as [PDF](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.732.1046&rep=rep1&type=pdf).
Why do publishers allow such redistribution of papers / preprints? I mean, if everyone is doing the same as I'm doing, the main revenue source of publishers will go away. Is it because publishers obtain their main revenue from university libraries? If I can't find a PDF preprint of an article, the next thing I'm going to do is to try to find the article through my university library.<issue_comment>username_1: It's a sign of goodwill, mostly.
Publishers, librarians and academics all rely on one another, and none of them can function without the other two. It's true that by allowing preprints, publishers are risking subscription revenue. University libraries are the main source of subscriptions, and they are highly incentivized not to subscribe if everything is available via Google Scholar! However prohibiting the author from uploading preprints will also generate hostility among academics, who might refuse to submit to the publisher (or worse - see [The Cost of Knowledge](http://thecostofknowledge.com/) boycott). It's a balancing act which most publishers err on the side of not prohibiting preprints.
Here's something related: can a university library completely discontinue journal subscriptions and ask its academics to use resources like Google Scholar or [Sci-Hub](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci-Hub)? Yes and no. The library can do it and probably save some money instantly, but in the long run, the publishers will shut down and the journals too, and there'd be no one to handle peer review. Like it or not, all three of publishers, librarians and academics are stuck with one another.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Although this is speculation since I don't work for a publisher, there are a couple of reasons I can think of:
* Due to pressure from funders, who want the research they funded to be publicly available.
* To take away the focus from gold open access. Publishing preprints is known as green open access, and means that authors are allowed to post their work elsewhere. Often, however, this is with restrictions: only the non-peer reviewed version is allowed, and only after a certain period. This discourages academic libraries from cancelling their subscriptions, and appeases the funders who might otherwise call for the published version to be publicly available immediately. (Note: I think this was mainly a motivation before the publishers figured out they could heavily charge funders for the latter requirements.)
* Because it might be hard to argue in a legal case for publishers to restrict access to research that they haven't been involved with at all (i.e. not yet been peer reviewed, layout done by the researcher themself, etc.). Yes, they often coerce authors in transferring copyrights to the publishers, but they might rather not test the strength of that argument in court.
* As a courtesy, to maintain goodwill. It's clear now that it doesn't *really* threaten their business model (no subscriptions appear to have been cancelled in response to preprints being available), so they can easily do this.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If a publisher doesn't allow distributors of preprints, they'll never get a submission from me. Why would I needlessly restrict the distribution of my own work? The publisher doesn't pay me anything in exchange for these rights.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: That'll depend on the field. In computer science, where your example comes from, there is some competition between publishers for conference proceedings and also, to an extent, competition between conferences for quality submissions and high-profile researchers on the committee.
Some conferences are moving or considering to move to open access proceedings, and this makes commercial publishers try and offer better deals, which includes better attitude towards authors. PLDI in your example is ACM's own conference and won't just go to another publisher, but still, harassing authors with copyright restrictions is going to repel authors and committee members. I know, universities and grants in Europe often require to upload publications to open access archives, but I don't know whether this would prevent authors from publishing in a venue that does not allow to publish preprints, since this problem does not normally arise.
I imagine that this indeed hurts publishers. For example, at some point in the past I did have access to Springer's LNCS in my institution, and these days there's some story unfolding in France with universities not renewing their Springer subscriptions.
I'm also curious to know where this will lead. Perhaps, publishers will soon start tightening their copyright agreements (thus confronting the existing open access policies). Or perhaps, they will raise publication costs. Participation in a CS conference is already expensive, usually somewhere between 500-1000 Euro just for being able to present (and then there are travel costs), so it may not make a big difference if a larger portion of this money goes to a publisher.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Because it will happen anyway, so they might as well appear magnanimous by permitting it.
Authors want their work to be read. The publishers effectively have three options:
* ignore it, which makes them look as though they're not in control
* sue their authors, which would probably be futile and would certainly reduce submissions to their journals
* say that preprints are allowed, and focus their efforts on trying to convince people that it's worth paying for the "version of record" anyway.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/02
| 2,205
| 9,228
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been struggling a lot recently with stuff thats been going on, I'm in therapy and receiving help but I'm still having a really hard time. I have a professor who's always asking if I'm doing okay even though I've never told him anything about what's been going on. The other day he came up to me and told me if I needed anything, or even just someone to listen, I could come to him. I kind of want to talk to him, but I'm scared of bothering him and I don't know how I would go about it.
If I should talk to him, should I go to his office hours and ask? Or should I send an email because he doesn't have office hours for another week?<issue_comment>username_1: He's already said he's OK with it, so yes, it's acceptable.
You can probably do either method to talk to him. The difference would be whether or not you're face-to-face. If you're able to talk about your personal issues without breaking down, then face-to-face is also more personal. However if you think you're likely to, e.g., spend most of the time crying or tongue-tied, you might want to use email instead. It's up to you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Talking to a Professor, indeed anyone is acceptable to guide you with personal problems.
Caveats are in this increasingly competitive world include:
- Privacy, can this person possibly use this information against you;
- Look at the persons credentials to answer your questions, are they widely respected and indeed qualified to answer you - in the field specific to your 'personal issue'. Your professor maybe a great physicist, but are they expert in handling divorce, death, bullying etc; by way of example.
- Don't put ANYTHING in writing, unless it is briefing your legal counsel.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: All professors *should* be able to have this sort of conversation with students, and should regard it as part of their duties. It's a key skill for anybody in a teaching profession.
Academic culture being what it is, not all professors *do* welcome this kind of conversation. Some still view teaching duties as an unwelcome distraction from the "real work" of research. (Some people really are much better suited to research than to teaching; others just don't try.)
But it sounds as if your professor has a better attitude. If you feel that it would be helpful to talk to him, you should definitely not have any guilt about "bothering him" - this is part of his job.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Obviously, how you approach this will depend on what your relationship with the professor is like. That they have personally asked how you're doing is a great sign that you aren't an anonymous face in a large lecture hall. In many ways, having yet another person to talk to---even if it's just a brief session to unload your worries---is hugely beneficial. Pain festers in isolation! I would wager that most any professor has seen the gamut of student depression and other life circumstances. You will not be the first student they've had who has struggled. From their comments, it seems like they suspect something is troubling you and want to check in and see what support they can give.
However, there are some power dynamics at play that are worth acknowledging and considering.
* Particularly in the US, professors are considered mandatory reporters. As such, they are required to notify the appropriate people in some circumstances (e.g., Title IX violations, crimes, imminent self-harm, etc.). Be aware that they may not legally be allowed to keep your conversation confidential.
* Outside of mandatory reporting, know that professors have to strike a balance between being compassionate and caring versus the needs of their other students and university policy.
* Professors will often be aware of resources that you are unfamiliar with on campus---from counseling services, to support groups, to tutoring services. This also cuts both ways: professors are not licensed therapists and cannot supplant the role of one. They are, however, genuine humans with human emotions and compassion.
* If outside circumstances are impacting your classroom performance, then this is an excellent reason to reach out to your professors. I would much rather be alerted early, even in vague terms, that there are external factors at work, than learn at the end of the semester after I've assigned grades. It is much easier to work out a proactive plan (such as meeting regularly, building a schedule for catching up, or even filing an incomplete grade) when there is time left to work with. If you think you're falling behind, talk to your professors as soon as possible. Many are very accommodating and receptive. That being said, this should not be considered an expectation and professors must always balance what is fair to the entire class.
* Choosing whether to reach out via email or in person (during office hours or similar) is highly dependent on you. If the idea of talking about your struggles in person is overwhelming, then a vaguely worded email can be sufficient to clue your professor in---never feel like your are forced to share more than you are comfortable with! It is not your professor's job to decide whether your problems are "bad enough." If you just want to let them know that you're struggling and need help, then don't feel pressured to say anything more than that! However, if they seem receptive, even general details of what you're dealing with can help steer the conversation and course of direction. If you're up for it, having a face-to-face meeting can be more productive (again, doubly so where your professor has strongly hinted that you are welcome to come by even if you just need someone to talk to).
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: Talk to him - as the other answers point out it may be part of their job.
My point is you can ask a friend / best friend / collegue along as a witness, moral support, friend, shoulder to cry on etc. I even say to students to bring along someone - this works for both “sides” - either they sit in the room and don’t contribute or they help “fill out” the conversation.
Depending on the location then he may have to report - usually to help get further action to your benefit - I have asked students “can I take this situation to X for you” to help get a solution - had both yes and no answers...
Do talk to someone though...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: This is really more of an extended comment.
Some information about your relationship with this professor, or lack of it, would be helpful and probably relevant.
Similarly, some information about what kinds of issues you are dealing with would also be helpful and probably relevant.
Have you ever spoken to this person individually? If not, what interaction have you had with him? Also, what are you expecting from a conversation with him? It is worth giving a little thought to that. If you are just looking for a sympathetic person to talk to, you hopefully have other options - friends, family etc. If you are looking for a trained professional to help with psychological/mental issues, the professor is clearly not that. If you need someone who can possibly help with some academic-related issues. then it might be reasonable to talk with him. But as others have mentioned, be careful. Don't assume the professor is your friend, just because he seems friendly and sympathetic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> Do not offer anything you are not willing or able to fulfill.
>
>
>
With respect to this claim, when the professor offers you such personal conversation they shall be able to handle it.
It is acceptable to accept such offer but be careful what you want to say and how you want to say it. Remember, what has beet said cannot be unsaid.
The fewer details you disclose, the better. If they want to see detailed picture, they'll ask. If you want to share, you'll answer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I find it highly upsetting and uncomfortable if a student introduces themselves with their personal problem. This happens all the time around the end of a semester. In a class of about 200 students, I get dozens of emails that open with the details of a personal tragedy and then tell me they need an extension. It's not that I think students are lying (I always assume they're not). It's that the volume of tragedies from strangers is a lot to process and handle. I do not like doing it, and sometimes even dread it.
On the other hand, I know tons about a few students and bend over backwards to help them through their problems, about which I know all the details. These students are not strangers to me, and we had a pre-existing academic relationship and rapport before problems befell them. I see helping them as part of my job. I do not feel this way about strangers.
In this case, you are being given a wide open invitation to seek support from this person. You are absolutely welcome to take it, and I encourage you to do so. Not all Profs are willing or able to hear your problems (I am one of those people if I do not know you already), but you can always assume that, if the invitation is extended, we 100% mean it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/03
| 818
| 2,649
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'd like to see how a given paper has impacted its own discipline and then spilled over to others.
Let's take Nash's paper on Equilibrium points in n-person games as an example. This work has eventually yielded him a Nobel prize and has +6k citations on Google Scholar.
I'm assuming it must have been first cited primarily by other mathematics papers; but over time, scholars from other disciplines would increasingly cite it.
Are you familiar with any tool/method that would provide this kind of information? It would be the most useful if it's possible to visualize the data.<issue_comment>username_1: You may try Microsoft Academic for that. They have an interesting semantic-web approach to finding answers to your queries and they also aggregate a lot of context information. This includes citations that can be filtered in various ways.
Have a look at this search regarding your questions's example: <https://academic.microsoft.com/paper/2067050450/citedby/search?q=Equilibrium%20points%20in%20n-person%20games&qe=RId%3D2067050450&f=&eyl=Y%3C%3D1956&orderBy=0> (you were right: initially, most citations were from mathematics).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: A second-best solution is [LENS.ORG](https://www.lens.org/); it allows you to see such patterns (at least partly):
1. Search for the paper and click on its citations ([example for Nash's *Equilibrium Points* here](https://www.lens.org/lens/scholar/article/088-886-561-757-360/citations/citing)).
2. Click on "View items in Scholar Search" ([example for Nash's paper here](https://www.lens.org/lens/scholar/search/results?q=&page=0&limit=10&orderBy=%2Bscore&filterMap=%7B%22reference.id%22:%7B%228888656175736%22:true%7D%7D&dateFilterField=year_published&preview=false®exEnabled=false&stemmed=true))
3. Click on "Analysis" ([example for Nash's paper here](https://www.lens.org/lens/scholar/search/analysis?q=&page=0&limit=10&orderBy=%2Bscore&filterMap=%7B%22reference.id%22:%7B%228888656175736%22:true%7D%7D&dateFilterField=year_published&preview=false®exEnabled=false&stemmed=true))
4. Look at the graphs "Scholarly Works over Time" and "Top Fields of Study"
This may give you a vague (but not precise) idea about the inter-disciplinary spread of the paper's impact.
---
The better solution would be a bibliometric analysis which you'd have to code by your own, perhaps using a downloaded, machine-readable bibliography from Web of Science (Journal Citation Reports) or CrossRef. Tools like [Bibliometrix for R](https://www.bibliometrix.org/) could help you with that. The exact approach would require a much more complex answer.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/03
| 3,061
| 12,200
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a master's student in the US studying international relations, and I had a negative experience in one of my classes last week. It is my last semester of my master's program, and I feel very exhausted from being a student. I have a story about what happened in one of my classes last week, and would like to know how I should cope in the class for the rest of the semester.
### Situation
Last week, in one of my classes (in a subject I am not too familiar with), I had to give a presentation based on a paper I wrote. The assignment involved writing a paper based on the course readings for the week that we signed up for and presenting it on the due date. I presented, but I admit that my presentation was quite poor because of my lack of confidence in my paper. This was definitely a situation of the input being much greater than the output, which is definitely one of the greatest frustrations that anyone could ever have. I know that it is a stupid calculation on my part, but I was just planning to present in a dull way so that other people would not ask any questions; the presentation did not seem to be weighted much.
The professor attacked my presentation in front of the class and gave it as an example of what not to do. However, I would have preferred that I just receive a bad grade in private, as opposed to having to feel embarrassed in class. I could tell that the professor was quite disappointed. 'Humiliated' might seem like a strong word, but I felt very embarrassed and helpless for the rest of class.
**Now,** there are three weeks left of the course, and I feel like I would not want to stare at anyone in the remaining class sessions. I am considering training my mind to think of myself as a corpse for the two-hour duration of each of the remaining classes. The papers for last week are already graded, and based on what happened in the class, I am already mentally prepared for the worst in relation to my paper grade.
I am from an eastern culture, and in my culture, it is considered one of the worst insults to publicly embarrass someone; this is done in cases when the person is mean-spirited or it is likely that the people involved will never see each other again.
### Questions
1. Is the professor's reaction common and justified in the US or other western countries in situations like mine across different fields?
2. How should I cope for the last few weeks of the semester?
I just can't wait for this course to finish. If such an experience were to occur, I would have preferred that it happen on the last day so that I would not have to look at familiar faces in the classroom ever again.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm sorry. **What happened to you should be very rare, but it does happen sometimes.** In US higher education I have seen otherwise good professors embarrass someone by accident (not realizing the effect of their words on the student, or saying something more extreme than they had thought through), and some extremely blunt professors who say this sort of thing on purpose (this group is mixed in whether they are otherwise kind people).
I highly doubt that what the professor did was "justified," but this may depend on the tone they used. In my opinion, *intending* to embarrass you for this would not be justified.
As for coping, I suggest you think about whether the professor has done this sort of thing to other people. If so, then other people know what you feel like. If not, then it is unlikely that the professor considered how his words would make you feel.
It may feel empowering to go to the professor with direct feedback that this was very embarrassing to you. I think that directness might help the professor learn but would even better free you from some of this shame. However, that's expert-level self-confidence and emotional intelligence, and not at all what I did when I was in a similar situation (grad student giving final presentation on my work, and the professor said a few slides in that my approach didn't make sense/wouldn't work; that sort of deflated me and I ended the presentation there--I was the last student to present, the class had already gone over time, and the prof was complaining before my presentation that he needed to leave.). In my case, I never brought it up, there was no direct feedback on the presentation, and I continued going to next term's class with the same prof even when I felt like I was going to cry. I felt embarrassed for a while when I ran into my fellow students from that class. But eventually I figured out my feelings, realized that professor is extremely direct (to put it kindly), and the pain dulled over time.
**To prepare for your remaining classes, really be kind to yourself.** If you have a friend in this class, try to arrange to come to this class with them so you're not alone at the beginning or end or class. Bring a comforting hot drink with you to class. (Or ice cold drink, depending on weather. :) ) Wear jewelry or put something in your pocket that reminds you of home & loved ones or a meaningful accomplishment. And try to remain engaged with the ideas right in front of you in the class, rather than replaying that class in your mind. If possible, finish a draft of what you need to do for the rest of the class as soon as you can, so you can mentally close the door on this class.
You are almost done with your program! I am sorry that there was this awful experience at the end, but please try to celebrate what you have done!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Ok, so first point I would assume is that the presentation grade is separate to the paper grade - there may be another grade involved for the overall grade. I separate them - they have different marking criteria.
Were you the first to present - had you been given the marking criteria - usually it is made available or at least an outline.
As for the rest of the course - go and benefit from the classes, the prof won’t be “out to get you” based on the presentation.
If, as you say, the prof held the presentation up as something not to do - and did not make comments about you personally - then it was for constructive critisism for the whole class and if that has been the method employed for all the other presentations, if not, then that is not so fair.
I had students give presentations where, at the end, both I and the audience of students would ask questions and make comments BUT all were warned that any Q / comment had to be constructive : this was good, needed more on this or what about X... etc.
So, go to class, finish the course and don’t panic.
One comment could the prof could be thinking is what happened - the paper was great, I was expecting a rolls-royce of a presentation - mind you it can happen - bad day etc...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. What exactly did the professor say?
Did the professor comment on precisely on your character, you as a student or person or anything of the sort? Or just your presentation?
It's definitely wrong if the professor said you were a bad presenter, bad student or negatively described you specifically.
If the presentation, it depends a little on what was said but more on how it was said. If it was indeed an *attack*, then that's wrong.
2. Talk to university counselling. Also, do you know <NAME>?
1 minute article: [<NAME> on The Difference Between Guilt and Shame](https://www.fs.blog/2014/10/brene-brown-guilt-shame/)
Videos:
[Dr. <NAME> on Faking It, Perfectionism and Living Wholeheartedly | SuperSoul Sunday | OWN (4:49)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YeulUgWNp8)
[<NAME>: Why Your Critics Aren't The Ones Who Count (22:40)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-JXOnFOXQk)
[<NAME> on Blame (3:25)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZWf2_2L2v8)
[<NAME> on Vulnerability (20:19)](https://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability)
[Listening to shame | <NAME> (20:38)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psN1DORYYV0)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Is the professor's reaction common and justified in the US or other
> western countries
>
>
>
Common, yes; justified, no. If you felt humiliated, then I don't think the professor behaved appropriately, since the point of class is to provide you with an environment to flourish and learn. However, as others have pointed out, there is a chance that the professor is unaware of the effect (s)he had on you. In my experience, some academic communities can be brutally harsh, and this is an accepted (sometimes even welcome) norm. Members of these communities can forget that not everyone interacts like they do.
1. **If you want to make it right with the professor,** you can go and be honest. Explain that you know it was not your best work, and that you didn't mean to be disrespectful -- you had a lot going on with your other coursework, and didn't have time to produce your best output. If you really want to go the extra mile, you can ask if there is a way to make it up.
2. **If you want to prevent this from happening with other students,** then you should definitely mention your feelings to the professor in a non-confrontational and unemotional way (if you can). You can do this after the semester is over so it doesn't affect you negatively.
3. **Otherwise,** just let it go and focus on getting through the next two weeks :)
>
> It is my last semester of my master's program, and I feel very
> exhausted from being a student.
>
>
> one of my classes (in a subject I am not too familiar with)
>
>
> The assignment involved writing a paper based on the course readings
> for the week that we signed up for and presenting it on the due date.
> I presented, but I admit that my presentation was quite poor
>
>
>
Three observations, based on your description of the problem.
1. Originally, you didn't seem to think that the assignment was very important or critical;
2. This topic doesn't seem to be your main strength;
3. You knew you weren't performing at your best.
Based on that, **you may feel a bit better if you can try to put the situation into perspective** (I know, with the embarrassment, that this can be really hard). Consider this:
* Your presentation was boring, but you designed it to be boring because you weren't happy with it! And, you weren't happy with it because you spent your time focusing on other important things! The professor may have been disappointed because (s)he expected you at 100%. But you deserve some slack.
* You got to the last 3 weeks of the program without anything like this happening - which means you've put in 1-2 years of good work. So while I am sure that you *feel* terrible, I don't think you're actually *doing* terribly.
* The professor criticized you, but it doesn't sound like the other students said anything. So, there is no need to be embarrassed before them. Usually, when this happens to students around me, I don't think worse of them or assume that my work was better -- I just feel relieved that I didn't get yelled at.
For this type of reasoning, you can take a look at David Burns' book on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, called "Feeling Good" (a nice summary [here](https://www.samuelthomasdavies.com/book-summaries/self-help/feeling-good/) -- see "Distortions"). Practicing this kind of reasoning with yourself might help you build some confidence before next class.
A second, and maybe faster/easier tip, is just to try to spend some time before each class refreshing yourself on your accomplishments. Look at a paper you're really proud of, or the big stack of all of the articles you've read over the semester. Think about a compliment you got from another student, or a way in which you helped someone else. Focus on things that remind you that you are talented and capable and not limited to one presentation in one week of one class!
Also, try to remember that as long as you pass the class, everything will be fine. I screwed up a final assignment for my master's degree and scored the worst grade I've ever gotten in anything. To be honest, I don't think anyone has ever even looked at it, or if they have, it's never come up to my detriment.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/03
| 291
| 1,190
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can I do an internship during my first semester of college in a state other than the one where my university is located?<issue_comment>username_1: My understanding is that you generally cannot. F-1 visas holders are allowed to hold part-time (up to 20 hours/week) on-campus jobs during all semesters enrolled (though I'm told that some positions don't count as on-campus, despite physically taking place on-campus). Authorization for off-campus work can only be granted [after the first academic year](https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/students-and-exchange-visitors/students-and-employment).
As scaaahu suggests, you should ask the international office at your university about your specific situation. They should be able to advise you also about potential exceptions to what I wrote above, e.g. unpaid internships.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can apply for CPT (Curricular Practical Training) after completing your first year, sponsored by your school/department. You will need to receive credit for it. This is different from OPT (Optional Practical Training) where you can apply within the first year after your graduation.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/03
| 953
| 3,583
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to know what license needs to be chosen in ***arXiv*** for a paper that is to be sent to an IEEE journal, ***IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS)***.
[Arxiv licenses](http://arxiv.org/help/license):
1. non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article.
2. Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0).
3. Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license (CC BY-SA 4.0).
4. Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).
5. Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication (CC0 1.0).
I read numerous pages like [A](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/57052/i-chose-wrong-license-during-submission-on-arxiv-what-shall-i-do), [B](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/87475/which-license-should-be-chosen-in-arxiv-for-a-paper-to-be-published-in-elsevier/87511), and [C](http://ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/publish-with-ieee/author-education-resources/guidelines-and-policies/policy-posting-your-article/), but I didn't find my answer.<issue_comment>username_1: I am no lawyer and I have not read the complete legalese, but as far as I see, the first option (non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article) is the only possible valid one, as it is the most restrictive.
All the Creative Commons licenses would allow others to distribute a copy of your paper (with attribution and some possible restrictions, such as the non-commercial clause). However the [IEEE policy](http://ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/publish-with-ieee/author-education-resources/guidelines-and-policies/policy-posting-your-article/) allows only the following:
>
> * Author’s personal website
> * Author’s employer’s website
> * arXiv.org
> * Funder’s repository
>
>
> [...] The posted article must be removed from any other third-party servers.
>
>
>
So using a CC license would result in a conflict, as you cannot both allow others to distribute copies while at the same time guaranteeing to the IEEE that there will be no copies on other servers.
This does not guarantee that the first option is the right one, however since the IEEE explicitly allows arXiv.org and we have excluded all the others, they will probably not complain...
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: ### Prevent IEEE access restrictions - Don't use option 1
The IEEE's ability to legally restrict access is based on having exclusive rights, which they take from you by strong-arming you into signing those away.
The solution is using the [**standard trick**](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/119002/7319): to actually grant the relevant rights beforehand to someone else - without losing them yourself - so that when you sign the IEEE copyright form, there will be someone else to give you the rights back afterwards. That's why you should choose one of the last three options, never the first one.
### Recommendation: CC-BY-SA
Personally, I would tend not to restrict commercial use from the get-go. It's tempting, but when you think about it - the social damage from having to go through you for economic use of your findings is probably higher than the benefit of sticking it to the large corporations or what-not.
As for public domain - I'd be against it, since attribution is important not just to you but also for academic/scientific work. So, wanna use my paper? Citation please.
Non-SA licenses: I would be worried about derivative work being non-free.
To be honest, though, this isn't a strong recommendation and all three are fine by me I guess.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/03
| 4,156
| 17,315
|
<issue_start>username_0: I spent more than half a year with a PhD supervisor, and am not happy with both aspects: relationship and academically. With time, it becomes obvious that our field of research doesn't match. He reassured me that he had sufficient knowledge on my topic, but it turns out that he doesn't. I'd say it's the fault on both sides (I should've checked his publications more).
The biggest problem is that he doesn't want to admit it, and either only gives me a very general advice, or blames my draft as not academic enough and tell me to revise the structure before he agrees to read it, and then he'd again give a general advice. He also prefers to meet only once every two or three months. I see no career prospect here, as he'll retire in three years, and then his department will close (I couldn't have known that before).
I consulted another professor that I met in a conference, who also specializes in my topic, and he said that my research is solid (plus, he gave me valuable inputs that I have never received from my own supervisor). Finally, learning about my problems, the second professor offered to supervise me, and said all I need to do is to apply at his university (in another state). By the way, I have neither working nor funding contract with my current university.
I know it sounds not very ethical, but I said nothing to my supervisor until I'm officially accepted by the new university. He's old, proud, and quirky, often taking the slightest mistake (by anyone) as a conspiracy against him. He never admits he doesn't master my topic, so he'll blow a fuse if I tell him that when I announce about my leaving him. I simply don't know what to answer if he asks me why (and he will certainly do). Any suggestion how to handle this well? Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: Well, are they offering you something tangible? Pay etc? Different or more extensive equipment..
Or do you have external reasons : family, partner (spouse, other...)
It could be simpler to stick to something like that...
Students have moved before and will again.
You MUST do what is best for you and Soon.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: My suggestion is that you talk about all of the reasons you are moving to the other university, as opposed to leaving the current one. These reasons could be to do with relationships (e.g., family) or future opportunities (e.g., a postdoc) or being paid whilst you are currently unpaid. If you have to give a reason why you are leaving your current position, the least-harmful choice seems to be to mention that his lab will close and that you chose to study with him in the hope of staying within his wonderful group.
The choice comes down to the problems of being honest (which does not imply you should be dishonest). If you are honest, then because he will retire even if you magically changed his world-view, then the impact would still be negligible. However, you may burn bridges and although a small probability, the professor may take retributive action.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> I know it sounds not very ethical, but I said nothing to my supervisor until I'm officially accepted by the new university.
>
>
>
That is almost certainly the best move. Don't say anything to anyone until you've officially been accepted by the other university. Keep working as normal until your acceptance letter comes.
Once you've been accepted to the 2nd university, tell him in person. Stick to a few sentences, and don't mention that your relationship has soured.
Some neutral reasons are
1) If you don't have a stipend here, and school B offers you one, then just cite that reason.
2) You're concerned he will retire before you graduate, meaning you'll have to find another advisor.
He will likely react badly, in general supervisors have limited slots for PhD students dictated by university acceptance. He'll have to wait for the next round of admissions to fill your slot. **This is his problem, not yours.**
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Just say that the new situation is a better fit, which is true. No need to go into details.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Agree with most people here - you need to do what is in YOUR interest right now. I saw similar situations myself at close quarters when I was a graduate student and if people didn't act, it usually ended badly/unsatisfactorily. Life is too short and you're putting too much of your own time/career etc on the line by staying with him cause you are afraid to offend him. Academics are not infallible and if they're too egotistical to admit a deficit of knowledge, to hell with them. Sure, wait until you have a definite alternative but I'd just say you found a research group and supervisor that you believe will be better for you, given your research interests.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The other answers give the most 'sensible' choice, but being nice and making false excuses for your departure is not the only option.
Consider politely but firmly telling the supervisor your genuine reasons for leaving. There is a risk of backlash (although your supervisor is retiring soon and you are leaving the department) but the upside is the self-respect you will gain from being honest. And if the supervisor is as proud as you say, then they will be just as angry if you say you are leaving to be 'nearer your family' or another excuse.
Too many PhD students are afraid to stand up for themselves because they fear reprisals, but often the opposite is true. If you let more senior academics walk all over you then they will never respect you. If you challenge them then they may be angry in the short-term, but eventually, you will reshape the dynamic and they will treat you more as a peer than an underling. This is essential if you want a long-term career in academia. Always trying to please your superiors may get you through a PhD, but it will not prepare you for leadership.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I'll add some points from a German perspective and the perspective of someone who defended her thesis in another university than where most of the research was actually done.
**I suspect that a large part of the conflict about the supervision may be due to OP and professor working with quite different concepts of PhD thesis work** which may be arising from a recent paradigm shift about what exactly PhD research should be.
---
Long version:
**Background:** when I started my PhD also in my field (chemistry) the typical set up (**A**) was that PhD research is "your own private fun" (as in: you're not paid for this - but you may use university infrastructure and project consumables for your research). My professor made sure, though, that all PhD students were hired as TAs or had some scholarship. Nevertheless it was made very clear that wages were paid for teaching, not for research.
This has changed considerably in my field, where the norm is now (**B**) that PhD students are *employed* to do research for a particular project.
(BTW: my old professor retired, I went working abroad and years later handed in and defended my thesis at another university. Old professor was one of the reviewers of my thesis, though.)
There are important differences/trade-offs: **B** of course gets you money for work that isn't paid in **A**. On the other hand, **A** gave far more freedom to choose the subject and arrange time and place youself (e.g. PhDs that were collected research of a *decade* alongside full time industrial work and external PhD students). Employed PhD students **B** are often quite tightly bound by that employment contract (project and job description have to be adhered to, there are restrictions on canceling these contracts also for the employee side).
The whole paradigm has also changed in that under **A** PhD students were seen and treated as fully responsible professionals (from the very beginning of the PhD - which they legally are in Germany) organizing their own life on their own behalf, whereas **B** students are often treated as not yet quite fully qualified professionals, and the PhD *studies* take more the shape of a university program.
**The professor giving only general advise at infrequent meetings may very well be an expression that they expect you work independently under paradigm A.** To reiterate it: paradigm **A** thinks of the PhD "student"\* as a fully trained top professional (only top professionals should do a PhD) from the very beginning. The PhD "student" does the thesis to proove these [already existing] skills of doing research *without* supervision (a research work done under supervision would qualify only as Diplom/Master thesis).
Whereas paradigm **B** thinks of the PhD as a training program where the student *learns* doing research.
Wrt. expected time line of the PhD, **A** theses took as long as they took (professor decides whether research content is sufficient for promotion = PhD), whereas **B** PhDs are supposed to be done within not too much more than the 3 years of the research project employment contract (this is also meant to guard students against exploitation).
\* PhD "student": aren't actually called students in German (student = Student, PhD student = Doktorand) and are typically not required to sign up with the university as student.
---
**In your situation, not having such a research employment contract is a huge advantage as there is nothing that binds you to your old institute/professor legally.**
(Side note: **B** students have the right to demand cancellation of their employment contract if they do have a better offer.)
Nevertheless, I'd suggest treating your situation in analogy.
>
> I know it sounds not very ethical, I said nothing to my supervisor until I'm officially accepted by the new university
>
>
>
This is *not* unethical, but expected and correct behaviour.
**You can safely rely on the academic community in Germany accepting reasons that would be considered suffient under employment law for temporal contract to demand cancellation.**
* >
> obvious that our field of research doesn't match
>
>
>
A better match of field is a good reason. How much that counts would depend on how much better the match is (but then the default assumption is that noone moves if there isn't anything gained by that move), and how long it took you to decide that the match wasn't good.
* If my guess is right that there is a considerable **gap between his and your concepts of good supervision of a PhD thesis and the expected level of independenc in your work**, then:
he may be considering any closer level of supervision bad in the sense that the need for closer supervision implies bad mark (possibly to the point where he may consider the work not up to the independence standard of a PhD thesis) when judging your research. So close supervision means depriving you of your chance to demonstrate the ability of unsupervised independent work.
A better match also in these expectations is needed for a successful PhD. This doesn't imply any direction: if you are already up to do your research practically without supervision it will be good for you if you can show that in your PhD. If not, then your only chance to surviving a PhD is one with (intially) closer supervision.
>
> He reassured me that he had sufficient knowledge on my topic, but it turns out that he doesn't. [...long snip...] He never admits he doesn't master my topic
>
>
>
Of course, it would be better if he were able to tell you that he isn't really into the particular field, but it's really *you* not he who's expected to be the expert on the topic of your thesis. He is actually only required to be able to judge and testify that you did do good research, and it would be totally legitimate (**A**) if he expects/hopes to learn from you about this topic.
My old professor once expressed this roughly as "You are a fully qualified professional. You are able and are expected to be able to decide and judge on your own what to do." and another told me "I'm not able to have in-depth scientific discussions with you on your [particular specialization]. It is exactly because I perceived a lack of this expertise in my group that I hired you."
The important conclusion is: **openly discuss these paradigms with your new professor to make sure you understand each other.**
* 6 months into the PhD would translate in paradigm **B** to "at the end of probation period" and that's a totally acceptable time frame to realize that the match wasn't that good.
* *any* financial advantage is a very good reason.
For the employees that could be more total pay, better hourly wage, more total hours, longer duration of fixed term contract, maybe a scholarship. As you are not an employee, lower cost of living in the new university town or better opportunities for part-time jobs would be acceptable as well. Extra bonus if you find a part time job there that is related to your profession.
---
Keep in mind: all you really need to get your PhD is:
1. your research (which doesn't need to be done in formal association with any university) and
2. a professor/institute that is willing to read your thesis and who then considers that it fulfils the criteria for promotion/successful thesis so they accept you as PhD candidate. (Of course, in practice this is easier if you are all the time inside the academic system and supervised, but few professors will reject you if you arrive with a *good* thesis or research proposal that matches their field)
This closely matches **A**, but is equally valid for **B**. Check the regulations of your new university early, though: I know of some faculties that demand a certain number of TA hours.
Your PhD research is *your own* work (and in your case there are no difficulties due to the old university owning work done as an employee), you can take your already existing work with you wherever you go.
---
Some more points:
* academia is a small world, and even smaller within Germany.
* A professor retiring doesn't mean they vanish from academia. Just university cannot *demand* that they do any particular work for them any more. But in most Länder, the professor retains the rights to teach and also to lecture and to take exams, so they can still act as supervisor and/or reviewer for a thesis.
* The other consequence is that your academic community probably will know also their side of what happend about you leaving (you may not be that important now academically speaking, but the next occasion is when your new faculty is looking for an external reviewer for your thesis).
* But if you treat this change of university honestly and professionally it doesn't matter that much how your old professor reacts. He may be temporarily annoyed when you tell him, but if *he* reacts unprofessionally, your academic community will realize it. Just as they will realize if *you* are dishonest and/or unprofessional.
* I hope I did guess correctly and Old Professor is not particularly but but just acts according to PhD paradigm **A**.
If so, acknowledging and sincerely thanking him (don't if you cannot sincerely) may smooth the situation considerably. If you can express that you weighted and appreciate the chance of showing you're able to do the research entirely on your own (in his group) vs. joining the other group where having colleagues working on much closer topics will hopefully give your specialization a boost due to more in-depth scientific discussion with your peers, more closely related seminars, etc..
* After all, the immediately important point for *you* is how much bad feelings you carry around about these 6 months.
* >
> I see no career prospect here, as he'll retire in three years, and then his department will close
>
>
>
If you want to go for an academic carreer, the perspective shouldn't be a postdoc at the same institute where you did your PhD. The expectation is a postdoc somewhere else, possibly abroad. (Although there's less stress on this if you have longer research stays abroad and/or changed groups/universities before).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Run. Definitely. The less reasons you give, the less cause he will be angry. Don't step on his pride.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: You did everything right in not telling him. If he is often loud and verbally abusive, consider the following:
You don't have a contract with your current institution. You got nothing from your supervisor. You do work and he gives no input. You owe him **nothing**. He is in the ethically problematic side, not you (since he probably wants to be on your publications).
In the day before leaving, clear your desk, return keys etc. To the administration, send an email to your current "supervisor" that he should not expect you to be in the group any more, stating that he was not happy with your research direction so you will stop working with him. Ask him to summarize briefly which specific parts of your research he considers to have given input to. BCC this to your new supervisor and CC it to the faculty Dean.
Be polite and formal in this email. Never talk to him again. Such people are all over the place in German academia in some subjects.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/03
| 302
| 1,438
|
<issue_start>username_0: When I write a paper comparing my algorithm to someone else's, how should I make sure that the results are not skewed because I implemented the other algorithm poorly? Is it acceptable to write that the other algorithm was implemented to my best knowledge?<issue_comment>username_1: It is usually sufficient to say that you tried to optimize both your algorithm and the baseline(s) as much as you could (provided you actually did so).
Before writing your own implementations though, you should first check that the authors of the baseline(s) haven't published their source code. You may even write to them. I've heard all kinds of replies to such requests: from people sending me the code within minutes, to people telling me their code was lost in an old laptop long ago (the paper was 2 years old...). If they don't have the code, you can ask them how they would/did implement their algorithm.
It would be good practice and very beneficial for the community if you then publish both the code for your algorithm AND (if you implemented them) the code for the baselines.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You could compare the computational complexity of each algorithm, without considering any implementation. (Of course, comparisons between implementations are interesting, but there are many barriers to conducting such comparisons, e.g., comparisons aren't skewed because of coding issues.)
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/04/03
| 366
| 1,600
|
<issue_start>username_0: I understand that this question is related to a workflow of a journal and have tried to look at the answer of this specific query but am not able to find a specific answer anywhere else. The query is
I had send a paper to a reputed journal. Its status for the past month was "Review in progress". After more than a month, its status changed to "Ready to review". What does this mean? How could the status for atleast one month be "Review in progress" and then change to "Ready to review".<issue_comment>username_1: These status in online manuscript portals can't be interpreted much. These are my interpretations:
* Review in Progress - When Editor(s) were reviewing for the quality check of the manuscript. ---> Ready to Review - by the Peer-reviewers.
* Review in Progress - Reviewers were reviewing ---> Review in Progress - Editors have got the review comments. They will make a decision soon.
* Review in progress - Reviewers were being selected and the requests to them had been sent ---> Now they have accepted the requests and start reviewing soon.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I had a similar experience. I contacted the Editor, and it turned out that one of the reviewers they contacted backed out of reviewing my paper, so the progress went back to something like "ready to review" (not those exact same words, I can't remember the exact status, but basically is a step back from *being reviewed* or *in progress*). I never would have known that if I didn't contact the Editor. A polite email to the editor won't hurt. IMHO.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/03
| 1,052
| 3,558
|
<issue_start>username_0: When citing two articles from the same author using different initials, one should cite each article with the relevant initials, even if they are different. This is answered [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/25993/how-to-cite-with-inconsistent-use-of-initials).
But what about differences in the last name of the same author when referencing inline? Russian authors, for instance, must transliterate their names and there are sometimes inconsistencies in the way this is done. For example, <NAME> writes his or her name *E. Maschenko* [here](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273639075_A_finding_of_the_male_mammoth_carcass_in_the_Karginsky_suit_of_the_Upper_Pleistocene_of_the_Taimyr_Peninsula) (published 2015), but *E. Mashchenko* [here](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S1062359013070042) (published 2013). Basic knowledge of Russian transliteration suggests that *Мащенко* is to be transliterated as *Mashchenko,* and that is indeed the spelling the author uses on Research Gate, suggesting that the *Maschenko* spelling is an error.
Yet, because the point of referencing is to make it easy for other researchers to find the sourced material, the literal spelling *Maschenko* should be preferred when citing Maschenko (2015). When citing both articles inline, which of the following would one write?
* >
> (Mashchenko, 2013; Maschenko, 2015)
>
>
>
which would be correct, but misleading and strange because this is the same person.
* >
> (Mashchenko, 2013, 2015)
>
>
>
which doesn’t adhere to the above standard.<issue_comment>username_1: You can use the correct *(Mashchenko, 2013; Maschenko, 2015)* version and address the issue that it might be misleading by explicitly stating that Mashchenko and Maschenko are the same author and perhaps by explaining why the issue has arisen.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Inline citations should match what appears in bibliographies, and bibliographies should match what appears in the publication record. You can augment what’s listed—for instance, you could provide the original Cyrillic rendering in the bibliography to indicate the authors are in fact the same person—but I would leave the citation uncorrected.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Well, first you do what the publishing guidelines say.
If they say nothing, one feasible option is, in my opinion, to use both spellings this way:
>
> (Mashchenko [Maschenko], 2013, 2015)
>
>
>
This goes with the policy that such a bibliographic entry should allow one to search for the paper. Sure it is not optimal that people may have to search for two different spellings, on the other hand, this makes it clear that it is the same author. Another option is this:
>
> (Mashchenko, 2013, 2015 [published as Maschenko])
>
>
>
Because I think that you personally should refer to the author using one name, and keep the alternative spelling only for the bibliographic entry.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The APA style blog addresses this and has some suggested wording: "Smith-Hartman (publishing as Smith, 2010)" blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2017/05/… That may be not quite the right wording for a transliteration issue, though.
You could write "Мащенко (published as Mashchenko 2013; Maschenko 2015) found that..." This might be the simplest way to quickly address the confusion, while allowing the citations to match the bibliography and published record. (Other answers have nicely explained the importance of this.)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/03
| 809
| 3,409
|
<issue_start>username_0: It seems nonsensical and backwards that university institutions can attract students by boasting with their brand value or exorbitant tuition fees rather than focusing on the actual educative quality their institution has to offer. Likewise, from the perspective of employers, it would be better to measure the actual education that potential employees have received, rather than have to hire supposedly smart Harvard graduates who then turn out to just be rich snobs.
Personally, I received my bachelor's from a "free" (tax-financed) university in Denmark, and then went on to study at LSE on a scholarship. If I had to pay for that master's degree, I'd be exponentially broke right now, and yet, I can honestly say that the education received in Denmark was more coherent and better structured, while LSE was more "read this, pass that exam, repeat", which is cool as well, but why are you demanding so much money then???
So my question is, why is there no established measure of the quality of the particular education offered at a particular institution? Is it because the powers that be have a vested interest in hiding the fact that high-tuition universitites with fancy latin mottos aren't actually more difficult to attend than average unis?<issue_comment>username_1: There have been numerous attempts to develop such “reductive” measures of educational quality, among others the *US News and World Report* rankings and the so-called Shanghai list.
The problem with these and other similar measures are that they reflect the specific aims and goals of the people who are creating the list. That is, there are no inherently unbiased and fully objective measures of educational quality and effectiveness.
Moreover, you can make the argument that even within a university, different departments can offer very different educational experiences as a result of class size, instructor quality, and other factors. So not only would you need an institutional ranking, you’d have to drill down to the department level, too, which is a very difficult endeavor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to the "consumer" rankings mentioned by username_1, there have been scholarly efforts such as the [National Survey of Student Engagement](http://nsse.indiana.edu/). U.S. accreditation practices offer self-evaluation, that are moving from being focused on inputs (library size, number of teachers, etc.) to outputs (schools figuring out how to show progress).
There are federal efforts that now provide baseline consumer reports, as a ["college scorecard"](https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/). And in fact, [Harvard scores remarkably well](https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University) as of 2018, with the average annual cost at $17,882 (due to generous need-based financial aid), a 6-year graduation rate of 98%, and the median earnings of graduates, 10 years out, of those who received federal financial aid, is $90,900.
The big conceptual difficulties in measurement are that students come in with all different preparation and goals (and there are not universal incoming measures about students--most colleges do not have very selective admissions criteria). Individual differences matter: some students would thrive at a small liberal arts college and learn poorly at a big state school, while other students might do the opposite.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/03
| 449
| 1,845
|
<issue_start>username_0: I read a very recent paper that describes something I am only starting to study. Basically, it looks like authors of the paper have covered almost everything that can be explored in the topic.
How can I know if there is room left to research the topic? Should I approach the authors with a similar question?<issue_comment>username_1: Welcome! The answer is usually that the topic is not completely explored. When you're new to an area, it can be hard to see what the open questions are. Hold off on asking the authors anything until you've asked your advisor and really dug into the topic (reading related papers, working through the problems).
There's a nice answer to this question about approaching a new field:
[Exploring something completely new, even silly.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/61705/exploring-something-completely-new-even-silly?rq=1)
Beyond that, I encourage you to look at the Illustrated Guide to the Ph.D.
<http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think it's a good idea to ask. Researchers usually don't give good suggestions on interesting, open, approachable problems in their field to the first person asking it via e-mail --- typically, they keep them for themselves to explore, or give them to their students. One may even argue that finding a good question to answer is 50% of the work (at least in theoretical fields).
Also, if you ask such an open-ended question in general terms, it's more likely that you will get an answer listing some of the big problems that have been open for a while --- so the exact opposite of a good problem to start out in that field. Not because the author is being mean to you or malicious, but because that's what they think about when you ask about "open problems".
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/03
| 1,254
| 5,120
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have an undergrad degree in linguistics, and a masters degree in natural language processing from a department of linguistics. I would like to continue research work in natural language processing, but change fields to computer science. How can I make this happen? Many say its not possible, but I'm willing to put in the work and do what it takes! Although continuing my research as a linguistics PhD would be easier, I am not interested in taking this route.
More about my background:
* I am 25 year old female.
* I currently have 2 publications: one is a publication on software that I developed, the other is a somewhat random bioinformatics publication.
+ Many more publications to come in the next year! I have worked at 1 research institute (where I developed and published my software), worked in a CS lab, and now I work in government R&D and am affiliated with an R1 university.
+ I have been involved in A LOT of digital literacy efforts, volunteered to help at women's hackathons, etc. and have given a lot of Data Science presentations to the public.
My plans:
* GRE & GRE Math subject test.
* CS self-studying. I'm comfortable about data types and learning more about algorithms.
Questions:
* Do I have to get another masters? I can't afford it :(
* Would community college classes actually help me get in? I'm afraid they won't be taken seriously...
* Other ways to obtain/prove I have the necessary prerequisites for a CS degree?
I know some universities will simply not accept someone without a CS background, but some explicitly state in their CS admissions that they will (e.g. UWashington, UToronto)<issue_comment>username_1: Grammatically you are very well-equipped. The community may take exception at your lack of coursework in graph, computation, and automata theories. In my opinion as a scholar, a lack of coursework is less of an indicator of long-term success in studies than the individual's piqued curiosity regarding a field of study. If you have already said, "I will spend 5-7 years developing a new item of knowledge in computer science," that itself is an intellectual achievement within computer science. Few undergraduates find this sort of dedication to any practice.
Undergraduate programs teach a variety of curricula, ranging from, "This is how to program a Linux computer with network access," to, "This is the mathematical concept of the computer, this is how we make conjectures about it, this is how these conjectures are abstracted into physical computer programs." Typically that third step is linguistic, but the previous two will be the focus of PhD research.
As with any intellectual pursuit which requires collaboration with academia, all you can do is write letters, show your personality in them, submit applications, and apply yourself to independent study.
Source: I have a M.Sc. in computer science & have been a student in the institutions my entire life.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have a bachelors and masters in a non-STEM field and am currently in a CS PhD program. I had a similar constraint that I could not afford a CS masters degree and wanted to go directly into a research PhD. You seem like you're in a good enough position to just apply now, but given my non-STEM background, here's what I did:
* I took online courses such as [Algorithms](https://www.coursera.org/learn/algorithms-part1), [Automata](https://online.stanford.edu/course/automata-theory), [Databases](https://lagunita.stanford.edu/courses/Engineering/db/2014_1/about), and [Machine Learning](https://www.coursera.org/learn/machine-learning). I did all the assignments and took detailed notes. I'd suggest you look into [Deep Learning](https://www.coursera.org/specializations/deep-learning) since neural machine translation is [a hot area](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/14/magazine/the-great-ai-awakening.html).
* I put everything I coded on GitHub. I made sure my code was clean, organized, and well-commented. This was primarily for employers—I'm not sure if grad schools care—, but I had to pay the bills while teaching myself on nights and weekends.
* I held a couple of programming-related jobs, starting as a software developer at a startup and ending as a research software developer in a bioinformatics lab. The first kind of job is good for getting your foot in the door and the second is good for publications—you might already be set on the latter.
* Because of the above job, I curated my application for ML + computational biology tracks in CS departments. Cross-disciplinary labs are nice because no one knows everything and everyone brings something to the table. For reference, one professor at another school told me that he wanted to accept me but was worried about my background. This lab was extremely focused, and the school expected me to start research in that area on day one. I interviewed twice but didn't get in. I think where you apply is probably the most important variable, provided you have a solid application.
* I applied to 8 schools and was only accepted by 1. Just FYI.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/03
| 694
| 2,808
|
<issue_start>username_0: All PhD students are getting their PhD from a university (as far as I know).
1. But some PhD students follow a PhD program that is just a standard program at their department (e.g. department of math, or physics, or sociology), do research under a supervisor who is just affiliated with the department. The supervisor may also be affiliated with research institutes, but the relation between the PhD student and the supervisor is not created via, or dependent on, or related to those research institutes: the relation is solely based on the fact that the PhD student and supervisor are affiliated with the same department.
2. Then there are PhD students, who (though they are of course also affiliated to a department) are enrolled into a PhD position that is specifically affiliated with a research institute. For example, there may be a research institute that is affiliated with university X, all researchers there are affiliated with X, but it is a somewhat separate institute. The PhD student would be specifically linked to that institute, rather than merely to his department.
**Are there generally accepted terms that distinguish between these two types of PhD positions?**<issue_comment>username_1: I'm involved, as adviser, in a PhD program that falls exactly in your second category. The program, which is briefly presented [here](http://dottorato.polito.it/mlg/en/overview) and [here](https://www.inrim.eu/training/phd-metrology), is jointly run by my university (POLITO) and by the Italian national metrology institute (INRIM), which is a governement institute. Half of the available positions are paid by POLITO and half by INRIM. Frequently students are co-advised by advisers from both entities (this is not mandatory, but it's useful; and the student list on both sites is not up-to-date for what concerns co-advising information).
However, the degree is awarded by the university only, and there is no formal distinction between the students that get their PhD from the above program and those who get their PhD from a program associated to a single department within the university. I'm aware of a couple of other similar programs in my field around Europe ([here](https://www.ptb.de/cms/en/about-us-careers/careers/what-ptb-offers-doctoral-candidates/support-of-doctoral-candidates.html) one in Germany), but I've never heard of any specific term distinguishing them.
Different is the case of a [double degree](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/79875/20058) which is awarded by two universities.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I did my PhD through #2 (enrolled at University of New South Wales, but affiliated with a Cooperative Research Centre). I never encountered any terminology to distinguish between the two, formal or otherwise.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/03
| 1,812
| 7,757
|
<issue_start>username_0: Obviously, if you choose to either do a PhD in English literature, or in mathematics, this choice will heavily determine the possible career paths you can later take.
But to what extent does the choice between two different topics within the same discipline influence your career possibilities?
* Physics: Quantum computing vs high energy particle physics
* Math: differential topology vs abstract algebra
* Economics: business cycle theory vs industrial organization.
* Psychology: Evolutionary psychology vs Neuro-psychology
**Would such a choice significantly affect your future career, or is there generally such an overlap in the skills you learn doing different topics that you will be able to easily switch between these topics within the same discipline?**<issue_comment>username_1: Very few people are static in their careers, in and out of academia. My PhD was in the area of molecular simulations in chemical engineering. My post doc was with a physicist working in computational materials, then I took a staff position in environmental engineering doing fluid flow and geochemistry studies, I have since moved into renewable energy applications and biomedical, with side work in algorithm development and kinetics.
All of this is to say, any limits on what direction your career can take are placed by the researcher, not the field of study. If you’re not willing to branch out, your choice of jobs will be limited. If you’re willing to explore, the options are as infinite as your curiosity and salesmanship will allow.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In the humanities, you may find yourself slightly limited — initially.
For example, if a Shakespeare scholar leaves an English department, depending on how large the department is and its make up, they may look to replace him with another Shakespeare person, a British literature person, an early modernist, or any one in English. If an applied linguist leaves, they will probably try to hire another applied linguist, or if it's a smaller department, just a linguist of the applied or theoretical flavor. (This assumes a department isn't trying to change directions, but in that case they will still have a [sub]field in mind).
If an art department wants a Far East modern art historian, and you are a European modern art historian, you can try to get the position, but may not pass the initial cull of applications, depending on whether the European or modern part is more important. But someone who does specialize in that and gets the job, may begin transitioning towards being a modern Latin American art historian. Then they could justifiably apply for jobs looking for specialists in that but in the meantime would likely be expected to continue teaching courses that they were hired for (and even then things can change).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: To some extent, if you get a PhD in a field, then that's probably sufficient for a lot of purposes. In some contexts, even the precise field that you got your PhD in isn't a huge issue.
However, yeah, the choice of dissertation project can matter a lot. If you spend years working on a dissertation project, then it's a golden opportunity to get to know that field's community and gain recognition as an expert. You might engage in collaborations that'll eventually define your career, including getting you a job or clients.
It'd seem ideal if you could start on that process from Day 1, doing a dissertation project in something that you'd like to pursue in your later career. However, many PhD students don't know precisely what they want to do long-term, or else they can't find support for such a project, so it's pretty common for PhD students to do projects different from what they'd later pursue.
So it's probably best to say that a PhD's career isn't really restricted by their choice of dissertation project, but rather than a PhD's career can be greatly served by selecting a dissertation project that they'll want to build their career from.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I did a PhD in biomedical engineering; after a few years that career fell apart, and I ended up moving into statistics. Currently I'm working in econometrics, which is quite a long way from any of my formal quals.
In my experience, mathematics is mathematics, and if you can handle one mathematical field you can probably adjust to another. For me the toughest part was convincing potential employers that I could make that shift.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Your choice of PhD topic can give you a slight head-start in a particular career path if it matches well to the work done in that position. However, choosing a topic (as opposed to a discipline) that does not match your later career path does not harm you, except to the extent that it forfeits this small advantage. If you undertake a PhD in a particular discipline (physics, maths, economics, psychology, etc.) you should acquire the ability to learn new topics in that discipline within a shorter time than it would take you to do another PhD in that topic. Hence, once you have completed your PhD in a particular discipline, it is usual that you can move around with reasonable ease, so long as you are willing to put in some time to learn a new topic.
For the most part, your PhD is an accreditation that signals high-level knowledge of a subject area and the ability to undertake research at a level that can be published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals. Most PhD graduates go on to publish papers in scholarly journals and this gives them some claim to expert knowledge in particular topics, but also a high-level of general knowledge in their chosen discipline. Most employers of specialists see it this way, and in my experience it rarely matters what your particular dissertation topic was, though it may matter what topics you have published in. (Besides which, in most cases your dissertation is sufficiently abstruse that eyes glaze over when you try to explain it.)
Choosing a discipline for your PhD study is important, but it is not a huge problem if your topic turns out to be substantially different from what you want to practice later. Your program should give you a good enough knowledge of the discipline that learning a new topic becomes easier and easier, and up-skilling into a new topic area is not too onerous.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: **Picking a Ph.D topic restricts your career choices about as much as picking an airport restricts which countries you can visit.**
As <NAME> [notes](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107522/to-what-extent-will-your-choice-of-phd-topic-restrict-your-career#comment281047_107522), having a Ph.D (by research, that is - I've heard of Ph.D by coursework but don't have experience there) is in a sense a certification as an independent thinker. Your work has been reviewed by experts in the field, and they agree that your work is an original and independent advance in your field. username_3urally, this gives you a head start in your own field.
Ph.D work tends to be deep and narrow, and somewhat ahead of the curve. Will people be advertising for work based on your specific thesis? It's possible, but very unlikely. So even if you remain in the general field, you should be prepared to work on something different from your thesis anyway.
As an employer working in a tech R&D setting, if I'm looking at prospective staff with a Ph.D, I'd probably want it to be in a maths-based discipline, but the specifics aren't likely to matter too much unless I'm chasing a narrow requirement. Cultural fit and other personal qualities are likely to be more important - including, after a few projects, your track record.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/03
| 992
| 3,913
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in computer science. I wrote few simulation programs, designed the experiment for a chemistry work with my colleague. I have no idea about the principal aim of the research; I was only involved with simulations and computer experiments. Also, I know that this publication (paper) will not advance my career option.
Recently, I have been offered to become a co-author of the article about the analysis of the results of my experiments. I understand that quantum of my contribution is reasonable; I am wishing not to co-author the work.
How to say politely reject this co-authorship request?
Note: There was no discussion related to co-authorship before I started writing the computer experiments.
Related, but very different questions:
* [Is it common to claim co-authorship by helping writing a paper without doing any research](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21251/)
* [Should a colleague receive authorship for identifying a research gap and reviewing a manuscript?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/82031/)<issue_comment>username_1: This is how I am planning to respond. I am posting this as an answer, because it might help future readers of the academia.SE.
>
> Dear Professor X
>
>
> I appreciate the offer to co-author the article titled 'Titled Paper' for which I did some computer experiments based on our past discussions. I am happy that my experiments are note-worthy and acceptable.
>
>
> However, I am willing to be a part of acknowledgement in your manuscript. Also, I would like to proof read the manuscript to learn something new or point out any mistake in the Simulation section of your manuscript.
>
>
> It has been a great collaboration with your group and I would be happy if I could contribute something more to your future works so that I could be considered a potential co-author of the work.
>
>
> Wishes,
>
>
> username_1
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I don’t think the question of how to “politely” decline the coauthorship is really worth fussing about. If you want to decline the coauthorship, that’s absolutely okay, just say so in plain words and explain that you don’t think your contribution was great enough to be a coauthor. I can’t imagine anyone ever being offended by this, as long as you don’t imply that you think the paper is worthless.
With that being said, I do think you are perhaps a bit misguided in where you are perceiving the bar for coauthorship to be compared to where it actually is. Everyone knows that being a coauthor can mean a variety of things, which can range anywhere between “I wrote the whole damn thing myself and my coauthors just answered a couple of questions I sent them over email” and “I just answered a couple of emails”. So, if someone asks about the paper in your viva, just tell the truth and say that your involvement was minimal - that is nothing to be ashamed of, but also doesn’t mean that it’s unreasonable for you to be a coauthor.
To summarize, as I said it’s absolutely fine if you wish to decline, but it’s best if that decision should be fully informed and based on an accurate understanding of what coauthorship is understood to imply.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: To me, your draft e-mail seems very long and confusing, and your decision to reject authorship seems highly questionable. Passing over the second point, here is a suggested revision to the mail:
>
> Dear Professor,
>
>
> I appreciate the offer to co-author the [subject] paper. At this point, I would prefer not to be a co-author, but, I would be happy to be listed in the acknowledgments. I would also be happy to help you with the writing/revisions, especially in the simulation section.
>
>
> Thanks again for the offer of authorship; I hope we can continue working together in the future. Best wishes,
>
>
> Name
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/03
| 1,175
| 4,843
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergrad teaching assistant of a physic BSc student's lab. My job is reviewing the (usually 8-10 pages long) reports the students make, arriving in electronic format. During the review, I add short comments (1-2 sentences) to the document: things like *"that's false because this and that", "this would've been better such and such", "you also could've check that and that"*, etc. The students then get their commented report back graded by the professor. Related to the course, I never meet the students in person.
The main purpose of these comments, among letting students know what they did wrong, is to help them improve their experimental skills. Observing and documenting *everything* reasonable, interpreting the results, thinking further, being consistent, etc. As such, there're usually a lot of comments on every student's report - usually 3-5/page - even on A-graded ones.
**My concern** is it's kind of hard to write even constructive comments of this kind without the possibility of sounding somewhat cantankerous. The relatively lot of *"that"s bad, that's wrong/missing/false/etc"* comments I make on small, but not unimportant errors set up a negative tone as is, and in this atmosphere even writing something like *"that wasn't strictly in the task, but it's interesting to think about this and that"* may come down as negative. I try to add as much positive comments as I can - but the simple *"Good!", "Clever!", "I like the approach"* kind of notes feel falsely in large amounts, especially when the student didn't really do anything outstanding, only did what he was told. Expanding them with something like "That's good work. You could also check that and that" also turns into education.
I'd like to avoid coming down too testy: it would kill the purpose, making students dismiss my comments as "nah, that guy finds error in everything". I want the students to feel that I actually want to help them, and I'm on *their* side. The professor - of course - told them the purpose of the reviews, but I know that when I did this same lab course (a year ago), there were still (silent) words like that about our teaching assistants.
**How could I make my coments more encouraging, without sounding false?**<issue_comment>username_1: Let them think you're testy or overly picky. They will still take your feedback on board if they care about doing a better job next time--either for the sake of their own skills or simply to get a better grade. And yes, they'll complain about you, but that's no reason to worry. Thinking back to my student days, the professors and graders that my classmates and I complained about most, were often the ones we learned the most from.
Regarding tone, you're right that a neutral tone can come across as harsh in writing, but it's something people can get used to from you. In fact, once they do get used to it, this way of communicating is refreshingly efficient.
At most, you could ask the professor if he thinks the tone of your comments is okay, but I suspect you don't need to change anything.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. I can see you've given some thought to balancing the negative with some positive. That's good. Note, you don't need to remark on every single thing they did right.
If you have a rubric, a list of elements you look for in each lab report, you may wish to put a check mark in the margin wherever you see that a required element is present.
Sometimes a student doesn't manage to get much of anything right. In that case, it can be helpful to notice something positive about what they were *trying* to do, e.g. "Glad to see you caught this contradiction."
2. Try expressing things as questions, rather than statements. Examples:
>
> Can you also check such-and-so? How does this fit in with etc.?
>
>
>
One of my professors would write in my proofs, instead of "Does not follow" or "Not relevant,"
>
> How is this germane?
>
>
>
3. As a student, with certain graders, I was sometimes unsure whether a particular comment was positive or negative or just food for thought. So try to avoid those misunderstandings, e.g. "Food for thought: etc." or "Enrichment idea: etc." or "Conclusion is correct; be careful to make clear the connection between…"
4. Be tactful — meaning, your belief that they are trying hard, and can get better with your guidance, should come through. Example: "Watch out, need more digits here to avoid rounding error later on."
5. I suggest you arrange with the professor to visit the class briefly at or near the beginning of the semester, and maybe at the midpoint again, to introduce yourself and show a friendly face. Convey to them that your job is to give them lots of specific feedback to help them improve their work. This can help humanize things.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/04
| 662
| 2,638
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a prospective PhD math student. This year's application season has brought me down to two schools to choose from:
1. Medium-sized department, ranked <80 on US News (whatever that means), very welcoming people, potential advisor is very young but seemed like we would "click", surrounding area and city is beautiful, program looks awesome.
2. Larger department, top 20 program, potential advisor is famous in his field, current advisor says I would work well with him/he's a cool guy, don't know much else since I've not visited.
I am waitlisted at university 2. University 1's initial offer to me included the standard stipend along with a decent fellowship. I made a visit to university 1 and talked with many professors and my potential advisor. After this visit, they offered me a ~17% increase in my stipend due to some professors advocating for me who were apparently impressed (whom I do not know other than my visit). I feel that this is a good sign, but I am ultimately pursuing a career in academia. So I know prestige plays a big roll in future jobs. Assuming I have an offer from university 2 as well:
**Questions:**
1. Is this late stipend increase offer typical?
2. Based on your experience and insight in the job market for academics, which university is the better option?
Thanks for your time to read.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. It's not too unusual. Lower-ranked schools know they need to work a little harder to attract top talent. For example, I did an REU at a lower-ranked school, and they admitted that the only reason they bothered offering an REU program was hoping that some of us would become grad students -- they normally couldn't attract grad students of our caliber. Offering a 15% stipend increase to particularly promising students seems altogether appropriate.
2. University 2. I might seriously consider university 1 if you didn't like university 2 for some reason -- what you do is far more important than where you go, and getting into a top school does not guarantee you an academic future (not even close!!). But in your case, both seem like good options, so if you get into university 2, I would go there.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There’s nothing wrong with a school revising its offer. In fact, I’d view the improved offer as a sign of serious interest—schools aren’t likely to do this for all of the students who visit. So this means that they want you to join their department, which is a plus in my book. (The big reputation is great, but a school that values you for you also matters instead of being merely a cog in the machine!)
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/04
| 574
| 2,416
|
<issue_start>username_0: The UK offers a Post Graduate Certificate of Education which certifies teachers domestically and is useful in the international school system.
As an American teaching abroad, I am looking for an equivalent.
What is the US equivalent to this?<issue_comment>username_1: **There is no such certificate**.
* To teach at a public school in the US, you will need to be licensed by the state you wish to teach in. If you have a BA/MA in education from an accredited university, it is often trivial to get this -- you normally have to pay a fee, get fingerprinted, and provide your transcripts. But some states are worse than others -- you may have to take exams to prove you're qualified. I've heard stories about having to redo your BA/MA at an in-state school, but I have not been able to confirm such reports. There is also such a thing as "emergency licensure" -- for example, if a school can't fill a key post, they can hire someone temporarily that normally wouldn't be eligible (e.g., a physicist without teacher training to be a physics teacher).
* At a private school in the US, each school has their own rules. State licensure and/or a degree in teaching is a good first step, but each school sets their own rules.
* To teach in an American school abroad, things are even less well-defined. To my knowledge, "American Schools abroad" do not have any oversight by the US Department of Education, so there are no uniform standards. Each school sets their own rules in accordance with local laws. Fluency in English and some previous teaching experience is often enough, though in some saturated markets (e.g., Geneva), and in some countries with stricter local policies, the requirements can be much higher.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The role of a postgraduate degree in education often fills the need of the PGCE. In the UK and in other Commonwealth countries, you get your degree first, like a physics degree for instance and then do your teacher training.
The US simply does not use that model, most of the training in regards to your ability to teach is done at the postgraduate level. There is, of course, no uniformity in how the US approaches this, each state has it's own licensing requirements
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: The equivalent in the US would be a one year Master of Arts in Teaching. It is pretty much the same thing.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/04
| 696
| 2,903
|
<issue_start>username_0: I revised and resubmitted my manuscript (rejected with the chance of resubmission) to the same journal. I listed all my answers to the reviewers' comments at the beginning of the document. Later, the editor asked me to highlight the changes in the text to make it easier to track them. Since I almost rewrote the entire paper (I mention it in the resubmission letter), about 85-90% of the text would be colored.
I have two questions:
1. Should I fulfill the editor's request even if almost the whole manuscript turns into let's say red? I'd prefer yes.
2. Should I place color tags in the Latex source file, or should I highlight changes directly in the pdf file? Which of these or even other choices are the most appropriate?<issue_comment>username_1: **There is no such certificate**.
* To teach at a public school in the US, you will need to be licensed by the state you wish to teach in. If you have a BA/MA in education from an accredited university, it is often trivial to get this -- you normally have to pay a fee, get fingerprinted, and provide your transcripts. But some states are worse than others -- you may have to take exams to prove you're qualified. I've heard stories about having to redo your BA/MA at an in-state school, but I have not been able to confirm such reports. There is also such a thing as "emergency licensure" -- for example, if a school can't fill a key post, they can hire someone temporarily that normally wouldn't be eligible (e.g., a physicist without teacher training to be a physics teacher).
* At a private school in the US, each school has their own rules. State licensure and/or a degree in teaching is a good first step, but each school sets their own rules.
* To teach in an American school abroad, things are even less well-defined. To my knowledge, "American Schools abroad" do not have any oversight by the US Department of Education, so there are no uniform standards. Each school sets their own rules in accordance with local laws. Fluency in English and some previous teaching experience is often enough, though in some saturated markets (e.g., Geneva), and in some countries with stricter local policies, the requirements can be much higher.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The role of a postgraduate degree in education often fills the need of the PGCE. In the UK and in other Commonwealth countries, you get your degree first, like a physics degree for instance and then do your teacher training.
The US simply does not use that model, most of the training in regards to your ability to teach is done at the postgraduate level. There is, of course, no uniformity in how the US approaches this, each state has it's own licensing requirements
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: The equivalent in the US would be a one year Master of Arts in Teaching. It is pretty much the same thing.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/04
| 694
| 2,878
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in mathematics education. As a part of my thesis, in the last year I designed a learning environment for tablets, similar to a computer game. The program is designed for children ages 6-10.
Up until now, I have not tested the program with any children, only some preliminary tests with fellow students.
Is it possible to publish this?
The program is quite complex and I fear that a single article detailing the program structure and the mathematics it can transport as well as the findings in the working sessions and interviews with the children may turn out to be too long.<issue_comment>username_1: I agree with user2768's comment that it will be most convincing if you can publish a user study and/or test of the program's impact. However, if your program is designed around some part of learning theory that is important but hard to implement, or focuses on a neglected area of mathematics, the program itself may generate interest. You allude to interviews with children when designing the program--so if you can illuminate what the misconceptions are that kids have (or other needs you found) and how the program is designed to address those, that might be compelling.
You may want to take a look at the Bootstrap project, which started as a teacher's classroom tool to teach algebra and became a dissertation topic and then an educational tool. <http://www.bootstrapworld.org/community/>
It's also not fully clear to me how far along in your thesis you are. You'd benefit from reading about Design-Based Research (see, e.g., the 2004 special issue of the Journal of Learning Sciences, starting with this article by <NAME>: <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1?journalCode=hlns20>), and possibly also this conference paper on how to build that into a dissertation: <http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks/1612/> This method may offer you a framework to help you publish design work-in-progress, as well as knowledge you gain as you test and develop it.
Also, you may want to ask your advisor about good outlets to publish this, and whether getting a paper out at this point is a top goal. Since most education conferences are non-archival (double-check whether the individual conference publishes archival proceedings), this may also be a good thing to submit to a conference.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Publishing an article about software just because it was difficult to write, is usually not enough. Software does not receive the recognition as research results. And articles describing how a specific software was written is of almost no interest to other readers.
My personal advice: Publish the software as open source to GitHub or similar. Always mention it when you publish or give talks covering your software. People will recognize your work.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/04
| 703
| 2,919
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an early-career academic in a humanities subject and have been offered my first book contract. The offer is from a reputable international commercial publisher, which has published several recent and important works in my field.
The publisher has offered an advance payment of c.$700/£500 on publication, but does not offer royalties. This is on the basis that most institutions are purchasing digital subscriptions as opposed to physical books or ebooks.
Having no prior experience of book contracts, I would like to gauge if this is a good deal in terms of payment, and what constitutes the norm for royalties for academic books.<issue_comment>username_1: I agree with user2768's comment that it will be most convincing if you can publish a user study and/or test of the program's impact. However, if your program is designed around some part of learning theory that is important but hard to implement, or focuses on a neglected area of mathematics, the program itself may generate interest. You allude to interviews with children when designing the program--so if you can illuminate what the misconceptions are that kids have (or other needs you found) and how the program is designed to address those, that might be compelling.
You may want to take a look at the Bootstrap project, which started as a teacher's classroom tool to teach algebra and became a dissertation topic and then an educational tool. <http://www.bootstrapworld.org/community/>
It's also not fully clear to me how far along in your thesis you are. You'd benefit from reading about Design-Based Research (see, e.g., the 2004 special issue of the Journal of Learning Sciences, starting with this article by <NAME>: <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1?journalCode=hlns20>), and possibly also this conference paper on how to build that into a dissertation: <http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks/1612/> This method may offer you a framework to help you publish design work-in-progress, as well as knowledge you gain as you test and develop it.
Also, you may want to ask your advisor about good outlets to publish this, and whether getting a paper out at this point is a top goal. Since most education conferences are non-archival (double-check whether the individual conference publishes archival proceedings), this may also be a good thing to submit to a conference.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Publishing an article about software just because it was difficult to write, is usually not enough. Software does not receive the recognition as research results. And articles describing how a specific software was written is of almost no interest to other readers.
My personal advice: Publish the software as open source to GitHub or similar. Always mention it when you publish or give talks covering your software. People will recognize your work.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/04
| 1,638
| 6,923
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student in Mathematics. I have solved my original thesis problem, and that will probably one or two papers, at least one of them very good. After that, my advisor basically told me: "Here is this paper that I wrote (together with two other very strong professors), there are some cases missing, I would like you to do them". Problem is, none of them has an idea on how to solve these cases (otherwise they would have written them in their paper, of course), so here I am, stuck on this problem for months, with basically no advance whatsoever (at the beginning at least I was learning a lot of stuff, now I know everything that's relevant that's been written up to know - I spent a lot of time looking at the literature). How can a PhD student (decently good, but certainly not a star) be expected to improve upon the work of some professors, if there nobody has a precise idea on how to do so? I think this is overambitious and nonsensical, to say the least (especially after spending 3-4 months on it).
It is one of those problems where once you have found the key idea, the problem is completely done (exactly the opposite of what I like working on).
I would like to work on other lower risk projects, but my advisor made it pretty clear that he wants me to spend time on this, so I would be completely on my own. I don't think I can come up with something new just on my own, but I think that spending other months trying to outdo professors is not going to work either! What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: Not being in a mathematics field, my experiences may not be absolutely translatable but I think in general the issue is pretty much the same. You work on a project for x amount of time with y output. If x starts getting too big with a small y, then you start not wanting to spend any more time on it and wish to pursue other projects, related or not to the original problem.
It is not enough to just say to your professor, however, that 'I have spent x amount of time with a tiny y, therefore I do not want to do this anymore'. You need to justify to them why the project is **a)** unviable and **b)** an alternative means to answer the same question or justification to work on something else. If you simply say you don't want to do it because it's too hard, I daresay they'll tell you 'tough-luck, stick with it'.
A PhD is meant to challenge you and push your level of expertise beyond the current abilities you hold, and this might mean struggling for 6 months to a year (or beyond that!) on a project. I would hazard a guess that your professor is aware of your capabilities, seeing as they wanted you to do a PhD with them, but instead of simply saying *'I am incapable of completing this'* perhaps ask yourself or your professor *'What do I need to do to become competent enough to complete this?'*
If this project does not absorb 100% of your time, I would suggest finding side projects that you can manage when things in the original project aren't working or you're burnt out with it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you should stick with it.
As far as my understanding goes, publishing 1-2 papers as a mathematics PhD student is (more than) enough to get your degree. It may not rank you as a star but it's a solid proof of competence. Working on other lower risk projects may not improve your thesis significantly. Successfully completing a high risk project, however, will be a boon to your PhD.
Furthermore, this project yanks you out of your comfort zone where you can gradually work towards a solution. Instead, you now have to find one key idea and you're basically done. Again, you've already shown you're a good mathematician inside your comfort zone, so showing that you can solve those kind of problems should not be your main priority.
I think your advisor has a high opinion of you and wants to give you an opportunity to prove exactly how much you're capable of. That's a nice vote of confidence. If you actually do want to stick with it, it's probably a good idea to find ways to enjoy the project. Possible ideas: talk to other people about the project, especially to your advisor and the other two professors. Sometimes spend as much time as possible trying to find a solution even if you feel it may not work. And sometimes work on unrelated fields or do other stuff (such as teaching) that is both inspiring and relaxing.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: When you start a PhD, typically you need a lot of help to find something suitable to study, and your supervisor knows a lot more than you about the subject.
By the end of your maths PhD, the situation should be different: you should be coming up with your own projects, about which you know more than your supervisor.
So while it is true that projects in maths can take a (very) long time, and that is no reason to give up, I believe you should **also** start to branch out on your own. Learning how to come up with projects yourself is part of the intended learning outcomes of a PhD, so even if you get nowhere it is not wasted time. Having more than one project running at a time has the advantage that when you get fed up with one, you can work on another.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Solving unsolved problems is basically what PhDs are all about. The real question is whether this *particular* unsolved problem is germane to *your* thesis.
If it is, you either persist in solving it or you look for a different topic.
However, you say that you've solved your original thesis problem and have a couple of papers up your sleeve. If that means you have enough to write up and submit, consider treating the new problem as a side issue. **Don't neglect the completion of your own PhD**. It sounds unprofessional for an advisor to block progress on your PhD until you've solved an unrelated problem, but if that *is* case, consider having a chat with your university's administration.
The middle ground is that the new problem is interesting and important to your advisor, and that although he isn't blocking progress on your PhD, the new problem is taking time away from your thesis. In this case, recognise that your main 'job' is the thesis, and the new problem is an additional collaborative task . As a PhD candidate, you are considered something of a peer generally, and an emerging expert in your own area, so don't downplay your own abilities.
Treat this like a consultation (them consulting you). If you give it a good try and can't work it out, let them know. The primary authors aren't likely to just sit around twiddling their thumbs until *you* hit upon the solution because it's *their* paper, after all. So it's up to you whether you want to keep working at a chance to add your name to their paper, or to let it go because you need to complete your thesis (*and* your own two papers). Both are valid options.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/04
| 1,074
| 4,431
|
<issue_start>username_0: What are the potential motives for an industry recruiter to want to know your PhD GPA?
Does this imply the position is more of an office drone position than a pure research position?<issue_comment>username_1: The most likely motive is your recruiter believes PhD GPAs are as relevant as undergrad GPAs. My guess is this recruiter has a plethora of office jobs and doesn't usually work with academics.
**It is perfectly acceptable to tell the recruiter you're not interested in working with them**
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In general it is difficult to tell whether a PhD student is a good researcher or not right after finishing his/her degree. Good results could come from a helping advisor, a lucky topic, or good office mates. Bad results could come from bad luck, lousy preparations of the topic before the student toke over, and so on.
GPA is at least somewhat objective.
By the way, industry research most often turns out to be much different from academic research. This might be good or not, but be warned.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I would not stop the conversation with the recruiter solely based on this aspect. Maybe they really rank the candidates on PhD GPA (which is as irrelevant as ranking on height, mass or their ratio) or maybe the recruiter has to fill up a form which is not involved in the selection/ranking.
Try to learn what is the job about, what would be expected from you in the first six months and one year. Meet your future boss and be all ears on what he/she has to say. Make sure you actually want to work for them.
There is no such thing as pure research position. Both industry and academia offer research positions, where you have at least to manage other people, write administrative documentation, attend non-research meetings, teach your topic to individuals not interested about learning, teach uninteresting topics to equally disinterested people, etc.
In a research job, the actual creative work is 5%, and the rest of 95% is making the first 5% work, go through reviewers, obtain financing, manage contributors and disseminate it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: While this may sound ridiculous, some employers do care about the GPA obtained during the PhD. I know that one of the contractors I worked for had an explicit requirement for undergrad and grad degrees, and hiring managers who wanted to make an offer to individuals with lower GPAs had to go through extra hoops to get it approved.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: To add some more detail to @sevenseven's answer, remember that for most companies the recruiter is not an employee of that company. To answer your first question, the only motive they have is filling the position. GPA is a common thing to blindly ask on a laundry-list of questions they will ask anyone.
So, the employer likely does not care about your GPA; while it may be communicated in some way to the hiring manager, it's not going to be anywhere close to being a deciding factor. In my experience, hiring managers know that recruiters ask for this kind of extraneous info and are typically professional enough to know how to wade through all of it to get to the core question - "can this candidate do this job?"
If the job is interesting to you, continue through the process and provide them the GPA. In general, if you have (or are working towards) a PhD *and* interested in research type positions where there's a slightly higher chance they would care about your GPA, I'm assuming you have a pretty good one anyways.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Potential motives: giving them an easy way to weight one applicant over another.
Implications to the type of job: none.
Understand that many, many (, many, many) recruiters have no idea how to evaluate someone for a job, even though it is arguable that it is THEIR job to know how. So they try to find ways to do it that are objective and that can at least be argued to be relevant. Your GPA is arguably (though *I* wouldn't argue it) an indication of how well you performed in graduate school, therefore it is an easy way to distinguish candidate A from candidate B.
The hiring manager may or may not care, and may or may not even know the question is being asked. Unfortunately, arguing (as a candidate or potential candidate) that it is not relevant is not likely to be taken well, however right you may be.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/05
| 965
| 4,057
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it okay to publish my thesis when it was done 2 yrs ago?
I defended my master's thesis in February 2016 but the data gathering was done in October 2015 and the final revision was submitted to my university in March 2016.
I thought of submitting my thesis for journal publication. Do you think they would still accept it when it's been done 2 yrs ago? I had been very busy after graduation and I never had the chance to submit my research paper for publication.
Hope for your enlightenment
Follow-up:
Thank you for taking time in answering my query. My field of study is in Psychology. It's a causal, experimental research. After I defended my thesis, I got the highest grade in my final defense. I was told by my adviser to submit my paper for journal publication and present it on the upcoming convention (that year) but I had been extremely busy because I focused on the licensure exam that time. It's not totally an original study because I adopted the intervention from the US. My study was to try it in the Philippine setting but there were some modification on the approach to suit with the respondents. I'm concerned about the originality, if you send your paper for publication, does it really have to be fully original especially the intervention? I really want to have it published so I can teach this intervention to others (to my community) especially to financially incapable families who can't afford to pay for a behavioral therapist or psychologist. Since the intervention is a cost-effective approach.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. Is the information offered in your thesis interesting?
2. Useful?
3. Original?
4. Previously unpublished and not known?
5. Pertinent to the subscribers of the journal to which it is to be submitted?
6. Would the visibility of the published work be useful to you, professionally?
Now none of those questions have anything to do with how long this work has been sitting around (like for 2 years). If **all** of the answers to those six questions was *"yes"*, what reason in the world would there be to not publish?
Even if it was, say, 4 outa 6 *"yeses"*, why wouldn't you publish?
There was some things I did in grad school that I thought was crap, yet I was encouraged to submit to publication (and I didn't). So, Sofia, you need to look at the content of your thesis and ask yourself if the work has value, if someone else reading it will find authentic value in it. And you need to make some attempt to evaluate its novelty (but don't worry, the reviewers/referees will let you know if there is uncited previous published work).
I can't think of a reason in the world where, if the content would otherwise be worthy of publication, that the two years would make any difference at all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If the data or comparable studies were not published from you, your former institute, collaborators, or third party, go for it. You might want to ask your someone in the field about a matching journal and then submit an article. If it is not interesting at all, it will be rejected.
I have seen post-docs presenting their thesis a couple of years on different posters just to advertise their work and get into touch with people because they had not yet gathered enough new material.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Based on your update, I think it is likely that your work could be published successfully. As long as you acknowledge the intervention you adapted, your work should provide useful evidence that that work can be replicated and that it can be successful in the Philippine setting as you adapted it.
Because of the delay, you should update your literature review to make sure to incorporate further developments in the last two years. If someone else has now done a similar intervention in a similar context, you should especially engage with their work.
Good luck! Especially if you ask your advisor for leads on where to submit, I think you can get your work published and out there for others to benefit from.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/05
| 1,060
| 4,663
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was admitted to several Phd position and I am considering most interesting two labs. Their fields are similar and both interesting to me. The problem is, one lab has more general topic, but the other has more specific topic.
The 'A' lab is focusing on brain-inspired AI. It aims to develop deep learning model based on neuroscience. There is not much rooms for mathematics seeing the previous papers. The 'B' lab is more concentrated on machine learning itself and uses extensive mathematics.
After I get Phd in CS, I will probably go to industry or perhaps to academia and I should be able to apply my knowledge to new domains which is required by company. I think mathematics is important for this flexibility.
I am worrying that if I study brain-driven AI during Phd, I might lack flexibility since the topic is specific and it is not using math a lot. Yes, I know that as a Phd, I should study mathematics by myself required for machine learning but it is also true that student whose topic is more math oriented ML will relatively have better knowledge at the end of Phd.
Some give me advice that I should go to a lab having more broad field of study. And it is better to go to more specific fields as a post-doctor. Considering the fact that I should always study new things by myself after Phd, I think it would be better to be trained with extensive mathematics which is core baseline of ML.
What do you think?<issue_comment>username_1: That's a very difficult question to answer, and my suggestions below are speculative, but based on experience and observations.
**Specific project**: On the other hand, a more specific project will be easier to address, you will spend less time wandering around, and you will gain specific skills that you can apply and reapply. These skills are more likely what industry will want.
**General project**: I think any project that offers a more general topic will give you greater flexibility to make your mark on the world, if you have the capabilities and the luck to come up with the right ideas at the right time. Making your mark is beneficial for subsequent academic positions, and essential if you want to be a big-shot celebrity.
The risk with general topics is that you have too much freedom and, without case studies or something to draw inspiration from, you may be forced to guess a lot of the time. That is fine, science is guessing, but given that you will be a PhD student you will likely lack the intuition to make your guesses worthwhile.
**Short-term advice**: a specific topic may be an easier path to industry, a general topic may be easier for academia, but you should make sure that the general topic is not too general.
**Long-term advice**: Working on a general and highly-speculative topic may lead to you becoming an expert in a new area of research, and hence demand from industry, but that would likely be many years after you PhD.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two broad criteria for a PhD: it must advance the state of the art (novelty); and it must be your own work (independence). The *novelty* criterion tends to suggest that *all* research PhDs are 'narrow'. The more interesting question is whether the field is 'crowded' (too many researchers chasing few new questions).
Congratulations on your admission to multiple PhD positions. I'd suggest that you consider the following, with the understanding that you make your own decisions on this:
* Is the topic of personal interest to you? This can be for the academic content or for job prospects or skills likely to be gained, etc.
* Does the supervisor have a good track record of having doctoral candidates that graduate within a reasonable time?
* Is there a reasonable expectation that you'd be able to settle on a research topic that is solvable and will satisfy the *novelty* aspect when you write up?
These questions help you deal with motivation, completion and realistic expectations.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If your goal is to work in industry after the fact, I would look for a specific problem that is not well served by the prior art. Doing general research on AI has some academic sex appeal but I don't think generic AI research will translate well to a position in industry. I would look for professors in other fields (engineering, science, and math) who work on computational algorithms for industrial applications and solicit them for positions.
I did my undergrad in Software Engineering and Management and I found that I had a lot to offer a mechanical engineering PhD who works in reliability of machinery.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/05
| 410
| 1,776
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question concerns a problem related to a paper submission in the field of psychological methods. As part of the review process, I was asked by the journal's editor to provide my appendices as online documents at an author-controlled site, and not in the main text (simply to shorten the paper). Since these documents will be reviewed as part of the journal's blinded peer-review process, the authorship of these documents should be blinded as well until the publication of the paper.
My question is which research-related sites allow this kind of submission (i.e., a document which is made available by an URL, with anonymous authors)? As far as I know, sites like arXiv or Zenodo do not allow anonymous submissions.
I am thankful in advance for any advise on this issue.
Edit: I am aware that a similar question addressed the anonymous storage of research data for a paper submission. However, the responses listed there (Dropbox, supplementary material in the submission) are not useful in my case. Dropbox is only a last resort, and I am not allowed to submit these documents as supplements.<issue_comment>username_1: Thank you for all your suggestions. After researching possible options online, I found a web service similar to Dropbox which is available to researchers at my (Swiss) university (<https://www.switch.ch/de/drive/>). I think this will do, since it allows the anonymous sharing of files via links. Probably similar services are available to researchers in other countries as well.
As a last resort, Dropbox could also be used for this purpose.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Not a repository, but if you use Latex, you can [attach arbitrary files](https://www.ctan.org/pkg/attachfile) to a pdf document.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/05
| 1,258
| 4,961
|
<issue_start>username_0: I intend to apply for a call for a postdoctoral position. Is it necessary to contact professors before sending my application formally? If so, which documents should be sent? Is my CV enough or should I also send a research statement?
My field is mathematics and I am applying to positions in France and Italy.<issue_comment>username_1: It's unclear if you mean cold-emailing professors for positions, or if you're planning to utilize the network that you've built from publishing and attending conferences.
I would highly recommend emailing other academics you've meet a conference that are already familiar with your work and letting them recommend postdocs to you.
Cold-emailing is unlikely to help much as professors are inundated with emails from prospective students who want a leg-up on acceptance, and your email is likely to get lost in the clutter.
EDIT:
The last sentence was unclear. By cold-emailing, I meant looking up the email of the hiring manager/professor for the postdoc and sending them a follow-up email.
Most professors receive HUNDREDS of legitimate emails every day from the students they teach and advise, journal/conference submission request, other professors, or their side consulting business. A "cold-email" is likely to get relegated to the spam box.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I absolutely agree to what @username_1 says about using your contacts you made through conferences and through your advisor or research group during your PhD. You have a much higher chance of getting a response from those contacts (any kind of response, be it positive or negative). I will talk about the case of when you are applying to public postdoc offers published on newsgroups, research group or university websites, and what @username_1 calls "cold e-mails".
When I was applying to postdocs (computer science, two in question were in the UK - but I would've likely done same regardless of the country), I did send a couple of e-mails, in one case before, in the other case with the application. I think what @username_1 says is mostly true; it is not likely to help much. I like to think of it as an *equivalent of a follow-up phone call after dropping in your job application*: polite, if it's short and timed correctly, but unlikely to make a big difference.
That is also how I would recommend phrasing it. Mine was a two-sentence e-mail, no attachments, along the lines:
>
> I have just finished my PhD on topic X and am currently in a
> short-term post-doc doing Y. I am very interested to your open post-doc
> offer on topic Z as I think it matches my research interests well, and
> have submitted an application for it.
>
>
>
Try and phrase X, Y, Z in a way that shows as much understanding in the postdoc and research group you are applying to, but keep it short.
The other e-mail, which I sent before sending in the application, was due to the fact that the position was not a full-blown postdoc, but rather a short one-year position requiring less qualifications, nonetheless in a topic where I could see an even better match to my research. I sent a similar e-mail, additionally asking if I should still apply due to my (over)qualifications.
The result: I got a response to both e-mails. One of them was a short
*"Thank you, I will look over your application."*, and the other encouraged me to apply. I ended up being offered the short-term position, while not the other one; but I attribute that to the topic match and my CV as sent with the application and doubt the e-mails made a great difference. And the short-term position developed in a full-blown postdoc which extended beyond the initial year.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I disagree with most of the posts here. I am postdoc hunting and contacting professors I want to work with by mentioning that I am sending an application has helped me a lot. I am even applying to another field that is not my PhD one and I've even gotten Skype chats from top schools. The key is to pay attention what they are doing as research and selling them a well thought proposal. Don't just sell your qualifications, you need to tell them you are creative and have initiative, thats why you should come up with a well thought plan. If they are interested, they often follow up and will back you.
A format similar to this has worked for me.
>
> Dear Dr. (professor),
>
>
> I am applying to (postdoc posting), and I am contacting you because I
> wish to join your research group since you do X and Y.
>
>
> My skills and training are (describe PhD experience and why it links
> to the professor's interests).
>
>
> I want to work in (describe proposal in a couple of sentences), which
> is important because (reasons).
>
>
> In the case you are interested I will attach my CV and a draft
> research proposal.
>
>
> Looking forward to your reply.
>
>
> Regards (your name)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/05
| 2,309
| 9,867
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a master's student, and over the course of my studies I've conducted a few independent studies in which I investigate specific research questions that I formulate on my own. Those independent studies have culminated in final papers, and I then use the material in those papers as part of articles I publish and presentations I give at conferences--am trying to build up a public profile on these topics.
Recently, a professor of mine asked to see research I had done for one of those studies, ostensibly to use as background for something the professor was working on. I'm not this professor's employee or otherwise under contract for a project of the professor's. I'm conducting independent research during classes that I pay for as part of my degree. The professor is in other words just my adviser and teacher.
I provided the professor my research and presentation materials, and then heard the professor use my work--word for word--in a subsequent presentation. The professor had not sought out my consent before doing this, and I was not cited.
The same professor again asked for a full, unpublished paper I had written to use as background for a different project the professor was undertaking. I declined to provide the paper because I did not know how it would be used (though I didn't say that).
Am curious about whether this is accepted and/or common practice in academia. And if it is, should I just send my paper to the professor?<issue_comment>username_1: No, this not accepted and/or common practice in academia. (Your use of the plagiarism tag was correct.) It is of course unethical and not right to copy other's work and not mention them.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: This seems like pretty direct plagiarism to me. It is also all too common in academia.
In your case, this is a little more straightforward, as you never have been employed (i.e., received money) for your work under this professor. Your professor may feel that he or she has a "right" to your work because the professor believes he or she oversaw your work. (Some advisors thing they have tacit advisory privilege on all work a graduate student produces). What becomes tricky is when your advisor actually paid you to be a research assistant, yet contributes nothing intellectually to the project.
If you are still a current student, there may not be much you can directly do about this. At least in my experience, many universities will stand behind their professors unless given a heaping mound of evidence otherwise. I would defer any requests for your research as long as you can, insofar as it does not hamper your ability to produce a thesis, final project, etc. I knew of two students in my department where they had the choice of blindly handing their research over to their advisor and graduating, or standing firm on their intellectual contributions and being denied the chance to defend their dissertation. Their advisor felt he had "ownership" of their research because he had paid their stipends. Advisors usually have almost all of the leverage in these cases.
But, nevertheless, what you have described is blatant plagiarism. So, yes, this is plagiarism. And yes, it was common at my university. And it is accepted because departments do not want to admit that their faculty may be taking advantage of graduate students' work. This is why I got out of academia.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Your case is blatant plagiarism. I saw this many years ago (at Harvard), and it still happens. As the others have implied, though, it is partly a cultural phenomenon that varies by university and department.
One suggestion that might help you is that research donors, and journals, have gotten much more sensitive in the last 10 years about illegal behavior. I would confidentially go to the legal department at your university, and sound them out. It could be, for instance, that this professor has created a legal liability *for the university* with the professor's funding agencies, which the lawyers will either want to hush up, or go after on their own so that the university can claim clean hands. In the former case, if they are smart they would find a way to refund all your tuition.
What gives you some leverage is that you are in an MS program and don't much depend on this guy, or the department, in the future. But that depends in part on where you see yourself working in 5 years, and whether the relevant work/academic community is small, or large.
Another technique that may work better than in the past is to threaten to write journal editors. So far, he has not published anything that uses your work. But if he ever does, then depending on how important your material was to his publication, he could get seriously embarrassed. (And by then, you will have graduated.)
This is sensitive, and it might blow up depending on personalities and local culture. You may therefore want to work through an intermediary who keeps your name, and his/her name, out of it at first. But I encourage you to seriously consider complaining. That is necessary for academia to progress.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: If the presentation that your professor gave was one that might result in a publication--like a conference that publishes its proceedings--then you have a right for credited authorship on that publication. And if it's already gone out, then it's a cause for a published correction. You'd need to go to the organizers of the conference to get this started. Have no doubt, it'll be a big deal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Simple answer: **No.** It is *never* ok in any professional (and especially in any academic) setting to present someone else's data or work without citing them. This is cut-and-dry ***plagiarism.***
* Doing so does not give credit where credit is due, and, worse, often leads others to falsely attribute the work to the person presenting it.
Unfortunately, this is a practice that is *all too common in the STEM fields*, especially between PIs and their professional "subordinates" (i.e., grad students, lab managers, undergrads, junior faculty, etc.). However, this approach to science is often a result of **unbalanced power dynamics** and there being no possibility for these so-called "subordinates" to challenge the PI in power. **Not all institutions accept this behavior**, and certainly, in many instances it is not a problem.
If you were able to effectively say "no" to additional requests from your PI without consequence, then good for you! I would suggest using the same approach moving forward and hopefully your PI doesn't implore further (to avoid that awkward conversation).
For those who are not so lucky, I recommend reaching out to your university's **ombuds** office (if you have one), **DGS** (director of graduate studies) or even to other graduate students or junior faculty to ask for advice.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Regarding your final question (possibly provided in an update): DO NOT hand over a second paper to this professor. Or, if this is within disciplinary norms, you may want to consider posting it a respected repository (e.g. Arxiv or SSRN), thus time-stamping it and showing your priority. You could choose whether or not to then share the link with that professor: "I'm so glad you're interested in my work! I just posted a copy on Arxiv!"
As for the first paper: in a comment you say you wrote it in an independent study with a different professor. Do you trust that professor? Do you think that professor would be willing to help challenge the rascal? You may want to consider asking the other professor about these norms and how to navigate the issue. If the original problem happened in an informal setting (e.g. an on-campus talk), the other professor may be able to set the record straight there, in a smooth way. Or, if it was a more external venue, especially one where you're thinking of accusing the professor of plagiarism, then the other professor could be even more valuable in corroborating your account and suggesting politically wise options.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Warning: this answer may upset the vast majority of readers.
Many universities require students to agree that all work produced while being a student or member of staff be the property of the university (not the student). This is more clearly noted when doing funding research, but is also often the case otherwise.
If the lecturer presented the work as entirely his own then he has crossed a line by claiming ownership. However if he has presented the work as from his university/department (eg. A Study in the effect of Blah on Blah, SomeName University) then he may not have done anything wrong. It is sometimes rare (feild specific) for presentations to include a full list of coauthorship, the presenter often opting to give the details of a contact at the department. This is done for multiple reason, one of which maybe continuity - a lecturer may be the point of contact as they are likely to remain at the university for longer than a student - this is specifically important when the work is contributing to a larger overall discipline the university is working towards.
I would advise you to carefully consider the outcome of your actions before speaking to the legal department of the university as mentioned in other answer. Even if the lecturer has stepped over the line you risk getting a reputation as a non-team-player, not ideal if you want a future in academia (yes it sucks to say it, but whistle blowers rarely end up well employed). A better course of action may be to speak to the professor about wanting to present the work yourself, and asking for his direct assistance in this - where to submit the paper, possibly getting university funding to go and present etc.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/05
| 777
| 2,939
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m an incoming grad student at a US university and I’ve been asked to set up my email alias. The university doesn’t have an explicit policy on what the aliases should look like, but I’ve noticed most faculty and grad students have gone with either of the following:
>
> <EMAIL>
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
>
However, my first name is shorter, available, and easier to spell.
It’s an unusual name in the US (which helped me secure firstname.com), but it’s four characters and hard to get wrong.
Therefore, I’m thinking of going with:
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
>
**Could that be interpreted as inappropriate/unprofessional/overly casual by some, or would it be fine?** It’s one of the top-five programs in economics in the US – everyone seemed friendly on my fly-out and they’re probably among the less formal departments I’ve visited.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> "*Could that be interpreted as inappropriate / unprofessional / overly casual by some*"
>
>
>
I'd say yes, there is no way in general to *completely* prevent that. But ...
>
> ... *"or would it be fine"*
>
>
>
Basically yes to that, too. If the university has no explicit policy, I don't think anyone would take it too seriously.
To somewhat qualify this answer, I know some high-status academic professionals who signed up with a silly user name when they enrolled as basic students, just because they could (and the local custom encourages this) and are now stuck with it.
If you gain a position where you are important enough that it matters, you can probably get *another* alias if your **<EMAIL>** (or whatever) turns out to be harder to live with than you imagined when you originally created it.
The ultimate decision also depends on your role. If you are senior faculty, I'd say having e.g. **<EMAIL>** actually looks like a friendly and inviting, rather than an unprofessional email address. If you are not in a position where you are expected to represent the university regularly anyway, I don't think anybody will particularly care enough that this would be an issue. On the other hand, if you work in a formal role (legal? accounting?) maybe be more strict.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You’re overthinking this issue. Nobody cares. Enjoy your cool email, and have fun in grad school.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I have always been in exactly the same boat. (Short, uncommon but hard to get wrong first name, versus long and foreignese-complicated surname.) I went with first name. Since I have not been able to live out my life in a parallel universe that is identical up to a longer email handle, I have no control experiment that would allow me to assert with certainty that it made no difference. However, I will go out on a limb and say that several other bad decisions have played a bigger role in fouling up my life.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/05
| 328
| 1,274
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently sent a thank you note to one of my college professors via email and never got a reply from her. I have not heard from her in a week and being that she is retired I would have thought that as a courtesy, she could have replied to my email (i.e. thank you for your kind words). Is it normal for retired professors to not reply to these sorts of emails?<issue_comment>username_1: I wouldn't say that. Professors really appreciate the "thank you" messages but replying to them makes some of us a little uncomfortable at times. Sometimes we don't know what to say also.
One thing for sure: it makes us quite happy and sometimes a little embarrassed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are 3 main reasons why she may not have responded.
**1.** The email you sent was to an address she no longer has access to, or does not check, because she is now retired.
**2.** As username_1 says above, some professors don't know how to reply or potentially does not see a reason to reply.
**3.** She did ignore you.
1 and 2 are the most likely reasons here. It isn't uncommon for professors to not reply all the time. In your case, don't do anything. Sending a follow up email asking why she didn't reply will be considered rude.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/05
| 814
| 3,361
|
<issue_start>username_0: Although I do research in science as my day job, I spend most of my free time for my life-long hobby, drawing cartoon. But I keep this fact in secret to my research co-workers since the culture of scientific community and that of comics artists are quite different, and I'm tired of looking like a person with an exotic hobby. But recently my 'career' as an artist became more successful than I expected (made a contract with a publisher, etc.), I started to worry about my future choices. Would it be wise to pursue two very different careers in my life, researcher and artist?
Many famous comics (e.g. PHD comics, xkcd) from ex-scientists are mostly for the people who are already in the culture of science and maybe it would be OK to be that kind of artist and you could still be accepted in researcher community. However my art style is pretty different from that of other many famous scientist-comics artists. When I draw comics, I try to be like other usual professional artists so that I can draw more attention from the general audience. As a result, my works may contain stimulating elements that would be considered absurd or obscene when read out of context. I'm not saying that my works are particularly unhealthy; comics in general are for fun, and my works are just one of them. It's just that my works are not very educational. Another concern is time and effort; drawing absorbs lots of time and energy when your art style is not simplistic.
Because of these reasons, I ask for advices from researchers who also have large passion for their asrtistic desire; how do you manage to do both of them? Would being a commercial artist give you disadvantage as a researcher in academia?<issue_comment>username_1: There are many people in academia with hobbies. Some very famous scientists like Heisenberg and Weyl are prime examples. I know a professor who paints for a hobby and keeps pictures of his paintings somewhere on the personal web page. It's tough to juggle work and hobbies, but you are already doing that.
However, you are now under a contract from the publisher. Will you have time to do your research? If I were you, I'd take a vacation from my research job, and focus on the contract work. If it takes you many more hours than your hobby took, you need to make a choice. Or you'll end up burnt out.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It’s very difficult to maintain two different careers at once, particularly when one of them is being an active scientist.
One of my grad school colleagues was a very excellent singer and had to make the decision about what to do—stay in school or go into singing full-time. (I had a similar option, but quickly realized I’d rather be an academic who enjoyed music, rather than be the “struggling artist.”) He opted to leave school to pursue being a musician, and is supporting himself with a number of other gigs in the meanwhile (administrator, real estate, etc.).
Ultimately, the time commitments are going to be overwhelming and you will need to find a way to address this. Perhaps you can negotiate a leave of absence with your permanent employer to decide if you can make it full-time as a freelance artist. That way, you have a chance to decide which of your career paths is more important to you for your long-term career and personal satisfaction.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/05
| 1,765
| 7,174
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to ask you for an opinion on how to act in the following scenario.
A year ago, some colleague PhD of me has suggested an open problem to me. This problem was already published in his paper, which is on arXiv.
He suggested that problem to me and invited me to collaborate on it.
However, he is not very hard-working and I personally suspect that he is just waiting for me to prove it.
He is working in that way quite often.
I, somewhat blindly, agreed to work on it. However, I do not like the way he
“collaborates” and I would like to work on that problem on my own since he is not helping at all and only waits till the problem is solved so he can write it as a result to his grant.
We are very far from being published. Actually, not much work was done yet. I want to work and solve this problem on my own.
How should I proceed?
1. Simply ignore him (he didn’t speak about problem for months) and publish the results?
2. Tell him about my opinion, quit, and publish the results?
3. Proceed and publish the results with him as a co-author.
4. Do something else.<issue_comment>username_1: It seems he wants to take your findings as his own. There are numerous laws against it. Consulting a lawyer might be helpful.
Scientists record everything, It's easy to record data about your findings to prove it was you who actually completed them.
Plagiarism is considered one of the worst in the scientific community.
Here's a good article from Berkley:
If you get caught, they banish you.
<http://w.astro.berkeley.edu/~kalas/ethics/documents/redan08.pdf>
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The collaboration so far has apparently steered you to an open problem that you're interested in solving and have an idea of how to solve. You and your colleague have discussed the problem, and part of where you are is due to him.
Make note of how much you and he have each done to this point, and what interactions you've had. By the broadest definition, this is potentially joint work. **Do not invest further effort into it until you talk to him about authorship and/or dissolving the partnership.**
If he wants this to count toward his grant, then perhaps there's a creative way he can get credit for the purpose of the grant without being a coauthor. Or can you give a joint presentation about the problem and what you've found so far--something that gives him credit for work to date--before you take over as a solo project? Because you are both doctoral students, your supervisor(s) may have wisdom they could share, or they could help break apart the problem into two chunks, or find some other way to mediate.
If you cannot find a way to continue the collaboration on terms you both agree to, then the best course of action, though hard, is to **find a new problem for yourself**. This reduces the damage that may happen to your reputation.
I am skeptical that he has malevolent motives, but if he does tend to try to take credit for others' work, then he probably knows how to fight over authorship, meaning that you do not want to appear at all to be taking his work. Further, if he doesn't intend to actually do any of the work, you have the most leverage and the least to lose before you do any further work, so this is the right time to try to figure out an amicable solution.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I will come at from the other direction. I will assume that your summary is correct, and that this person truly did nothing other than point you to a question that had already been posed in published work. In this case, **you are under no obligation to work with him.** You must be careful to cite his work appropriately, and probably acknowledge him in the acknowledgment section as having suggested this line of research, but I don't think he has a legitimate case for co-authorship.
That said, he could still create a messy, public confrontation. So, I would send a note like this:
>
> John,
>
>
> Some time ago, we discussed collaborating on an effort to prove [blah] as an extension of your work in [blah]. So far I don't think either of us has made much progress, so I wanted to reach out with you about resurrecting this work.
>
>
> At this point, I think it would be best if I tackled this on my own. If successful, I will write up a paper that cites your paper, and will acknowledge you in the acknowledgments. What do you think?\*
>
>
> -Name
>
>
>
Depending on whether you are willing to consider working with this guy, you could also replace the last sentence with:
>
> If you would prefer to collaborate on this paper as a co-author, we can discuss, but I am hoping to publish in the next ~6 months, so we should meet ASAP to discuss what you will contribute and when it will be ready.
>
>
>
Then there are a few possible outcomes:
* If he ignores you, or says "good", then all is okay.
* If he claims to be interested in collaborating with you, you will have to discuss this with him.
+ You may need to be fairly aggressive in telling him that you don't think collaborating will be feasible, but better to have this argument now and in private, rather than after publishing without him.
+ If you are willing to give him a chance, you can try to define his contributions and the deadlines now, and let him know that if doesn't have satisfactory material by the deadline, you will publish your results without him. If he is serious about working with you, then this is reasonable; if he is lazy as you say, he may withdraw his objections.
* If you cannot come to terms, or if he reacts very poorly, then you can decide whether you want to risk a nasty, public fight over authorship, or whether you want to drop the line of research.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: You may like to introspect on how much you need this problem. It is not known from the question (presently) at what stage of career you are in, as previously mentioned by @cactus\_pardner. If you are a busy mid- to senior- academic, this may not even be worth the time to think about. If you are in the early stages, you may be looking for problems to solve and advance your research, and may be in even if waters are a bit muddy.
Either way, as not too much work has been done so far, you are not in a very tricky spot right now. If you want to tackle it alone, do consider if you have the resources necessary for it (not just skills, even financial - as you mentioned his grant). Also keep in mind that he may bear you some ill-will for 'taking' his idea. While no science belongs to anyone, he may feel entitled since it was his paper that highlighted the problem, and more importantly, he pointed you in that direction. So consider if you (a) have a good chance at solving it, and, (b) are alright with a potentially sub-optimal relationship.
I am leaning towards (3), in the hope that if he sees there is good potential in your work together, and you bring in some interpersonal skills, he may contribute more productively. If he absolutely doesn't, maybe because he doesn't have the time, then you can publish by yourself (after telling him about it, of course).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/05
| 1,282
| 5,341
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am curious as to whether there are any accepted standard rules on when to cite, or not to cite, a published correction (erratum/corrigendum) along with a paper.
The meanings of these terms are [not universal across all publishers](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/119623/17254), so for the purposes of this question, I will follow the convention of APS journals where errata are used for corrections by the authors. In my field (physics), I often see an erratum get between zero and a handful of citations, while the main paper keeps amassing them after publication of the erratum.
Clearly then, (at least in physics) there is no expectation that an author should always cite the corrections. This is reasonable to me: If I cite a paper in my introduction about a related interesting system, the fact that the paper has a typo in eq. (33) isn't very relevant, so no need to have it clutter up the bibliography. On the other hand, it seems obvious to cite the erratum if my paper directly depends on the contents of the erratum. Presumably there's a line somewhere in-between. However, I have never seen this formalized. What if my work builds on a paper, but is not affected by the published corrections?
So my question is essentially:
* Under what conditions should the erratum be cited? Are there any relevant guidelines, or rules of thumb?
(I also welcome any discussion on how the standards might vary between fields, or between different types of publications.)<issue_comment>username_1: Errata are used for substantial errors in a paper, rather than mere spelling or grammatical errors. Citation of errata with original papers helps reduce error propagation in research. Unfortunately this is not as common a practice as it should be, mostly because authors are often unaware of an erratum, or believe that if they are aware of it, others will be too. The problem of error propagation due to failure to cite errata has been studied in the context of physics research by [<NAME> Resnik (1995)](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02628800). They find that the existence of an erratum does not decrease the citation frequency for the original paper, and the erratum is usually not cited with the original paper, allowing errors in research to propagate.
It is possible that this situation will improve now that most journals are online, owing to better online referencing of papers and direct connection of papers to their erratum. When you look at a paper from its original source in an online scholarly journal, it is usually obvious when there has been an erratum. However, it is still common for researchers to obtain papers from other sources where they are not alerted to this, and so this is not a panacea. (For example, some authors print out papers and then read from printed copies. If there is a later erratum, the researcher with a printed copy may have no idea that this has occurred.)
Though I am not aware of any formal "standard rules" on the matter, it is desirable to reduce error propagation in research, and so ideally it is best to always include citation of the erratum with the citation of the original paper. That way the reader is alerted to the existence of the erratum, and does not propagate any error in the paper. At a minimum the erratum should obviously be cited whenever the main citation to the paper touches on an aspect of the paper that is actually *affected by* that erratum (i.e., you should avoid error propagation yourself). But even in cases where the erratum does not affect parts of the paper that were of relevance to the main citation, it is also useful to cite the erratum in case an interested reader decides to read the cited paper in full, and is not aware that there has been an erratum. Evidently, from the fact that errata receive few citations, not many academics are doing this.
Speaking as someone who has published a mathematical paper with an error in an equation, and an erratum to correct that error, I would prefer it if all citations to my paper also cite the erratum with it, just to make sure that the original error does not propagate. It is not offensive to an author who has made an error to have the erratum to their paper cited; we are already aware we fucked up, and it is a relief when others do the right thing to minimise the damage.
---
Thom<NAME>. and <NAME>. (1995) [The effectiveness of the erratum in avoiding error propagation in physics](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02628800). *Science and Engineering Ethics* **1(3)**, pp. 231-240.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The big question is why the erratum was issued. If the error is a significant technical issue, then the erratum should certainly be cited along with the original article.
However, I can provide a counterexample where it is probably unnecessary to cite the erratum—-if the publisher failed to make a correction specified in the proof stage, and then published an erratum or corrigendum. This happened on my most cited paper—a grammatical error was left uncorrected, even though we notified them of it. The publisher fixed the error, and issued an erratum. Given that this all happened within a few weeks of the initial publication, citing the erratum is just a waste of time for everybody involved.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/05
| 631
| 2,024
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am looking for US equivalents of Russian academic titles, such as "<NAME>" and "Doctor Nauk". I've done my research and come up with a list of translations of these terms. I'd like to know which of these translated titles are the most recognized/appropriate in the US academic world and whether they carry the full meaning of the Russian titles.
Кандидат наук (<NAME>) – Ph.D./Doctoral Candidate/First Doctoral Degree
Доктор наук (Doctor Nauk) – Grand Ph.D./Senior Doctoral Degree/Higher Doctoral Degree/Second Doctoral Degree.
Here are some of the Internet sources I used:
* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidate_of_Sciences>
* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doktor_nauk>
* <https://www.englishelp.ru/translator/articles-for-translator/288-translating-academic-degrees.html>
* <http://www.aic.lv/ace/tools/leg_aca/guid_rus.htm><issue_comment>username_1: From how it *should* work, the situation is like this:
* *<NAME>* (кандидат наук) is a PhD holder. Not a PhD *candidate*, but a done PhD.
* *<NAME>* (доктор наук) is something not really common in the US system. It's the higher doctorate in the UK or a [habilitation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habilitation) in a European system.
Now what you get recognized depends on the local authorities, but ideally that should be it.
Bonus: the typical position names in ex-Soviet system are junior and senior research staff (младший научный сотрудник, старший научный сотрудник). Typically, you have the former when you are doing your PhD and the latter when you are a postdoc/tenure track researcher.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: <NAME> ≈ Ph.D.
<NAME> ≈ Sc.D. See <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Science> for details. Not very common in the U.S., but I've known a number of poeple who had one from European universities. Some people (see <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Science#United_States> ) take a view that it's the same as a Ph.D., but they're mistaken.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/05
| 387
| 1,555
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student that is about to graduate. Sometimes professors whom I know personally (and/or have collaborated with before) will say "Come work in my lab as a postdoc!".
However, when I approach them after a few days/weeks/months, they inform me they would like to hire me, but do not have any funding.
Personally I would rather they not have not said "Come work in my lab as a postdoc" if they weren't sure they would have the funding, but I understand their reasons for saying such things.
However, in future, how can I politely enquire how serious they are about how interested (and able) they are in hiring me?<issue_comment>username_1: I would follow up the verbal conversation with an email. For example
>
> Thanks for the encouraging words the other day about a possible postdoc. I wanted to check, were you talking about a funded position? Where would I find instructions for submitting an application?
>
>
>
Depending on the vibes you got, you might want to start with something less formal, for example
>
> Thanks for the encouraging words the other day about a possible postdoc. I was wondering whether the position might be available for the upcoming semester.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Ask them!!! If you're having a conversation, and they mention that, it could be a serious proposal or could be a throwaway compliment. You could ask "I would be interested in that - did you mean it seriously?" or "I'd be interested - do you have funding available?"
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/06
| 2,876
| 11,682
|
<issue_start>username_0: The importance of a recent PhD’s [GPA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_point_average) was recently dismissed in another question ([What does an industry recruiter want to know my Ph.D. GPA for?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107603/what-does-an-industry-recruiter-want-to-know-my-ph-d-gpa-for)).
Why isn’t GPA considered relevant for graduate study?<issue_comment>username_1: Simple: a graduate degree (esp. PhD) is about research. GPA doesn't measure research ability to any extent.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: My take on this is the fact that most reputable schools will dismiss students with low GPA. But even if GPA is sub par, if a graduate student gets to the point that an unbiased committee will award this highest degree, proficiency has been demonstrated. Is a PhD from A with GPA 3.2 really different from a PhD from B with a GPA 3.5? Probably not in any meaningful way.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The primary purpose of a PhD is to create an independent researcher and add to the existing knowledge in a given field. The secondary purpose may be to train the doctoral student on the 'tools of the trade', which includes practical knowledge of experimental/modelling/other techniques, as well as the fundamental knowledge needed to use those tools.
Completion of the primary objective is judged by a thesis (or equivalent research output). The secondary objective may be judged, in some part, by exam scores/GPA. Therefore, the GPA counts less than the actual research output. This is why some PhD programmes waive off coursework altogether. Similarly, completion of PhD is based on thesis acceptance, not coursework completion.
This is in contrast to say, undergraduate study, where the primary objective is to teach the fundamental knowledge. Any research work is generally intended to acquaint the student with research methodology, not to generate actual output. Therefore, the GPA is more relevant as a primary metric.
It may be further argued that even in undergrad (1) GPA is not the best measure (2) A low GPA student may turn out to be an excellent researcher later. These may be true, but until a better, standardised system is devised, the existing system stands.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The PhD is a ~6 year degree, and most classes are in the first year or two. As others have said, the classes are really incidental; the PhD is about doing original research. There is also the question of normalization: GPAs must be interpreted in terms of the subject, the quality of the school in that subject, and the student's specialization.
Given this, the graduate GPA is only useful internally, to flag students who are doing unsatisfactorily in the coursework, or to help advisors choose students -- advisors have the necessary context to interpret course grades. In contrast, some bozo in HR will not have the context to decide whether a GPA of 3.5 from Harvard in Music is more impressive than a GPA of 3.8 from NC State in Chemistry.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: One more point: in some cases, a graduate course may be simply an opportunity for students to attend a series of advanced lectures on a particular topic. There may not be any homework, exams, papers, or coursework at all. In such cases a grade will be assigned more or less arbitrarily, perhaps just an A for every student who showed up to most of the lectures and/or asked some pertinent questions. So the grade really doesn't indicate anything about the student's knowledge or skill, and this will tend to make the GPA less meaningful.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I would like to extend username_1's answer a bit:
>
> Simple: a graduate degree (esp. PhD) is about research. GPA doesn't
> measure research ability to any extent.
>
>
>
For those who wonder why, here is my take.
* Grades are mostly relative. PhD programs usually have too few students all studying unique subjects so they can't be graded relative to each other.
* Most PhD programs are different and hardly comparable even within one field or one university. Without standardized curriculum, grading on absolute scale is pretty much impossible.
* Formal grades are given by someone who is superior. By definition, a successful completion of a PhD program makes you an independent peer researcher with no one on top to "grade" you.
So even if a university provides PhD GPA, it will at best be interpreted as some in-faculty fraction-measure to track early-stage performance.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: That GPA from the PhD is irrelevant is not entirely true.
If you proceed with a career in the industry, other things count more, like for example just the fact that you could focus for so long on a specific goal, had the ambition, discipline, persistence and self-organization skills to finish quite an extensive, exhausting and more often than not frustrating project successfully. This is quite a statement about you as personality from the perspective of any head-hunter in industry. The more or less subjective perception of the supervisor of how well did you do your research however is naturally not the priority.
Things look a bit different, if you intend to proceed with career in academics. Then the GPA (or the "evaluation" of your PhD as we have it in Germany) suddenly becomes important. How important also depends on the research group, research field and the region where you are, but in general, it is more often really important than not. In Germany (and most of the EU) for instance it would be extremely hard to apply for research grants and funding (especially as a young, just starting-trough researcher) if the evaluation/grade of your PhD is anything but "with excellence". In some fields, it could kill entirely the chances for career in academics or in a specific research group (especially if it's closely affiliated with the supervisor who gave the grade).
So, it depends a lot. And yes, there are situations, where it is quite important:)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: In the case where you *do* have a GPA during your PhD, it's frequently irrelevant and largely the result of some arcane bureaucratic requirements.
After my wife defended her thesis and requested her transcripts, she was surprised to discover that she had been taking 12 units of a class called something like "continuing research". Her university had automatically enrolled her and her advisor had actually given her a letter grade in the course every three months for the past four years.
He gave her an A every quarter, because that's what was required for the university to continue paying her tuition.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: The answer to this question is highly dependent on the way the school's course structure is set up. At my institution, a GPA would be meaningless. At the majority of institutions I have been associated with or worked with (all in the United States), the setup has been very similar:
In our first year, we take 4 core classes and must get a B or higher (3.0 grade points) or drop the program. After this, we may take 2-3 optional electives but these courses have no formal examinations and simply require giving presentations. By the way, you can sometimes get out of these courses or get infinite extensions on projects if you are in the middle of writing a grant or paper revisions. The rest of the time, for the purposes of tuition, we are enrolled in a 3-9 hour credit course called "Research Problems" which is automatically awarded an A unless your adviser intervenes (it's 3-9 hours to fill the remainder of credit hours so the student is taking a total of 9 credit hours). "Research Problems" corresponds to the fact that after the first year, you are just doing research. The vast majority of students are much more likely to drop the program than they are to continuously get poor grades for Research Problems so we can assume they would receive A's.
**Why is the GPA meaningless?** I took 14 semesters to graduate for a total of 126 credit hours. The classes made up roughly 20 of my total credit hours. Since the lowest grade I could make on these courses was a B (3.0), the remaining 106 credit hours would be A's (4.0). This amounts to a 3.84 as the lowest possible GPA I could have had. *But this is not in any way reflective of the student's actual performance in their classes which is what the GPA is really measuring.* If a recruiter asked me for this, I would assume they have no idea how graduate programs are structured or it was just a formality.
What a recruiter should ask for, if it matters (I can't see why it would), is the grades the applicant received in a class. I would still argue that this doesn't really tell anyone much of anything. In my candidacy examinations, the committee received a copy of my transcript beforehand so they could see the grades I made in my first year classes so they could ask question to test if I still had gaps in these areas. They would not have let me pass if they felt I was not ready. I could not have published any first author papers if I was still struggling with an introductory level class.
As a side note, having trained many undergraduates, the correlation between research aptitude and grade point average is not nearly as tight as one might think.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: In a PhD program you don't take many classes, and 90% of your efforts are focused on research (the other 10% is split between TA'ships and classes). This is because you are being trained for a specific purpose, i.e., to do research. The ability to create, carry out, and report a research project is what you are there to perfect. Classes are good supplements to hone this process, but are mostly just a distraction. Similarly, evaluating a PhD on grades is like judging a carpenter on how quickly he can work out math problems, or recall how many teeth are on a saw. If he can frame a house to code, do those things really matter? Sure, they help him get there, but you look at the product he has been trained to produce when assessing his talents.
Generally, there is only one time when GPA really *matters* (and I say this loosely). This is when applying to grant agencies, in my case, NSERC.
Tangibly, GPA can play a big role in seeking employment. If an employer asks for your PhD GPA, this is an indication that you are in the wrong building, talking to the wrong person. Leaving immediately can save you some potential hassle down the road!! :D
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: FWIW,
I remember hearing the same thing when I did my Ph.D., "grade point is irrelevent" and I was starting to act on that. Had a buddy tell me "BS" and I then decided to get a 4.0. And this from a guy with Harvard capability but always an underperformer (3.3. in HS, college, nuke school: which are progressively harder...but still NEVER to my capability).
I still did publications and talks and lab work and the rest of the stuff. But that 4.0 helped me get a LOT of interviews, get into McKinsey, etc. So...I would just be a little cagey when people tell you the GPA is irrelevant. Yes, you need to "bring it" on research also. But get good grades too. It's not that hard. Doesn't hurt anything. And looks great on a resume.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: Your GPA got you into your PhD program… What is important now is your intellectual curiosity, your uncompromised integrity, and the ability to see things that others do not see.
GPAs lack external validity. Your internal validity is untenable because you understand what is important and..
what is not
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/06
| 1,140
| 5,006
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am struggling a lot these days while presenting in front of my supervisor. I make many mistakes, sometimes very stupid mistakes, and he is now saying, "You need to avoid these mistakes." I am not able to focus on theorems, lemmas, etc. but instead focus on things like how to avoid mistakes in front of him. Many times I feel nervous in front of him, sometimes sweating in front him due to nervousness. Although he tries to make me calm but also give strict feedback.
The one question that makes me worry is that he knows the things I am presenting in front of him, but he doesn't try to clarify things. To me it appears that he creates confusion in the proof that I try to present.
**Question:** Is my supervisor making things clearer or confusing?
On the comment of @Magicsowon I am going to add a detail here. When I discuss things with him he asks, "What is this?" Now the problem is there can be multiple definitions of the same term. Then I often assume the wrong one and do the proof. In the literature I follow, things are not defined in a good way so most of the time it happens that there is a confusion on concepts.<issue_comment>username_1: Since I struggled a lot with making presentations as a graduate student, I'll tell you what worked for me. There are two things to worry about. Content, in other words your theorems and lemmas, and presentation. Presentation is what you will have on your slides and what you will say and do to get your point across to the audience. Then there are your "mistakes". Maybe you don't understand clearly some textbook concepts, maybe you make some presentation mistakes like putting too much on slides, or looking at your shoes while you talk.
One important thing to understand is that you cannot worry about those things during your talk. You have to automate the process. That means train for your talks. If it takes you a week, or two, so be it. Just be organized about it. Before everything, make a check list with all the things you worry about -- what your adviser said, what you think should be included in the presentation, etc.
First, make sure you get right the scientific content. Your explanations of what you do, have to be clear and concise. It helps trying to explain what you do to your peers, if they want to listen. Then, make sure you understand the concepts that need to be understood to explain your results. If someone would ask you about a concept, a theorem directly related to your work, or a paper relevant to it, make sure you at least know what they are talking about. If there are other mistakes you make, let your adviser point them out. See if you have time to fix them, if not, stop worrying. Research is made of fixed mistakes anyway.
Second, make your slides in such way that they contain the minimum necessary to outline your work and its importance. If there are things you really don't understand yet, better not insist on them, or not include them at all.
Third, start training. Write down, if you have to, what you want to say. Practice in front of the mirror, or phone camera, until you can present without the slides. Then go back and try again to present in front of your adviser. It will definitely be better.
Edit: I won't erase the answer, though I think it doesn't help OP. Maybe it will help others.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: When and why would I, as a supervisor, ask students "What's this?" rather than just telling them (assuming that "this" is something I already know about)? The most likely situation is that I can't tell whether the student understands the relevant definition. If I already knew that the student didn't understand the definition, then I'd explain it, but if I'm unsure about the student's understanding, then I might ask questions intended to show me what the student knows or doesn't know. The student might view such questions the way you did, as "making things doubtful", but that wouldn't be my primary intent. (It might be a good side effect; if the student has a wrong idea, causing doubt about that idea might be a good preface to explaining the correct idea or to sending the student to study it.)
I'm worried by the last part of the material you edited in at the end of the question, the part about multiple definitions of the same term, assuming the wrong definition, things not defined in a good way, and a confusion of concepts. This sounds like a recipe for a disaster. I would recommend that, as soon as you see two genuinely different definitions of the same term, you try to determine whether they are equivalent. If they aren't, or if you can't decide whether they are, then ask your adviser to explain. Are there really two different concepts with the same name? If so, which interpretation of the name should you use? Getting the definition clear is necessary before any other work involving that concept; anything built on unclear definitions will be unclear (if not outright nonsense).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/06
| 1,381
| 5,822
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am part of a masters student's thesis committee for the first time in my career, and am unsure what I should be doing be during the question session following the public presentation. I have read the whole document and have made comments about edits and corrections I would like the student to make, and have prepared a list of questions I could ask the student. However, I am unclear on a few things:
1. What criteria should I use to evaluate the student's work? What is necessary to consider their work good enough to pass?
2. If there is a disagreement among committee members, how does that typically get resolved?
3. What should my goal be with the questions I ask? I am already familiar with the theory and experimental design of the student's project, and could easily find myself digging into details or trying to test the student's overall knowledge of the field, but I'm not sure these would be useful ways to spend time. As the most junior person on the committee I expect I will be last, and unsure how much I'm expected to contribute to the examination.
For background, the student is at a different institution than I am, and my department does not have graduate students. We're both in the same city in the United States. I have talked to the student's advisor about the project itself, but I haven't gotten a clear sense of what I should be doing in the exam. The student's institution only lists administrative requirements for scheduling and submitting documents on their website, and doesn't seem to provide guidance for the contents of the thesis.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have a complete answer to your question, but I have a story that applies. I had a friend who was asked to be the "external" panel member on a dissertation committee. He read the dissertation and then took time off work, flew to the other city, and sat through the defense. One of the "internal" panel members sucker punched the Ph.D. candidate. She had correctly identified a serious flaw in the dissertation. She waited until the formal defense and then pounced. The candidate failed his defense (a year later he passed.) It cost my friend a certain amount of time and money and trouble that could have been avoided, had the internal not been such a drama queen.
But everyone, absolutely everyone, thought the internal lady was way out of line, even though she was right. She'd had copies of the dissertation throughout the previous months and at any time could have gone to either the student or the advisor with her issues. But she waited until the juiciest moment so she could revel in the student's public humiliation and her own exaltation. Everyone now knows her true character and she's paid the price for that.
So my advice is: Treat your duties as, mostly, a formality. If you have problems or objections, see if you can take care of them privately, like a sensible adult would. And I say *mostly* a formality. It's a formality in that the standards for work vary by school and the internal people will know best whether the student's work measures up. Your job as external is to make sure things aren't insane. I wouldn't speak up unless I thought the problem was way out of bounds. I would ask some questions, maybe along the lines of "What would be different if...?" or "What comes next?"
If there are disagreements on the committee and you know the right side, chose that side. If you don't know the right side, side with the advisor or abstain.
Let's see....Oh yeah. Another story. It's sadly the case that many committee members just sign off on whatever whenever meh. The don't read the paper even once. I know of a case where a young lady had submitted her thesis and the committee was ready to sign off. A member of the department NOT on the committee read the paper, which rang a bell in his memory. He was able to find the paper she had plagiarized. He showed it to the advisor and that was it for her.
(When confronted, she broke down and confessed that she had always cheated. She said she'd learned virtually no math, (yet had a B.S. and nearly, but for the above, had an M.S. in math.) She was a skilled cheater who had methods for getting exams taken for her, etc. Bizarre.)
Anyway, it would be your job to do a thorough plagiarism check, in my opinion. If you find something, then, as I said above, don't wait until the day of the defense to spring it on the players.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Internally within the committee, asking the committee chair is the best option. The chair should be able to fill you in with the procedure and what kind of angles the questions usually take. Be aware that the chair may still insist that you should decide what kind of questions to ask. And from my experience serving in committees, they did mean it.
Externally, since your institute is in the same city with the host, why not go attend a public defense there? That way you can also get the tone right. Do know that, however, tone/attitude can still vary greatly within an institute.
As for what to ask... first, I'd say don't ask any structural questions that would destroy the student's work. Those should be cleared up before the committee signed off the student to present. Second, unless it's for clarifying some question in the results or data, use open-ended questions. From my experience, I usually ask 1-2 clarifying question (e.g. on a limitation they suggested, etc.) and 1-2 "what if's" (e.g. what would you have changed if you can redo this work?) or "how should this work be carried forward", etc. That's just my style, I like to start by making it feel like the candidate is a student answering questions to end with treating the candidate as a new expert who can make recommendations and broad takeaway.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/06
| 2,949
| 12,318
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc at a European University. However, I am planning to quit my postdoc in a month or so since the research environment and the city life is not to me liking.
Also, I work with a Professor who is very polite, but also very busy with meetings. My salary comes from the project he administers, so he is the boss of the organization and the project.
For the past four months I have been working on a problem day and night including weekends as I found the problem very interesting and challenging. The theoretical part of the work is complete. It is a "complete" solution. He had NO contribution at all in this. Not even a single email exchange. He is too busy with meetings all the time. He is in the department twice a week for two to three hours at a time. I am also managing his master student as he has no time.
He is definitely polite and nice though, but I have not received any input from him other than giving me printed research papers. But he always asked me to give him the PDFs of lengthy derivations which I did. But I am dealing with analytical/numerical Navier-Stokes equation and its variations, so you can imagine how much terse that is. He has the entire theory now with him from my work. He may have been a good researcher in the past but no contribution to this work. And he had no proper publication in the work that I am doing so I am not sure how much he can contribute in writing the paper.
Now remains the numerical part which I believe I can do in next 2/3 weeks. And I have the ability to write the paper by myself when I have the numerical solution.
I talked to him and asked if I can work for him based in another city. He said if it is a week visit, that is fine, but not otherwise. He said it clearly that "I will not pay you to work somewhere else."
I still have a cordial relationship with him. No worries on that part. So, I am going to leave the place and the position in a month or two for sure.
So, he gains co-authorship just because he has the authority to provide employment? What should I do? Please help. I could have continued to live in the city though it was little boring for me, provided I was able to get inputs from my collaborator, or if he had given me necessary freedom to collaborate with other researchers, which he hasn't.
---
Update 10th June, I have resigned now. This problem has evolved into a new stage. Please post your replies there:
[Gifting co-authorship if the topic of research was suggested by my boss?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/111033/gifting-co-authorship-if-the-topic-of-research-was-suggested-by-my-boss)
and
[Acknowledgment of funding and adding an affiliation in exchange of permission to use experimental data?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/111034/acknowledgment-of-funding-and-adding-an-affiliation-in-exchange-of-permission-to)<issue_comment>username_1: This is a form of gift authorship. The worst form, if he imposes it on you. I know some people would think otherwise, but my last supervisor, who was a big name in his field never signed papers he had no contribution on. And this was despite of the fact that he was the big grant writer and winner of the group.
It's hard to tell what to do. In my case, I used to simply do what I was told by the boss. Only I never had such dilemmas. But, I had a few friends who were in the same situation as you. When they refused co-authorship, their supervisors got angry. I work with one of these supervisors at this time. The guy went around and told everyone my friend "stole" his idea. Nevermind that dude had no ideas to begin with. The other guy, wrote a negative recommendation letter for my other friend who lost a very tempting postdoc offer over it.
My recommendation is to stall until you leave the group. Until then you fix all the details you need to fix for the paper and find out if your boss plans to contribute anything else to it. If it wasn't his idea and had so little involvement in it, once you are gone, you can publish without permission. As a courtesy, you can tell your superviser, after you're gone, that you are thinking of including him in the paper if he has time to make a contribution you think would be useful and within his capabilities. If not, include him in your Acknowledgements section.
Edit: backup your correspondence with him (emails). You may need them if he's the kind of guy who gets upset and writes your editor that you "stole" ideas from him. Hopefully, it won't be the case.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Different people would approach this differently. Given that you like to avoid conflict, why not give him authorship, finish your notice period, and leave on a happy note?
I don't think it would hurt you very much to add an author, especially your host. Rather, you are creating a collaboration that may be useful some day.
What you are suggesting, i.e. writing the paper with dual affiliation would actually be a little dishonest, because the work is all done at the first institute. This business of sharing your password and returning salary sounds rather unnecessary, and pardon me, slightly immature. I understand that you consider it the scrupluous thing to do, but let me assure you, it will leave a bitter taste with the institute and/or the host.
As I understand you are leaving because the city doesn't suit you, not because the institute is not supportive. No point burning bridges then, isn't it?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I find adding a **contributions** paragraph (or making the acknowledgements paragraph "Acknowlegements & Contributions") to papers and posters very helpful. I think they also have merit for the reader, providing a better idea whos specialization is what (particularly for highly interdisciplinary papers).
Some medical journals require it, and so far, I've neither met nor heard of a revision calling to cut that paragraph out. Even if that would happen, it means that the editor and reviewers have read it - which provides an outside control instance against gift authorship.
* In case we're really talking gift authorship, I think that even of those who'd accept a gift authorship without any second thought if it just involves entering their name on the front page, the vast majority would not type out outright lies about their contribution.
* I also assume that potential co-authors do know the rules for authorship, and hesitate to type out ridiculous non-contributions (provided instrumentation) that rather should be acknowledged. However, if that happens, I'd think you may just leave it as it is. Editor and reviewers will see it. They know the power difference between PhD students, postdocs, and professors very well, they'll draw the correctand conclusion. I trust they will also take appropriate action, as the reputation of the journal is directly implied.
* They do take action: I've made the experience of being upgraded to co-first-authorship by decision of the editor based on our contributions section.
---
If your European University happens to be in Germany, the [DFG rules for authorship are quite clear and avalable in German and English](http://www.dfg.de/download/pdf/dfg_im_profil/reden_stellungnahmen/download/empfehlung_wiss_praxis_1310.pdf).
Part of the strategy for quality assurance for scienctific research is that there are ombudspersons for scientific questions.
---
The question whether or not your professor is entitled for co-authorship IMHO cannot be decided from what you told us so far: while you did not describe any sufficient scientific contribution from their side, but it is still possible that there is sufficent contribution which you do not yet realize.
Please do not get upset, but we're all stranger to both you and your professor. We just know that:
* There are black sheep who take or even demand gift authorship.
* But we also know that there are students who do not recognize proper scientific contributions by their supervisors.
+ Typical candidates for such unrecognized contributions are: questions and possibly short (but to the point) conversations after seminar presentations, over a coffee. A suggested experiment or solution strategy on the hallway. Note: the length of a sentence is not a good indicator of the amount of thought or intellect someone put in to arrive at that sentence.
+ >
> he does not contribute anything at all, other than placing research papers on my desk. And I never read those papers, never found them related to what I have been doing.
>
>
>
How can you know that they do not contain relevant ideas if you do not read them!?
How do you know he never thinks about the pdfs he asked for? Or never thinks about the topic even without your pdfs?
(Authorship needs scientific contribution plus writing contribution - IMHO at the moment you cannot know that there aren't (going to be) any)
---
Here are some borderline cases to ponder:
* suppose you have an ideal supervisor S and two students or postdocs: ideal researcher I and not-so-good researcher N. S closely follows their work. As S is a good supervisor, they work with least possible disturbance by S. Also, as a good teacher, any guidance is done in a way that the researcher in question is lead to discover the error/solution/correction themselves. S critically weighs all arguments brought by the researchers and pinpoints any weak points. Turns out, N needed some guidance to arrive at their paper, whereas I did not. I basically answered all questions before they were asked.
Questions: So S clearly has contributed scientifically to the N paper. Is his contribution to I's paper less, solely because I is a better researcher than N? In other words, S doing the same except expressing a few questions to N which he doesn't express to I, does their contribution depend on the contribution of N vs. I? If so, could (or mabe even should) S ask some questions to I (that are OTOH neither necessary nor OTOH dumb), and thus gain a scientific contribution also to I's paper?
* Assume a supervisor S thinks over a problem long and intensive enough to arrive at an idea how to tackle/solve it. E.g. sufficiently to decide that a solution can be managed by researcher R within a reasonable time frame. If S then hands over the task and explains the proposed solution strategy to R who in turn solves the problem, they clearly have a scientific contribution.
*Questions:* if the S hands over the problem, but for the sake of the improved learning possibilites for R does not (initially - though it is at hand should R not find their way) outline the solution strategy, does S lose their contribution?
Once R knows the task, they avoid any discourse with S, in order to make sure they'll get a single-author paper (i.e. avoid S's co-authorship). Is this a valid strategy for R?
*Please note:*
Wheras I maintain (until you convince me of the opposite) that what I called scientific contribution, are scientific contributions, I consider it a different question whether they are sufficiently large to warrant co-authorship on their own (assuming everyone contributes to the writing, which is also necessary), and one where the answer is very much field dependent.
Personally, if I were a supervisor in the described cases, I'd prefer acknowledgement - but then you cannot count me as I'm not entirely in academia anymore and thus do not have the full publication pressure.
---
>
> "Could you please clarify if you are expecting a co-authorship even though I have done all the theory and the numerical part, and so I am confident I can write the paper by myself"? he will certainly say, YES. what next?
>
>
>
* I'd consider this rather *unnecessarily* confrontational - particularly as you say you'd like to avoid conflict.
* A more neutral alternative would be to tell him you're ready to start writing the paper and whether he wants to become co-author.
* If he then says yes, it is time to tie down who is going to contribute what to the paper.
* (BTW, This idea is largely not my own: I heard of a similar strategy from an acquaintance, where the student basically said they'd like to have professor as co-author on the paper, and what scientific contribution professor suggests to make)
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/06
| 629
| 2,498
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am wondering if anyone knows of any studies that indicate whether students read online texts more or less than hard copy texts.
I am in the midst of trying to "reboot" the intro stats class I teach and a big question in my mind is how effective the text is. Active learning (like the flipped classroom) requires the students read the material beforehand, and I'm not convinced (from the results I saw this year using a Pearson Learning Management System (LMS)) that the students are reading the online text very much.
I have a suspicion that students read the online texts less (and I plan to give my students a survey to check) but I'd like to know if there is any research supporting my limited observations.<issue_comment>username_1: This recent literature review goes over some of the research on [print versus screen reading.](https://doi.org/10.1080/00048623.2016.1227661)
It looks like in real-world situations there are [no significant differences in grades between e-textbooks and print textbooks](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.022) even though some laboratory studies show that content reading works better from print and that some students tend to prefer print.
In contrast, course reserve books are more likely to be accessed [if they're e-books rather than print books.](https://doi.org/10.1108/00907321211228291)
Practically, it may be worthwhile to give students a "tour" of the ebook to make sure they know how to use it, and/or to design quizzes or activities that require students to know/use the textbook material.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I will say personally that using both platform is far the best. Online text reading can be a little bit tedious especially when it is in large PDF volume for example and sometimes calculations may not be properly formulated especially for student new in statistics. From my experience having to take bio-statistics, i still had to refer to my hard text book especially to see exactly how the answers were got from start to finish of the problem. On finding a report to support you. i came across the site below, check it out and see if the data can support your report.
<http://hechingerreport.org/textbook-dilemma-digital-paper/>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree that if it is possible, give students option to use either modality, but as a blind student, I would love online materials. We need to think about accessibility of our materials for everyone.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/06
| 1,309
| 6,011
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received a decision on my manuscript, requiring Major Revisions. One referee thinks one of my result is abnormal and contradictory with previous findings.
After checking my raw data and analysis and I found I did make a big mistake about the calculation. I know my carelessness brought the confusion to the referees and editors and I will explain this carefully in the cover letter when submitting the revised manuscript.
But I am also worried that the manuscript will be rejected even if I correct this mistake, because one mistake may make them stop trusting my research. How do editors and reviewers typically react to major changes in analysis?<issue_comment>username_1: Part of the point of peer review is to help correct errors before they’re published. Acknowledging that you made an error isn’t a sign of weakness, or at least shouldn’t be viewed as such, instead, it should be a sign that you are a person interested in making work that is done correctly.
A reviewer on my very first paper pointed out that one of my graphs had to be incorrect, because it violated an important principle. It turned out the reviewer was correct. I had made a math error in the code that generated the graph. I fixed it and resubmitted it, and there were no further issues.
Don’t worry about the impressions of the peer reviewers—focus on making your papers as strong and as accurate as possible.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Mistakes happen, and the reviewers and editor know this. However, you are probably right that they will have less trust for your results once they see there was a major mistake. Once these particular people have confirmation that the calculation had been wrong, it's possible they may not want to spend more effort on this paper, but if that is the case they would probably return a negative result quite quickly. That would free you to submit the improved paper to another journal.
**Let's assume your calculation mistake was truly huge**, but that you still have workable results after fixing it. **How might the reviewers and editor react to learning this, and how can you address their concerns?**
* Overall, they might worry about whether the other results are accurate.
+ Before resubmitting, make sure that you catch all of the mistakes possible. Ask trusted colleagues to "sanity check" everything with you, including asking some the big favor of doing an in-depth check of all your calculations, to make sure that you uncover any other potential errors.
+ If there are additional tests you can perform (specification checks, testing how strong your results are to the omission of outliers, etc.) it may be appropriate to include these in a new appendix. These could reassure the reviewers about the integrity of your approach, the underlying data, and how you're handling it. This would also give them more chances to spot inconsistencies--which would hopefully not be present. (If such checks show that your results may not be robust, you may want to acknowledge that as a new limitation in the paper--honesty and transparency will matter to the reviewers.)
+ Emphasize in the cover letter that you have fully rechecked all of the calculations, after sincerely thanking the reviewer for pointing out the problem and acknowledging that you had to make a major revision. (It may be appropriate to address how the mistake came about and the steps you have taken to check and cross-check the remaining calculations.)
+ Make sure you are as detail-oriented as possible with this draft, including by dealing thoroughly with unrelated problems. If you can hire someone to copy-edit the submission, this would be a good time. Even small errors in other places may be seen by these reviewers as a bad sign.
+ Allow them to verify your results, if at all possible. Clean up your programs/calculations while reviewing, such that you can share them. If the programs are long or complicated, provide an overview document explaining the structure. This is far more than what you might publish as an appendix, but you want the reviewers to be able to check the process step by step.
+ Is it possible to share your raw data (e.g. without violating confidentiality or breaking anonymity of review or earning the ire of colleagues who want to keep the data private)? If so, that should be part of what you share, so they can replicate your analysis if interested. (It may be beyond their scope of duty to go this in-depth, but you should make it easy for them to do so if they want to.)
+ If there is no established way in the publishing management system to share these additional files, you should state in your cover letter your willingness to share the full data and calculations and ask the editor whether there is an established procedure for this.
* The reviewers may have initially been interested in the paper, and granted the revision, because of the result that referee considers unexpected. I'm not entirely sure from the question whether you still have this unexpected result after performing your major revision.
+ If there was a change in the meaning of your results, be sure to edit the "frame" for your results (in the abstract, introduction, discussion, and/or conclusion, especially). I.e., if nothing changes beyond the "Analysis" and "Results" section, then this would be a problem.
+ Make sure you acknowledge the previous findings that the reviewer pointed out. If your revised results are still "unexpected," then make sure that the discussion addresses and conjectures about the discrepancy in productive ways.
+ If there are other reasons for skepticism around that result that the reviewer provided, you may want to come up with specific ways to test them, and include the results in either a "falsification check" section or an appendix.
Your (eventually) published paper should include sincere acknowledgements to any colleague(s) who helped and the anonymous reviewers who helped you strengthen the work.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/07
| 1,269
| 5,818
|
<issue_start>username_0: When considering to publish a *paper* in a research *journal*, the journal's reputation itself is what people usually care about, rather than the editor's expertise and scientific status (although high-standing journals usually have well-known researchers as their editors).
Does the same rule apply to handbook-style *books* (that cover recent research papers, with each chapter written by a different group of authors)? I have seen a couple of times that a relatively unknown person in a research area is the editor of such a book that is published by a well-known publisher, such as Wiley or Springer.
When considering to write a book chapter for books like this, how should one weigh the editor's scientific status against the publisher's reputation? For example, is it a good idea to publish a book chapter in a book published by a very well-known publisher that has an editor unknown in the research community? (Being *unknown* while serving as the editor of a title published by a big publisher can raise some red flags such as being a fraud, too.) How would the book editor status affect the writers and the perceived value of their work?
(To clarify, I'm asking this as an applied physics graduate student who is mainly interested in getting a Ph.D. admission and is helping to write the book chapter. This may lower the bar a little compared to an established researcher)<issue_comment>username_1: The expertise and reputation of the editor(s) is of prime importance, with the publisher's reputation being a distant second, at best. I answer from an applied materials science perspective, which should be close enough to applied physics; although I don't see the situation changing much across fields. One exception would be if the field is highly specialised and only a few publishers operate in it.
At the outset, l believe there is no major difference in evaluating a journal and evaluating a book. In both cases, one looks for unflinching ethical conduct, respectability and high visibility. The first is non-negotiable; any hint of predatory publishers should deter submissions immediately, whether journal or book. The presence of a reputed and respected editor is a good indicator that the publication will be handled ethically.
Second, the matter of respectability. It is not much of an extrapolation from respectable editor to respectable book. Remember, any full citation of work published in a book will carry the editor's name, so the association is long-term. Often, such books are parts of series, or are associated with legacy conferences. In these cases, the repute of the series/conference can take precedence over the individual editor's, because different books are edited by different people. In these cases, the priority would be series, editors, publisher.
Finally, visibility. For journals you have an impact factor and other merits. For book chapters, there is none such. Here a well-known publisher is good because they will typically have better distribution than a smaller publisher. You mentioned Wiley and Springer, I'd like to add Elsevier, who somehow seem to be flooding the market. Yet, books tend to generally be thematic, so a well-known editor guarantees enough publicity within the respective field. Incidental/interdisciplinary readership may be affected less by editor and more by publisher.
On the basis of these three points, it's safe to say that a big publisher is desirable, it is not decisive. Why not? Primarily because publishing is ultimately a business, and like all big businesses, all eggs aren't put in the same basket. Every big publisher will have a spectrum of publications, varying in impact, quality and degree of specialisation. You can easily see this in the publishers you mentioned. So the same publisher could put out an average book or a great book, and you'd be none the wiser without looking at the editor.
Secondly, if a book is associated with a conference/seminar series, the publisher is decided by how much financial muscle the organisers have. It's a no-brainer that better finances don't necessarily mean better quality. Again, the visibility to a general audience will be higher for a larger publisher, but in the long term, once the chapters notch up enough citations, this is likely to be offset.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In Information Security there are common publishers were researchers expect to find materials. If you publish outside of those, less people will find your work (less impact). This is probably less of an issue in Physics since the area is much bigger.
The reputation of the editor contributes to how likely others in the research community are to select that book over others. A well established name will generate more interest.
Both are important if your goal is to have the highest impact possible. You need a large platform (publisher) and you need a interest-generating name (editor).
If possible, also consider the quality of the other chapters. Usually accepted chapters already have at least a one page summary. If the quality is poor, you may not want to be associated.
You say you are undertaking book chapter writing for PhD admission. This is not technically part of your question, but in my experience writing a book chapter was much more difficult than writing a journal article. Also, book chapters in edited books normally get fewer citations. The overall book tends to be cited rather than the chapter (in Information Security). This does not include edited volumes that are part of a conference proceeding.
My recommendation would be to focus on writing a high-quality journal paper instead of a book chapter. You are more likely to be cited directly, and you can show potential PhD advisors that your work can pass peer review.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/07
| 582
| 2,331
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've researched the "rules" regarding use of tenses in scientific writing. However, I'm still not sure how to describe the simulations I've done during my thesis.
Just a simple example:
>
> **1:** An example model was developed to simulate the behavior during
> compression.
>
>
>
Here I'm describing something I did in the past, similar to an experiment, hence I'm using the past tense.
Then I'll describe what happens during the simulation, or how specific properties of the simulation model were set.
>
> **2:** The piston geometry **is** imported as a .stl-mesh. By moving the mesh in direction of the negative z-axis, the particles in the
> cylinder **are** compressed until...
>
>
>
I'm not sure about the tenses used in example 2. I could have also written:
>
> **3:** The piston geometry **was** imported as a .stl-mesh. By moving the mesh in direction of the negative z-axis, the particles in the
> cylinder **were** compressed until...
>
>
>
I can't decide whether example 2 or 3 is the better choice.<issue_comment>username_1: What I do is use the past tense when talking in general like in an introduction or abstract, and the present when talking about the actual development of the model. I don’t think there is a general rule.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would say the present tense is appropriate if you are giving a description of how the model works *in general*. The model itself is timeless; it will keep working the same way now and forever.
The past tense puts the emphasis on what you did in your *specific* project; it reads like a report. You did it this way; someone else in the future might do something else.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Closely tied to @username_2's answer, one way to resolve this could be to see what you want to emphasize- the results from the simulation (maybe for a general engineering journal) or the simulation itself (maybe for a computational journal).
In the first case, use past tense, because you ran the simulation in a particular way to get those results, and others should do the same for reproducibility.
In the second case, use present tense, because you are highlighting what the simulation does, and it is up to others to think what results they can use it for.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/07
| 2,140
| 8,290
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there any research/study/survey/dataset that looked at to what extent the wealth, connections and alumni donation of a parent help their children be accepted into a college in the United States?
(E.g., a notorious case: [John F. Kennedy's Harvard application](https://bookhaven.stanford.edu/2011/01/annals-of-mediocre-writing-jfks-harvard-application/))<issue_comment>username_1: I want to offer some commentary on the graduate situation, and why it's so hard to find comparable results to the level of research available for undergraduate admissions.
It’s going to be very hard to find studies of graduate admissions in the US, because admissions are handled at the departmental level, so data sets are smaller, and because financial need and socioeconomic status are not something asked for or measured in graduate applications. Thus, they’d need to be “add-ons” in a study.
While I can’t say they’d have no impact, graduate admissions by necessity tend to be more meritocratic than undergraduate admissions. Admitting someone who is clearly not competent for graduate studies makes the department look bad, and can act as a drag on future recruitment efforts. That said, if the candidate is otherwise qualified, a history of donations to the department from the candidate’s family certainly wouldn’t go overlooked.
Another possibly overlooked aspect of a family’s socioeconomic status that can indirectly impact things is that their financial security enables opportunities that someone who is not similarly advantaged might not have. For instance, someone who comes from a well-to-do family could offer to volunteer in a lab for credit, while someone who needs to “pay their own way” or help support their family may have to do something outside of research during the summers, thereby being at a disadvantage by virtue of having a smaller research profile.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is an important question for understanding the system of American higher education. (I do not read it as being an off-topic request for "How do I improve chances of admission to college?" especially since changing a family's wealth is a much more difficult course of action than, say, paying for tutoring.)
There has been some quantitative study of "legacy admissions," with [Hurwitz (2011)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.12.002) estimating that the odds of admission are multiplied by 3 for students with a parent who attended the school, after controlling for other factors. (For instance, legacy students in his data tend to have higher SAT scores than non-legacy students.)
He explains that favoring students whose parents attended has benefits similar to favoring those who apply early or sports stars:
>
> Highly selective colleges face the challenge of maximizing the academic profile of their student bodies, with the understanding that sacrificing some academic talent now will enable the college to preserve or improve its selectivity in the future. In other words, from the college's perspective, an exclusive focus on academics in the admissions process is not sustainable. ... Other tradeoffs might include relaxing admissions standards for early decision applicants to decrease acceptance rates and increase yield rates, and consequently to appear more selective (<NAME>, 2010). Or they might involve admitting academically lackluster star athletes to maintain the successful sports teams that encourage alumni giving (Holmes, 2009; Meer & Rosen, 2009). Relatives of alumni (legacies) offer enthusiasm and familiarity to colleges, and the special treatment awarded to them in the admissions process helps to preserve generational ties that also are intended to motivate financial generosity. (from section 2.1)
>
>
>
His data do not include parents' giving rates, but they compare the same student's admissions across multiple colleges, showing an advantage at a parent's alma mater.
---
For some historical background, [in a legal review of legacy admissions, Lamb (1992) explains how legacy admissions policies came about](http://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/collsp26&i=501). Harvard and Yale kept out most public school students with a Latin requirement through the end of the 19th century, and only had to deal with selective admissions upon dropping that requirement. Their (at least somewhat) meritocratic process that followed let in "too many" Jewish and Catholic applicants. Columbia started asking for family information (religious affiliation, father's name and place of birth) in 1919, and other elite schools followed. In 1926, Harvard announced it was taking things like "personality" into account in admissions and started requiring photographs with applications; they used the photos and the discretion to make it harder for Jews, Catholics, and (likely) black students to gain admission, while increasing the proportion of legacy students. (p. 494)
So, the example of <NAME>'s 1935 Harvard application is an interesting one. He had famous parentage and family background at Harvard (and by WWII 1/4 of Harvard students were legacies, according to Lamb p. 495). In his case, his Catholicism was probably not held against him.
Lamb also reviews data from a Department of Education Office of Civil Rights inquiry into Harvard admissions. Circa 1992, the Harvard admissions process benefited legacies, and gave additional weight to children of alumni who served on the "Schools and Scholarship Committee" (p. 502), which is apparently a group of alumni interviewers. (My guess would be those who give time are more likely to also give money, but I do not know that donations would change the odds of being accepted as an alumni interviewer.)
---
In the graduate realm, my guess would be that graduate programs that charge admission (especially for professional training) are much more likely to have legacy preferences than academic programs. However, in subjective processes where a department is hoping to get a good yield of applicants or hire a faculty member who will choose them, I'm sure that there is some benefit in being able to say in an interview, "It's great to be back at this university! My parents met here..."
---
As a backdrop to this question, there is a longstanding literature that admission into selective colleges, attendance at any college, and graduation rates from college, depend strongly on family socioeconomic status, including level of parent education and family income.
For instance, [<NAME>, and Ziol-Guest (2017) find:](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13524-017-0600-4)
>
> Across 31 cohorts, we find that increases in the income gap between high- and low-income children account for approximately three-quarters of the increasing gap in completed schooling, one-half of the gap in college attendance, and one-fifth of the gap in college graduation.
>
>
>
Controlling for family structure does not explain much of the difference they find, but some of it is related to maternal age; the "maternal age gap" between higher-income and lower-income families increased over the time period they're looking at. (It is not clear whether maternal age is causal or a marker of other family differences.)
[Chetty, Friedman, Saez, Turner, and Yagan (2017)](https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/hkawpaper/2017-059.htm) look at intergenerational mobility by parent wealth, finding that children from rich families are much more likely to attend college--and fancier colleges--than their poorer counterparts.
Family connections and legacy admissions will not shape these overall enrollment statistics, because the kind of students whose families have that pull are very unlikely to be on the margin of not attending any college.
Instead, [sociologist Annette Lareau's idea of "concerted cultivation"](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/02/explaining-annette-lareau-or-why-parenting-style-ensures-inequality/253156/) is probably much more relevant. Middle- and upper-class parents know the pathways for success and train their children into the attitudes and behaviors that prepare them for success in this society. The example username_1 gives of volunteering to work in a lab runs along these lines.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/07
| 1,319
| 5,797
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergrad currently working in the lab with a great professor and doing interesting work. I promised the professor that I would take more relevant courses related to the research I'm working on to help me with my research.
However, I found that there are some other courses that are more interesting to me and more marketable as a career skill. I want to take those instead but also continue working with him, but do you think he'd be angry if I went against his strong recommendation to take more relevant classes?<issue_comment>username_1: The professor would not be called great if he would be angry with your choice towards a career which you think is best suited for you. There is no point in following all the professor's advice. You are not a PhD student, you are an undergrad - the time when you should explore as much as possible.
Of course, you could convince that you are doing those courses informally through video lectures or self studies and might want to discuss with him after finishing some of those courses.
I don't see any reason why I would be 'angry' if my undergrad research student does not follow all my advice, if it could give my research a different direction altogether.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: While your advisor may want you to take classes relevant to his interests, ultimately, **it’s your degree and your career.**
Where the two are in conflict, you need to focus on what will help you graduate and move on to the next stage of your career. If that means getting a job in industry, then you should focus on that. On the other hand, if this is someone you want to continue working with beyond undergraduate research, you may want to see about meeting him halfway—take some courses you want, and some courses he wants you to take.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The professor can certainly be angry with your decision to go against his recommendation; however, this is far more likely to happen if you do it without explaining him several things:
* your intention of not taking the courses he recommends
* your motivation to take the other courses instead
* and most importantly, your motivation and expectations from working in his lab
You certainly don't have to follow his advice and try to explore as many options as you want as an undergraduate, but I would give your professor an explanation BEFORE and a chance to make his points one more time. If the professor is actually "great" and professional, he would totally listen to you and understand your decision – nothing to be mad about.
Sometimes, professors treat some of their undergrad assistants similar to the grad ones. That is usually a good sign – you seem professional and valuable enough. However, this comes at a cost of them unintentionally assuming you want to continue working in their lab forever. With you clearly explaining your reasons, motivations, and aspirations, you have a chance to be as professional as you can be and maintaining the best possible relationships.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: **Would your professor be angry?**
(In the U.S. context) professors understand that undergraduates are still exploring their classes; you are not contractually obligated to take those further courses (unless you signed something to that effect). It would be (within the range of) normal for a professor in this situation to feel disappointed or upset when learning that you had changed your mind about this course of action he was expecting, but he should not take it out on you or be vindictive.
**Why might he care?**
In the near term, if you do not take the recommended classes, you may not be able to advance further on the work you're doing with the professor; this might mean the end of the job. Backing out on what you describe as a "promise" would be bad form in general. If the promise was also part of why the prof currently has you in his lab (investment in training you, with the hope that you will train yourself further), then the promise has even more importance.
**What might be the effect on you?**
So, this might end your job in the lab, if the coursework is a necessary co-requisite. You might find it hard to get the professor's recommendation for graduate school, if you choose to pursue it. (And/or the professor would have a harder time making a convincing case for your interest and skill in the field.)
**Red flag check**
Is the professor prone to expressing anger? Did the professor force you to make a promise about this? If either of these is true, you should find an ombudsman (university position of being a neutral 3rd party) or talk with the DUS (director of undergraduate studies in the professor's department) or another person you trust for advice.
If you are still interested in taking the other courses, I would recommend that you:
1. Study their syllabi and see if any skills meaningfully relate to the skills you would get in the recommended classes.
2. Look up on job sites what some of the marketable applications of the recommended classes are
3. Talk with other students in the lab or seniors in the major about the value of the skills from those classes.
4. Consider options you're willing to accept (e.g. not working in lab and taking desired classes; taking one recommended class and one new class; taking just the recommended classes and honing your lab skills).
5. Decide whether to bring the dilemma to the professor (if you trust him and your mind is truly not made up, and if his reaction to the different paths will impact your decision--e.g. whether or not you can keep your job in lab).
6. Otherwise, if you decide not to take the classes you promised to, tell the professor as soon as your decision is firm, so he has as many options as possible.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/07
| 1,189
| 4,328
|
<issue_start>username_0: I found [an exam online from the MIT](https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-093j-optimization-methods-fall-2009/exams/MIT15_093J_F09_mid_2008.pdf) that states:
>
> You have two hours (academic time, 110 minutes) to complete the exam.
>
>
>
What is this *academic time* unit and where does it come from?<issue_comment>username_1: It is a scheduling problem. If you schedule two lectures directly after one another, then you need to add some time for the students to walk from one lecture hall to the next. So an "academic hour" is less than an actual hour, to allow for that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The 10 minute interval given here seems to be common in the US, while in Europe 15 minutes is also in widespread use, but some universities also use 5 minutes.
It is to solve a rather practical scheduling problem: If one lecture ends on the hour sharp, and the next begins on the hour, you would have only zero time to walk an often non-zero distance to get to your next lesson/lecture/exam/whatever, requiring asymptotically infinite velocity to cover that distance - a theoretical and practical impossibility.
In order to solve this, European universities invented the so called ["academic quarter"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_quarter_(class_timing)), which is in use at some universities until today. It means that events start 15 minutes after their scheduled time.
The abbreviations *c.t.* (for *cum tempore*, en. "with time"), which means 15 minutes after the scheduled time and *s.t.* (*sine tempore*, en. "without time") which means *exactly* at the scheduled time stem from this. In *some* European universities (especially german), times are assumed to be *c.t.* unless stated otherwise.
Berkeley calls this 10-minute interval ["Berkeley time"](https://web.archive.org/web/20140310204319/http://visitors.berkeley.edu/know/class.shtml), and MIT seems to prefer "academic time", although I have never seen it been used with *intervals*, only with *instants* in time so far.
There are many variations of this scheme, and many universities have their custom practices. Some start at the hour sharp and end five/ten/fifteen minutes early, some start five/ten/fifteen minutes after the hour and end sharp, and at some universites lectures both start five/ten/fifteen minutes late and end five/ten/fifteen minutes early, and maybe some universities use even other schemes (a comment refers to seven past the hour).
At my university, the academic quarter is used both at the start *and* end, since our campus is rather large and for some locations, you actually need almost 30 minutes when walking, and 20 when talking public transport in between those locations.
From personal experience, universities tend to move away from using c.t. times, and rather list actual (s.t.) start times on *official resources/documents* (e.g. 10:15 as start for a lecture), while students and professors would still refer to those lectures by their time slot (in this case 10 o'clock lecture) and make use of whatever length their university uses as "academic quarter" in colloquial speech.
(Addition from comments):
At some universities, the academic quarter is also used as the time students have to wait for the lecturer. If the lecturer is late, but does not arrive within the academic quarter without any more information, students may assume the lecture is cancelled and can leave without the fear of missing any material.
(I recommend not leaving without being *sure* this is policy at your own university as well)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: From [MIT's Term Regulations and Examination Policies](http://catalog.mit.edu/mit/procedures/term-regulations-exam-policies/) ([mirror](https://web.archive.org/web/20180407222755/http://catalog.mit.edu/mit/procedures/term-regulations-exam-policies/)):
>
> Classes begin five minutes after and end five minutes before the scheduled hour or half-hour.
>
>
>
Hence a "two-hour" lecture/exam lasts 110 minutes at MIT.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: At many colleges, "1-hour" classes are 50 minutes long to provide 10 minutes of break time between classes. For example, a 2-hour class starting at 10:30am would end at 12:20pm, which is 110 minutes long.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/07
| 699
| 2,736
|
<issue_start>username_0: [This journal issue](http://al-qantara.revistas.csic.es/index.php/al-qantara/user/setLocale/en_US?source=%2Findex.php%2Fal-qantara%2Fissue%2Fview%2F34) has contents that are grouped as "article" or "monographic section". What's the difference between these two sections?
I checked the dictionary definition of [monograph](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/monograph): "*a highly detailed and thoroughly documented study or paper written about a limited area of a subject or field of inquiry*", but can't we say the same about the regular articles in this journal? Why do some texts get classified in "article" and some in "monographic section"? To make it more confusing there is also a "Miscellaneous" section in that issue, and I have no idea why it was considered so versus the other texts.<issue_comment>username_1: My general analogy would be that article : monograph : book :: short story : novella : novel. It's a distinction based on length and scope. (Monographs and novellas are probably harder to get published than their more common kin.)
Looking into [that journal's submission policies](http://al-qantara.revistas.csic.es/index.php/al-qantara/about/submissions#authorGuidelines), it appears that articles have a word limit while monographs do not. However, in the issue you cited, some of the articles were longer than the monographs, at least in pages.
It appears that they ask for / commission (encargar) specific people to write the monographs and reviews. Even the solicited work goes under double-blind review.
>
> Sólo se encargarán contribuciones para las secciones monográficas y reseñas.
>
>
>
As a result, the monographs may be more thematic or provided by experts. The articles are also called "investigation articles," which suggests that they may require new research, while monographs may have more latitude in their content.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The word monograph is derived from "mono" and "grapho", so the implied literal meaning is "writing on a single subject". Monographic sections are thus sections linked by a single theme, and often only have invited contributions. In the specific journal issue, the theme appears to be related to monuments/architecture from the Almohad Caliphate.
A journal that is clearer about what they mean with monographic sections is
[Kriterion Journal of Philosophy](http://www.kriterion-journal-of-philosophy.org/kriterion/special-issues/):
>
> Monographic sections are small collections of original research papers on a specific topic, with an introductory part, that are, in contradistinction to special issues, published as part of a regular issue together with other articles.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/08
| 6,098
| 24,741
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was just at a conference where I met another grad student who - upon learning about my specialization and university affiliation - excitedly asked me if I knew Dr. -- and if he was my advisor (she's a fan). Deer in the headlights moment for me, as I did know Dr. --; he had been my advisor - one that until recently I admired and was very fond of. Only he's not my advisor anymore, because our once enviable mentor/mentee relationship is now in ruins. (In sum: he crossed a professional line with me, I called him out on it, he started punishing me for it in various ways, and it culminated in him stepping down from my committee and me reporting him to HR (human resources) when my dept chair dismissed my complaints about his abusive behavior. After effects: we're not speaking to each other, avoid each other as much as possible, I get panic attacks/have some sort of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) whenever I have run-ins with him, and I've slowly become isolated from the rest of my department because he practically runs it and no student or faculty member wants/dares to step on his toes).
The thing is, I came to this university primarily to work with him...he and everyone in the dept knows this..and pretty much anyone in our field of research would assume that he and I are connected somehow, given that we're at the same university, and how much our research interests align. So, as I've discovered from this conference incident, I need to come up with a response for if/when people ask me if I know him/work with him/why am I not working with him. Personally, I'd love to just answer truthfully and throw him under the bus since that's what he's done to me several times over these last few months, but I know doing so will hurt me more than it'll hurt him. Any suggestions on how to handle those types of questions?
EDIT:
First, thank you so much to everyone for taking the time to respond. I really appreciate everyone's feedback and different opinions. You've definitely given me a lot to think about. From reading the responses, I think I can clarify a few items if you think it'll alter your suggestions:
1. "crossed a professional line" - admittedly, I intentionally used that vague term because it's very complicated, and also because he crossed that line in a few ways. One is of a sexual harassment nature, but I was reluctant to use that term because it happened in a very subtle and covert manner - so much that the Title IX (gender equality) office at my university said that technically his behavior (both initial line crossing and his reaction to me standing up to him) - however unprofessional it was - did not rise to the level of sexual harassment. But as I said, he was unprofessional towards me in other non-sexual ways as well. Ultimately, for the scope of my question, I don't think it matters much, because regardless of what he did to me initially, regardless of whether or not I had any right to be offended, and regardless of which specific incident he took issue with when I confronted him, nothing justifies how he subsequently treated me/how he handled his anger, which was essentially bullying me and then later gaslighting me and becoming verbally abusive/hostile when I tried to address the bullying.
2. HR investigation: the investigation is ongoing; I filed my official complaint about a month ago, so hopefully I'll hear back soon re: next steps/resolution.
3. I'm an American student in the U.S.
4. The extent to which others know: a few of the the graduate students/TAs/my friends do know about everything that's happened. Some of the faculty do as well (including my other two committee members, one of whom is my new advisor; the other was also willing to take over as advisor) Outside my department: HR, Title IX office, the graduate ombudsperson, assistant dean of the college of arts & sciences, university police (Dr. - didn't do anything criminal...it was just a formality that HR had to observe when I filed my complaint) so his behavior has definitely been publicized a bit, but in a very hushed/behind closed doors sort of way.<issue_comment>username_1: This answer is **focused on keeping the OP well** and **advancing their career**.
**I fully support the right of OP to warn others about the professor**, but it need not be done every time his name comes up in conversation. **Having to warn all askers is a huge and unfair burden**, and the topic of OP's grad study is [awesome topic that fits with the conference], not [setting the record straight about Dr. --]. Further, sometimes hearing or talking about a person can trigger PTSD (possibly part of the "deer in the headlights" moment--fight, flight, or freeze), and certainly telling her experience in any detail, in a convincing way is even more liable to bring up those memories.
Even in the comments on this SE question, people asked questions to try to get at the nature of "crossing a line," offering that maybe the OP misunderstood, that it would help to know what kind of line was crossed. As <NAME> commented, "in every instance I have known, people have favored the perpetrator (at least initially)." People are often skeptical and don't want to believe people who have gained their (professional) respect can do awful things.
OP should not have to spend valuable time at a conference rehashing Prof. X's misdeeds, convincing skeptical strangers who started with idle curiosity, and being remembered as "that student bitter about Dr. --" rather than "the grad student who's pursuing [awesome topic]."
---
A friend leaving an abusive advisor was told by someone in charge of her department that students are admitted on the basis of many opinions, and during the admissions process other professors acknowledge that this is someone they think would add to the department. This may not be universal, but your identity as a student is linked to the department/university, not just your former advisor. Further, your research interests have a (potential) audience and community of scholars much broader than Dr. --.
The main advice for the conference: focus on the positive! For the most part, you are dealing with strangers who are rarely going to interact with Dr. --.
* With or without a new advisor, you could say:
>
> I've worked with him, but it seems that our university has a [growing | large | passionate] group of scholars interested in [awesome topic].
>
>
>
* If you have a new advisor, you can answer with:
>
> I'm really excited to be working with Dr. Y.
>
>
> I chose to work with Dr. Y, who [brings expertise on velociraptors | has a high energy kitten lab | is a great collaborator].
>
>
>
* What you choose to praise about your new advisor may be an implicit critique of your old advisor. Calibrate what you say for how much you want to throw shade on your former advisor.
* **For a fellow grad student** (e.g. who might apply to work as his postdoc or otherwise work with him in a junior position), **it may be appropriate to sound a bit of a warning**; **for someone who already knows you and you trust**, you can similarly also let on some misgivings.
* If you're talking to an established professor you do not know, try not to waste time talking about your old advisor and the past, but instead talk about what you're excited about.
+ Talking to senior scholars is a key opportunity at conferences!
+ Only if you know the person is likely to be sympathetic (e.g., just gave a speech about rooting out bad behavior in the discipline), you might choose to reveal something to them.
+ Someone established is more likely to already know and somewhat trust Dr. --, knowing him in a context that had a very different power differential, and you would be much more likely to get disbelief and/or be seen as unprofessional for airing dirty laundry.
**If a stranger--someone you don't trust yet--asks about what happened**, you can jokingly defer. Or even if there's someone who you trust but **you do not feel like going through the torture of talking about it**, you can still change the subject. Some possible ways of saying this are:
>
> How much time do you have? Really, though, I'd love to hear more about what you're working on.
>
>
> I value qualities in an advisor beyond a great research reputation. But I don't want to spend all my time at this conference talking about him, when I really want to talk about that amazing keynote.
>
>
> Get in touch if you're thinking of applying; I'd be happy to talk more about the research environment in my department. But for now, I wanted to ask you about X...
>
>
>
The way you defer does not have to be joking. To prevent unwanted follow-ups, though, you should try not to have an air of mystery about it. You could try being extremely dull about the answer.
>
> Oh, the story's more about paperwork than about [field of study].
>
>
>
<NAME> suggests in the comments another approach, that is candid but limited:
>
> Unprofessional behavior happened and HR is looking into it.
>
>
>
He's right that this approach is "honest, makes it clear that nothing is set in stone ('looking into it', rather than 'he was fired'), and gives some idea as to what happened, without requiring OP to go into possibly painful detail." However, even when asked point-blank, there is no duty to answer personal questions. One could also just say:
>
> I'd rather not go into that.
>
>
>
Comments are suggesting that this answer is artificially happy and papers over the problem. **I was wrong to say in the original version that you should fake excitement**, but if you can feel excitement about the conference, then hold onto that and [don't let the bastards get you down!](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegitimi_non_carborundum) There are a range of legitimate options, and you will know what feels like the right direction in the situation.
Few other answers really acknowledge the **stressful reality of your situation and PTSD**. **Extrapolating from my own related experience**, I imagine that even being at the conference--perhaps hearing citations of Dr. --'s work or remembering how he explained a concept someone's talking about--may feel like a minefield. It is so easy for thoughts to return to a trauma and force you into those same feelings, especially if you are having to talk about anything remotely related. It can also lead to worry that the road ahead on your career is still under Dr. --'s control, leading to panic or despair or anger. And in my case, having had the emotions brought up once made it more likely that panic or tears would return later in the same day. Especially when the cost of disclosing something to a stranger is spending most of the conference holding back sobs and periodically leaving to cry in the bathroom, it is clear that you are not morally obliged to take on that burden.
(In my case, therapy has helped a lot, as has learning how to reclaim my identity in that realm, separate from traumatic incidents. You have plenty of time ahead to share your truth on your terms. In my own case (with different details), I have discreetly warned many people one-on-one and encouraged policy changes that make it unlikely for similar things to happen again.)
Good luck! Especially with the PTSD, I hope you can get some counseling resources to help. The power dynamics and uncertainty that grad students face makes a lot of problems especially stressful, and it can even be common to doubt oneself when lots of people are questioning you. **You are not morally obligated to disclose this beyond the formal avenues you are already pursuing,** and you have a scholarly identity and future that's not just tied to Dr. --.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: First, let me say that I'm sorry to hear that your relationship with your original advisor has deteriorated to such a state that you have been emotionally scarred by the relationship. That is certainly not the desired outcome.
That said, you have a very important cautionary story to tell. Unlike cactus\_pardner's answer, I don't think you should "jokingly defer," but instead take a very serious tone about the situation:
>
> I wish I could be more positive about my relationship with Prof. X.
>
>
> If you are serious about working with Prof. X, then there are some things that you should be aware of.
>
>
> This may not happen to you, but I had some significant issues during my time working in that lab.
>
>
>
You can then offer to talk with the asker in more detail, if she so wishes, and leave the choice up to the asker. But do not blow off the discussion. Hiding the situation will just allow it to continue unchecked, which is exactly what you do not want to see happen in the long run.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I have not experienced anything similar to what you experienced, but I imagine that if I was in your situation, I would mention that you and Dr. --- are not on good terms with each other but I would refrain from mentioning what exactly it was about. I don't think it would be polite (or professional) to mention to someone who is not close to you information that hurts the reputation of someone else (even if the information is correct).
---
*Grad student*: "Oh, you're affiliated with [university] and you specialize in [specialty]. You probably know Dr. --- !"
*You*: Yes, I know Dr. ---.
*Grad student*: So how is it working with Dr. --- ?
*You*: We are not on good terms with each other and I'd rather not talk about it.
*Grad student*: Why? What happened?
*You*: I think it would be best if you get that information from someone other than me or Dr. ---.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You observed, "I know [that throwing him under the bus] will hurt me more than it'll hurt him."
There is no reason to keep the truth from people you have a trusting relationship with. However, with someone you are meeting for the first time, it's probably better to protect yourself. It is possible to draw an emotional curtain during that part of the conversation, and then open it up again when you and the person are ready to move on to another topic. Here's one possible way that might play out. I'll call the student from another university "S."
*S*: Oh, you work in (name of subfield)! Do you work with Prof. X?
*You*: No. I work with Prof. Y.
*S*: Oh. I thought Prof. X was the only person working in (name of subfield) at your university.
*You*: How did you like the keynote presentation this morning?
---
Comment: if you are in the US, and if I understood correctly that your ex-advisor engaged in sexual harassment and then retaliation after you reported him to HR, then I would strongly encourage you to [file a complaint](https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/howto.html) with the US Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. If you decide to do this, don't forget to describe any wrongdoing on the part of other members of the department, and please note that there's a time limit -- complaints must typically be filed within 180 days.
---
**Edit 4/8:** In your update, you said, "It happened in a very subtle and covert manner - so much that the title IX office said that technically his behavior (both initial line crossing and his reaction to me standing up to him) - however unprofessional it was - did not rise to the level of sexual harassment."
What your Title IX office may be overlooking in their assessment is the professor's subsequent retaliatory behavior. OCR takes retaliation very seriously.
Please keep in mind that the reason Title IX offices have sprouted up all over the country recently is that colleges and universities were pushed *by OCR* to create effective internal structures and protocols for dealing with sexual harassment complaints. Some institutions have really *gotten* it and their Title IX officers are doing an excellent job; some, on the other hand, mainly function as a means of keeping a lid on any problems that may exist.
I haven't seen the evidence in your case, and I'm not a lawyer or an expert in this area. But I do know two things, from personal experience filing an OCR complaint about disability discrimination (on behalf of my son who has Tourette Syndrome): that filing a complaint with OCR can be an effective way of protecting oneself from further retaliatory actions; and that the process is such that an ordinary person without legal training such as you or I can file meaningful OCR complaints.
Regarding this sentence: "I get panic attacks/have some sort of PTSD whenever I have run-ins with him." "Run-in" might mean you have some unpleasant verbal encounters with him, or it might mean you pass him in the hall. Or something intermediate between those two. Regardless of exactly what you meant, I have a suggestion regarding these run-ins. Did you know that you can request an Order of Protection? I've seen this to protect a secondary school student who had received death threats from specific fellow students. The perpetrators' class schedules were changed so they were no longer in any of the victim's classes; but also, the perpetrators were not allowed to traverse certain hallways at certain times in the school day so that they would not cross paths with the victim. An on the most basic level, the Order of Protection prevents the perpetrator from speaking to the victim.
I'm suggesting this because after trauma, one needs time to heal.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Edit: The below answer is for general conflicts. However, since the poster used the phrase "crossed a professional line with me" its possible that the OP is referring to a case of sexual harassment/abuse rather than general academic bullying. That colloquial phrase is used in different countries differently, so it's impossible to know for certain that the OP is suggesting that the former advisor sexually harassed them without getting clarification. If the OP is talking about sexual harassment, it's very sad that reporting it to HR didn't result in a better outcome. I'd second username_4's comment to file a complaint with the US Department of Education - also known as a "[title IX complaint](https://nwlc.org/resources/how-to-file-a-title-ix-sexual-harassment-or-assault-complaint-with-the-u-s-department-of-education/). I'm leaving my below answer up in case it helps others who are dealing with more minor advisor/student conflicts rather than sexual harassment."
---
During the conversation, focus on (1) your research, (2) your current collaborations, and (3) the the person you are speaking to's research. Of course, also let the student know that you are happy to tell them about your personal experience working with the various labs in your university if they are considering a working there.
The reason why you may not want to flag your negative experience with your old advisor at conferences is that going to conferences should be about networking and improving one another's research and careers. There are several scientific studies that show that when you say something negative about someone it reflects badly on both them and you. So from the perspective of one's own career, its best to stay positive when meeting other scientists for the first time. Something you could say is as follows.
"I work with *Dr New*. Its an exciting collaboration because ... I've worked with *Dr Old* a bit in the past, and its nice having related research going on next door. If you do end up wanting to work with *Dr New* or *Dr Old* in the future, let me know and I can provide information on the culture of the various labs. Here's my contact info. [while exchanging info] Now that was a really interesting question you asked during the last session, what did you think about the speaker's answer?."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I am very sorry to hear about your situation - that sounds very painful and I wish you the best in healing from it.
>
> Personally, I'd love to just answer truthfully and throw him under the bus since that's what he's done to me several times over these last few months, but I know doing so will hurt me more than it'll hurt him.
>
>
>
Probably the biggest argument for answering truthfully isn't payback (no matter how richly deserved) but protecting your peers from the same experience you had. Against that, as you've identified, there is a risk of retaliation if he hears that you're doing this.
By reporting him you've already taken action to deal with this [missing stair](http://pervocracy.blogspot.co.nz/2012/06/missing-stair.html). This may discourage him from repeating the harassment and/or improve the outcome for the next student to report, if it comes to that.
I've been in a similar situation (not sexual harassment, but bullying and professional retaliation from an academic superior) and I understand that it's exhausting. Nobody here can tell you whether you ought to do more than you already have done.
With that said...
>
> After effects: we're not speaking to each other, avoid each other as much as possible, I get panic attacks/have some sort of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) whenever I have run-ins with him, and I've slowly become isolated from the rest of my department because he practically runs it and no student or faculty member wants/dares to step on his toes).
>
>
>
To be honest, it sounds as if this bridge is well and truly burned. You've formally reported him to his professional colleagues. This is a much more threatening step than informally warning off a potential student. At this point I expect the only thing restraining his behaviour is fear of professional consequences if he gets too blatant about it.
To be blunt, whatever you might have stood to lose in your relationship with him by warning off another student, you've already lost it.
What you *do* need to consider is the risk of giving him ammunition. If you make specific accusations against him, and he or colleagues find out about it, there's a chance that this could be used against you. You are probably best keeping it to things that are incontrovertible fact.
Other answers here have suggested deflecting the question. I'm not a fan of this; some people may notice the deflection and read between the lines, but not everybody catches that kind of subtlety.
You might consider something along the following lines:
***"Yes, he was my advisor for a couple of years. I'm afraid we don't have a good relationship and I ended up making a formal complaint against him, so I'd prefer not to discuss the details."***
You're not making any accusations there, so it'd be hard for him or anybody else to take this as an attempt at escalation. At the same time, it lets her know to keep her eyes open for trouble. In the event that she doesn't take the warning and he harasses her, it also lets her know that there is already a formal complaint on record against this guy, which may help then.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_7: The following may be hard to set up (it really depends on the situation), but would make your life a lot easier:
Ask a colleague that also knows the advisor and who knows the story if it is okay to just send any questioners to him/her.
Then, whenever someone asks about the advisor, just refer them to your friend.
He/she will probably have a lot easier time telling the story and can leave your name out of the story.
Never underestimate how likely people want to help others. I would be very surprised if someone would decline helping out.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: It depends a lot on whether you talk to someone within your organization, outside your organization, and whether you still work there.
A general rule of thumb outside of academia, which worked for me in academia as well, would be:
>
> "There were challenges, but I don't discuss my previous employers and
> colleagues".
>
>
>
It may seem like a very business-like attitude, especially talking to someone who is very friendly to you, but everyone who changed employers at least once will understand and respect it and every employer will think you are golden.
There is hardly anyone who hadn't had bad experience with previous employers, ranging from minor things to straight up criminal events. But there is also hardly anyone who wasn't misunderstood, misguided, unfairly judged, treated, or discriminated. If you give someone a story, they will put themselves in your shoes and in the shoes of the opposite side and arrive at a conclusion which may or may not be in your favor. Unless you feel like you really owe something to someone, just give a standard formal response and drop it.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/08
| 1,497
| 6,487
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a third year undergraduate at a good university studying computer science. I am planning to apply to top graduate schools when I finish my undergrad and I need a bit of advice.
In the first two and half (5 semesters) of my studies, I took the most challenging CS/Math courses in my university and did very well in them (GPA 4.11/4.30). I also joined two research groups and have 2 publications where I am the first author, published in reputable journals. I also have a very good relationship with my 2 research advisors.
Now in my sixth semester, I decided to go on an exchange semester and things just started crumbling. First of all, I couldn't integrate well in the culture and I was left very lonely with no new friends in the area. My Girlfriend of 5 years broke up with me, my mother got into a car accident which affected her health, and I started taking depression medication due to that. I also gained a lot of weight which lead to some health problems. Needless to say, this term is coming to an end and I can't wait to leave this place. I am going to probably fail 2/4 courses, and in the remaining ones, I will barely pass. I am expecting a 2.0 GPA at best.
Now I know this won't go unnoticed by graduate school admissions. **I am just wondering what steps can I take as of now to document all of this so that I can justify the poor performance in the exchange semester during my graduate application?**<issue_comment>username_1: **Your transcript should be all you need.** Presumably, your transcript shows that you studied at a foreign university, and that things did not go well. If you are back to 100% next semester, it will be pretty obvious that the problems were related to studying abroad. You may then want to write something in your statement of purpose when you apply to assure them that attending grad school won't cause problems similar to what happened when you were studying abroad. This should be an easy sell, especially if the exchange program was in a very far away country and the grad program is in your home country/region.
At any rate, graduate school admissions people certainly do not want to see documentation about your health or personal relationships. They just need a believable reason for why that one semester doesn't indicate you are unfit for grad school, and the transcript showing you studied abroad far away and had some problems should address that. The only place you may run into problems is if your application is automatically filtered out before it reaches the committee -- but no way to avoid that.
**The question posed in the title is a bit more challenging**. You are able to attribute your difficulties to having studied abroad. For students who suffer mental health challenges at their home universities, graduate school admission is more challenging. Even in this case, however, I do not think they are interested in seeing medical or other documentation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Having experienced health/family/personal problems of any kind doesn't give one a magical get-out-of-jail-free card when it comes to grad school applications, so in this sense, documentation is irrelevant.
The area where documentation can be helpful is when one is trying to get reasonable accommodations due to a health condition that affects one's studies (in the UK I think the term is reasonable adjustments). If you are about to leave your current geographical area, and you have consulted a medical or mental health professional where you are now, you might want to sign a release so that those recent records can be transferred to your primary provider, who would be the ideal person to hold a repository of all your records.
*(Side note, some SSRIs have less side-effect weight gain than others, so you might want to talk with your doctor about possibly switching your SSRI to one with a lower side-effect profile.)*
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm sorry to hear about the difficulties you experienced while you studied abroad. You're right- grad programs will notice this, so I think it's important to acknowledge it, but find a way to put a positive spin on it/use it as a way to showcase your other strengths as an applicant. I don't think providing documentation of any sort will come into play though.
Assuming you have personal statements to submit, I would find a relevant way to include that you studied abroad because (insert a good reason here), but that you struggled during your time there for a number of reasons, including not integrating well with the culture. Then, turn it into a positive by saying what you took from the experience (maybe that you just discovered something new about yourself, you learned a new language, interesting coursework, etc), and talk about how you've bounced back (you're doing your best to improve your final grades, you now have a much clearer idea of what you want/need from an academic program, what you need to do excel, etc...)
The trick (and difficult part) is to do this in just a few sentences, and then quickly move on so it's not the focus of your personal statement.
Ultimately, I think the message you need to get across to them is "I know I took a stumble, but look how I came out much stronger and better prepared for your graduate program!"
One last thing I'd add: if any of your references writing your recommendation letters are privy to what you've gone through, you could always discuss your concerns with them. Now, you can't specify to them what to write in their letters since they're confidential, but in sharing your concerns with maybe just one of them, they might take it upon themselves to corroborate what you say in your personal statement by commenting on how you're an excellent student who - yes, took a stumble - but is still a great investment because of (insert strengths here). Of course, I would only discuss your concerns with your professor if he/she is someone you trust/are comfortable with.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Just suck it up. Talking about depression will make it worse...not only did you underperform, but you make excuses.
This is not a troll. I have underperformed on all kinds of things in my life. But once you are an adult nobody wants to hear about your excuses. Get it done or don't get it done. But just deal with it when you don't. Life goes on and there are a million second chances. But don't ask for special forgiveness.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/04/08
| 1,001
| 4,515
|
<issue_start>username_0: Associate Prof. X is committed to reproducible research and makes his code available. He authors a paper with Dr. Y and others.
Dr. Y is the first author of the paper and the code is shared on Ass. Prof. X's website. It is clearly stated in the paper that the code produces the graphs in the paper.
I downloaded the code, ran the code and found it works well i.e produces the same graphs in the paper. However, the code was not descriptive and easy to understand (Apparently, the variables which makes it easy to read has been changed to something difficult to understand except with much effort and time). Anyway, I studied the code and was able to clearly understand the meanings of various parts of the code. I gave the variables their proper definitions while generating the same graphs
Now, I find the graphs for some figures are not provided, then mailed Ass Prof. X, who after a while informed me that first author Dr. Y will send the code. The code was sent and I was able to understand this paper.
Currently, I am about making an extension to this work. However, I observe there are some errors in several equations in the paper which adversely affects the behavior of some graphs! Furthermore, on a deeper investigation into the paper, some inferences and propositions were made based on some of the mistakes within the paper! At a time I tried contacting Dr. Y about something I wanted to know better about the paper but I didn't get a response.
The challenge I have now is, I want to present my own paper and as well make corrections to these mistakes since it directly extends this work. How do I handle this? Do I say for example: "We corrected equation (y) in [ref] and thus, the graphs behave like this?". Also, I am thinking that since I got the code for some of the graphs (via email), I should thank the authors for sharing the code (for those graphs). However, I am not sure this is appropriate as the public gets to know implicitly that the code for some of the graphs are not provided in the paper.
Note that, I appreciate and consider it as an obligation to be straightforward in my research!<issue_comment>username_1: I would think several times before using the word 'corrected', especially if I don't fully understand the code, as it seems from your question ("...I studied the code and was able to decipher the meanings of various parts of the code."). Understanding various parts is different from understanding it entirely, the latter being a prerequisite to improving upon it or correcting it.
However, if you are sure that mistakes exist in the code, you have two options:
(a) Point out those mistakes and share them with X and Y before trying to publish it. Once you publish, the credibility of their code goes down - if some parts are wrong others could be too. Therefore it is only fair that you convey the errors to them first. You aren't obligated to, but I think it's the right thing to do.
(b) If you're significantly extending the code, write your own- it could be based on their code, and you can acknowledge that, but by writing your own code you take full responsibility for it, and are not propogating any errors inherent to the original code. In terms of quantum of work, I think this is more significant, and gives you more room to develop it for your particular purpose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Firstly, yes, you should definitely thank them for providing their code, and making their research reproducible. This is extremely valuable, and it is precisely the ability to spot and correct errors in research that makes this a good practice. If it were me, I would be quite profuse in my thanks for this, and make sure that any criticisms of errors are contextualised by the excellent work done in preserving their data and code.
The other thing you should be careful of is to make *absolutely sure* you're right about the errors. I would suggest that prior to submission of your article you first contact the authors of the other work and show them the errors you have found in their work. This will give you feedback to confirm/deny the error. (You might even find it is something simple like they sent you the wrong version of the code.) Most authors are quite reasonable in responding to things like this, and I'm sure they will want to check their work to see if there are errors. If you find them responsive to your concerns, you might even consider suggesting these authors as referees for your paper.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/08
| 630
| 2,832
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm about to graduate with my BS and I'm trying to decide whether it's worth it to submit a paper for publication in an undergraduate journal, given that I've already applied to and picked a PhD program and I start on the fall.
What sorts of papers, presentations, and awards that I received as an undergrad are still worth mentioning on a CV even after I graduate? Do my accomplishments restart like they did after graduating high school?<issue_comment>username_1: I would think several times before using the word 'corrected', especially if I don't fully understand the code, as it seems from your question ("...I studied the code and was able to decipher the meanings of various parts of the code."). Understanding various parts is different from understanding it entirely, the latter being a prerequisite to improving upon it or correcting it.
However, if you are sure that mistakes exist in the code, you have two options:
(a) Point out those mistakes and share them with X and Y before trying to publish it. Once you publish, the credibility of their code goes down - if some parts are wrong others could be too. Therefore it is only fair that you convey the errors to them first. You aren't obligated to, but I think it's the right thing to do.
(b) If you're significantly extending the code, write your own- it could be based on their code, and you can acknowledge that, but by writing your own code you take full responsibility for it, and are not propogating any errors inherent to the original code. In terms of quantum of work, I think this is more significant, and gives you more room to develop it for your particular purpose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Firstly, yes, you should definitely thank them for providing their code, and making their research reproducible. This is extremely valuable, and it is precisely the ability to spot and correct errors in research that makes this a good practice. If it were me, I would be quite profuse in my thanks for this, and make sure that any criticisms of errors are contextualised by the excellent work done in preserving their data and code.
The other thing you should be careful of is to make *absolutely sure* you're right about the errors. I would suggest that prior to submission of your article you first contact the authors of the other work and show them the errors you have found in their work. This will give you feedback to confirm/deny the error. (You might even find it is something simple like they sent you the wrong version of the code.) Most authors are quite reasonable in responding to things like this, and I'm sure they will want to check their work to see if there are errors. If you find them responsive to your concerns, you might even consider suggesting these authors as referees for your paper.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/08
| 3,288
| 13,689
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in computer science (theory). I am worried about my productivity. I try to do as much as possible. I used to take four courses per semester during my first two years of studying. Now I have started doing research. In the last 4 months, I have only read 2-3 proofs and one research paper. It took 2-3 weeks to go over each mathematical proof.
**Question:** How do I know I have done enough work in one semester? I mean is there any parameter to measure the work that I have done in the last semester? I have heard some students read only one research paper per one semester.
I can get feedback from my research supervisor, but the problem is he might say I did enough work just to keep my motivation high.<issue_comment>username_1: Everyone works at their own pace; moreover, the pace can fluctuate a lot depending on the time of year, your personal life, and "position of stars in the sky". Even though the semester seems like a decent amount of time to average out those fluctuations, I don't think it is.
I would try to use the following criteria to estimate the term success:
* feedback from your advisor
* how did the term go compared to the original plan (yep, here I assume that you make the plans for your term/month/week and correct them accordingly. Hopefully, some milestones are discussed with the advisor as well)
* feedback from your committee (in some universities, Ph.D. students meet with their committee regularly or send them the progress report to hear their feedback)
I would certainly not recommend comparing your progress with other students because they are different, they have different goals, and you don't have complete information about their progress either. It is very easy to get discouraged for no reason.
To sum it up, I would stress the importance of initial planning and correcting the plans throughout the term. Then, you will have a very good measure of your success. You will end up with a different question of "how to plan", but that is a totally different problem.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One way is to compare with other students, collect the set of students that have: 1) recently completed their PhD, 2) in your field, and 3) in yours or a similar department (at least within the same country). Take a few median PhDs in terms of output as your example and see how many papers they are publishing per year and at what venues. That will tell you what you have to aim for. For the shorter-term objectives (reading papers, proving theorems), you will get a better understanding after your first publication.
There are some shortcomings of this approach. Fields such as mathematics where only two papers published is the norm for a PhD (or fewer!) makes it hard to gauge how much work you need to do to move forward until it is potentially too late. But, apart from that I do think you should compare with others. It's a competition if you want to continue in academia, and even if not, your PhD will be obtained by meeting the expected standard.
Apart from this attempt at quantification, much of progress is qualitative and so you will have to talk to your adviser in terms of quality of work, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Worrying about whether you've been productive enough is not going to make you more productive.
I suggest that you diversify your goals for yourself. You mentioned two prongs to your work: reading papers, and writing proofs. See if you can find some additional prongs to add to your definition of "being productive." Here are a few ideas to get you started:
* Get to know the publications in your area, and figure out what parts of each are of most interest to you.
* Regularly browse the most recent issues of those publications. Gradually get better at skimming articles to get a general idea what they're about.
* Develop a system for cataloguing your notes about your journal reading.
* Attend department seminars. Try to gradually increase your level of understanding of these talks. When you feel ready, start to ask questions, either during the Q&A part at the end, or afterwards, more informally.
* Form a study group with some fellow students.
* Attend some thesis defenses.
* Attend a conference.
* Start figuring out what you think makes a good talk.
* Start working on your writing and powerpoint skills.
I don't mean that you should necessarily try to do *all* of the above, and of course, the papers and the proofs do need to continue being in center stage. But a bit of diversification may help you worry less and produce more.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: **Quality is more important than quantity in research.**
One solid proof that proves an important result likely matters far more than a bunch of smaller, less significant proofs. Similarly, one big research advance that shows long-term promise will matter more than a bunch of small experiments that don't open any new doors research-wise.
Also remember that most research does not succeed at first! I tell my students when they're getting started that research will likely be a bunch of failures punctuated by the occasional success. This is not to discourage them, but rather to get them to realize that the process is slow and winding. At this early stage, I want to get them familiar with the tools they need and the skills they must develop, rather than focusing on early breakthroughs.
So don't try to plan your research *too* closely—you should have some goalposts and markers in mind so that you're not a perpetual grad student, but you don't need to micromanage your work down to the day or week (other than keeping track of external deadlines). Focus on doing the best work you can, and talk to your advisor about your progress.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: The concept of "doing enough work" has to be measured against some standard. Are you aiming to win the Turing Prize? Then you probably aren't doing enough work. Are you doing enough for your advisor to say that you are? Then by your own words you are.
So realistically, you have to determine at what standard to compare yourself to. There are two broad categories in which to measure: how much you need to do to advance professionally at some level (e.g. obtain a post-doc, get an assistant professorship, etc.), and how much you need to do in order to satisfy your self-esteem.
The first is primarily concerned with the materiality of living. Find a job with health benefits and be able to pay a mortgage. Whether or not you are focused on a tenure track job, you should really have a backup plan semi-worked out for if you leave academia. This can take some pressure off. For a job in academia, get an idea of what recent PhDs did to graduate and linearly interpolate for where you are at.
The second is trickier. Steeped in academia is the currency of prestige and recognition. One of its appeals is to be a revered expert in your field. Trading complements like "brilliant" or "genius" are something peculiar to academia. I would suggest you evaluate how important recognition is to you and how much of your anxiety on the amount of work you do is tied to envy of the success of others.
Again, to emphasize, both of these are value judgments that only you can make. Personally, I found I was too taken in by the prestige culture in academia which contributed to my health issues that required me to leave.
Finally, and this is something I cannot contribute to that much, is the question of efficiency. If you could be doing more work without changing much more than your approach, then in that sense you aren't doing enough. I.e., if you spend too much time on irrelevant details.
Most of the answers here have addressed this last issue. As such, my interest was primarily in calling to your attention my first two points.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I'll take an unloved twist to this. I should warn you that the milage varies hugely, so instead of taking the numbers for granted, look at people *in your area of research* that you would assess as good and look at their output. You should aim at seasoned PhD candidates or early postdocs.
The number of papers per year
=============================
In my PhD area it was "good" (but not extremely, insanely, genius-level wonderful) to publish two papers in a year. This number, as I already warned, may vary. In life sciences in might be like one big paper in three years. Tenured professors can manage 10 in a year.
Not only the field, but also the experience, basically how long you are in the academia, is important. It is Ok to get, say, only one paper in the first PhD year. You should get more then one in your final PhD year, though. And, for the last time, your milage may vary, depending on your "tenure" and field.
Most importantly, if you have such a goal from carefully observing your surroundings, and you keep missing it, there is something wrong. Say, if your goal is two papers in a year, and you have none in total by the end of your second PhD year (of three years total, isn't it?), you might be in trouble.
---
I did not manage to see the answer by <NAME> before I posted mine. This is basically the same idea as his.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: My take:
Try to get papers done, get LPUs, etc. People will tell you it doesn't matter, but it does. Some people will say that the only thing that matters is some huge discovery but this is a very high risk/reward calculation. And it makes more sense for professors than for students. There are even professors who knowingly burn multiple students on very risky problems since they have tenure and going after the big prize makes more sense for them. Not in any way saying this is common or is your case...but you always need to watch out for yourself. It won't HURT anyone if you just churn out some mediocre product, especially at the beginning. It's better than getting skunked or spinning wheels.
I would also say that it is much better psychologically to be getting some sort of measurable accomplishment. Ph.D. can be pretty long and discouraging. Create ways to get some intermediate accomplishments. You also learn something about writing papers and doing research.
I have even used it as motivation when I was sick of something in the lab. Only had about 80% of the experiments done...so I just wrote the whole thing up as a paper (even including conclusions of what I expected to see). Once I had done all that, it was very motivational to just get the last 20% of the data done. I think I even had to change some of the conclusions, but so what. It was easy. That's what word processing is good for...easier revisions than back in the days of typewriters.
In case this sounds sleazy...it's really not. There is a good section in <NAME>'s Dover book (look it up) where he talks about the importance of writing up research. Or maybe it is Katzoff Clarity in Technical Reporting (look that up also...and read it...and do it). In any case, the basic point is that most research is government funded. And if you don't write it up, you are not just screwing yourself, you are hurting others (and the whole enterprise of getting more science done faster) because others have to do your work instead. This is even the case where funding is cut and only partial reports done...yes, you should try to aim for perfect work...but if you have to cut a project, write up WHAT YOU HAVE. There is always a journal for everything...and you would be surprised how WELL stuff gets accepted if you are just honest about things versus trying to act all cool or to gloss over gaps.
Now, some of this will vary from field to field. I did solid state chemistry (shake and bake). Which is like a dirty little secret for how easy it is to do the experiments AND to produce at least mediocre publications. But in any field, including SSC, there are ways to do LPUs and to publish a lot. And I find it will even motivate your work (even in theory) to push for pubs.
So...I totally feel ya on the loneliness and the miserableness of it. It really is not a great system of apprenticeship. All that said, you are the captain of your fate and if you push, you can get good things. There is a lot of freedom there too.
Good luck.
Get some publications!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> Question: How do I know I have done enough work in one semester? I
> mean is there any parameter to measure the work that I have done in
> the last semester? I have heard some students read only one research
> paper per one semester.
>
>
>
First, if you need to know something, you have to read papers until you find the information. Consequently, the amount fluctuates.
Second, the amount of papers you read for fun or interest, might be not relevant for your work or subject. This is why, it has no influence on your performance.
Third, the comparison with your co-mates has no influence on your own work.
Fourth, it is impossible to compare real productivity. Productivity, is dependent on so many variables which you can not access, because you are not the other person. Maybe (but unlikely) it looks like someone is not productive for ten years and then he suddenly makes a big publication and wins a prize.
Fifth, thinking about this question, lowers your work related productivity.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: You are doing this backwards. Instead of worrying about whether you are doing enough in a semester, manage your degree like a project. Set dates on long term goals, then put dates on intermediate goals. This is the only way to tell if you're falling behind
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/09
| 795
| 3,462
|
<issue_start>username_0: A master's program that I want to apply to is asking for two letters of recommendation. I can get one of them, because I am very close with a professor that I'm doing a research project for, and I'm doing a good job in it.
But the second letter might be a problem. Basically, I have other professors and instructors to choose from, but none of them know me as well as the professor mentioned above. In their classes, I did well, but I wasn't top of the class.
There is one lab instructor that I had, and I always did very well in his lab (I'm good with hands-on work), but I don't know if he remembers me. He would always give me a bunch of extra credit for the lab reports.
Another professor I was thinking of asking is a statistics professor. I'm thinking he might be willing because at the beginning of his class, I was struggling, and failed the first midterm, but I studied and improved greatly in the end. I finished that class with a 3.5.
So my question is, how can you ask for a recommendation letter from a professor that doesn't know you all that well? I've seen others do it, but it always seems like they are the students who either did very well in their classes, or who have a much closer relationship with the professor.
Also, I'm on a time limit, as the masters application is due in about one month.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: I think you have a couple of good options for the second recommendation letter:
1. Ask the statistics professor to write the recommendation letter. Struggling in the beginning, but overcoming the difficulties can be a good point in his recommendation letter if he perceived that situation the same way. If you ask him over the e-mail, please, give him enough information to connect yourself with a student he had. You don't want to write his recommendation letter, but want to give/remind him of certain facts (term, grade, progress, course contents, what you learned). Meeting in person will be probably even better, but be prepared to introduce yourself with some story and keep a piece of paper with the factual information you wish he uses in the recommendation letter. The professor will either decline (if he doesn't feel comfortable) or will become one of your references.
2. Ask the lab instructor. And follow the same procedure. The recommendation letter from him might feature your hands-on skills and ability to analyze the experiments, which is also valuable.
3. Find somebody outside of academic circles. It would be nice if you worked and volunteered somewhere and your manager is able to recommend you based on some other set of skills.
Again, none of those are ideal references, but usually, for a Master's program, people don't have reference letters that are from perfect sources. And your potential ones are certainly not bad at all. Especially, if they decide to write a good recommendation letter.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First, ask him/her if they feel confident they can write a positive letter. If they can’t, it’s usually apparent.
Next, consider how *you* would write a letter for someone you have a positive impression of but don’t know that well. You’d want some help. To do that, create a ‘packet’ of objective evidence - some papers you’ve written, synopsis of projects, a statement of accomplishments, and career goals. The willing writer will draw from that in constructing your letter.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/09
| 5,443
| 22,989
|
<issue_start>username_0: This year I prepare a new course (in programming, but it could be any other course). I spend a lot of effort in creating homework exercises. This is fun, but also very time-consuming.
I wonder if I can use the same exercises next year, when I teach this course again. The main problem is that, once the solutions are out, surely some students next year will be able to get them and copy them. It may be possible to use some automatic plagiarism detection tools, but it is quite difficult and not very reliable.
I believe the copiers will not gain much from copying, since the homework grade is only 20% of the final grade. On the contrary, they will lose since they will be less prepared for the exam, which is 80% of the final grade. My fear is that the temptation to copy will harm these students. So maybe I should create new exercises to avoid the temptation to copy.
On the other hand, the students are grown-ups, if they choose to copy, it is their problem and they should bear the consequences of not knowing the material well enough. Should I work so hard each year, only to protect the copiers from their own faults?<issue_comment>username_1: I always try to prepare a new set of homework questions -- regardless of the percentage.
As you have mentioned, there will always be a subset of students who will copy their way out, no matter how original your questions are. But there are also students who do not copy, and put their effort to solve the questions. They take the course seriously, they do not try to reach the ones from previous years.
So, I feel like should respect them and bring out a set of new questions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I believe it is worth your effort to create different (or even just slightly different) sets of assignments every time you teach a course. I believe it gives current students an incentive to solve the assignment without copying from others. If you give the same assignment every time, then even the best students may be tempted to just copy the solutions obtained from previous students.
To make it more difficult for students to copy from each other, I usually have at least two sets of assignments (call them sets A and B) and I take note of which set was given to which student. This makes it difficult for students to copy from others in the present. Then the next time I teach the course, I try to create two new sets (C and D). This makes it difficult to copy from others in the past. (If you don't have the time to create totally new sets, then just make some small changes.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The main dilemma is that the homework is part of the grades, therefore you should prepare a new one each semester.
I solved this for my programming course in a radical way (after struggling with a similar issue for a few years): I made *all* homework optional, and only the exams count. I make it very clear that the students will fail if they don't do the exercises (and some prove me right each year which is motivating for the others). Students are getting feedback on their submissions and they can even submit revisions. I'm using the homework results (anonymously) for the course where I'm discussing common errors and best practices.
What I did instead is to build dependencies in our course management website (in our case Moodle based): The students only get access to the next chapters if they at least submit the mandatory (minimum) exercises. Yes, they can submit crap, but it's hard to evaluate each submission in very little time so I'm willing to accept this loophole, and at least up until now, students haven't used this option.
The second thing I do is have three live programming sessions where the students have to solve little tasks (in general quite simple exercises) without an internet connection. You have to pass all three of them. Since this happens during the semester, they recieve a feedback about their progress quite early. Each test can be repeated once during the semester.
The combination of thoses measures results in high participation rates and people have no more motivation to copy solutions since they don't have any benefit from it.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: It is useful to have a pool of questions to avoid having the same questions every year. If you have questions for like 2,5 years, you are able to mix them in every year and it is hard to use the previous years notes of somebody else to copy the answers.
If you do not have enough questions yet, you can try changing some numbers and variable names at least, so simple copying will be noticed. Of course you still need to check afterwards if the new questions and answers are correct, but you will still be faster than when writing new ones.
If the homework is graded in the final grade of the course, you cannot tolerate copying. If it is only needed for admission to the exam, it does not matter. People are grown up and if they want to be admitted without being prepared that's their problem.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Student perspective here.
By all means. Repeating the same graded exercises (this includes exams) year by year is extremely demotivating for the student effectively discouraging learning process by putting students in the position when they choose between:
* Learning and academic integrity where they work hard with possibility of failure.
* Plagiarism or memoising known correct answers with guaranteed success.
At least in a short term this is gives a serious advantage to dishonest agents, and is extremely frustrating.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I think that making new sets of questions is not necessary, and having same assignments can actually be beneficial for students. If they get stuck on something they can look at the solution, even one line can make everything click, be it in math, programming, physics etc.
You already said, that the students are grown ups, and choosing to copy will only be detrimental to their understanding, so the serious students, who look to understand the subject better, not just get a passing grade, will still do the assignments by themselves.
You also specified that you teach a course in programming, so you have an advantage - when students hand in their assignments you can ask them to make a simple modification in their software, but one that requires them to understand what is written. At least that is how it works in my university, where modification is 40% of the grade from the assignment.
An example modification, just as I was doing last week would be: Assigned software gives solutions to a 3x3 system of equations, make it work for 5x5 system.
That is just the perspective from a view of a student, so all in all if I were teaching a course, I wouldn't change them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: There is always a trade-off. While it would be really nice to have new exercises each year, you need to ask yourself if your time would not be spend better someplace else, for example in better preparing other parts of the course. Additionally old exercises have the benefit that you can learn from your mistakes. In my experience, each semester there are a few exercises which I thought were easy and straightforward but which were really problematic for the students. Furthermore I am much more incentivised to create good and comprehensive solutions for myself (and possibly the TAs), if I am most likely going to use them several times in a row. Finally there are also some exercises which are kind of mandatory and do not really have an alternative, usually the more theoretic ones.
That does not mean that you should not prepare some new exercises. Usually you get some new ideas throughout the year and personally I try to make a habit of noting them down for possible later use. On the other hand there are always some exercises that did not quite work as intended and can't really be fixed or which become obsolete due to slight changes in the course material or its order.
So in other words, this is not a binary problem, the middle ground of changing only some of the exercises is quite valid too.
If you are worried about plagiarism, often there are also some quick changes that can be done without much work, such as changing some numbers and descriptions, as well as the text of the exercise and its formatting. While it will not fool everybody it at least requires students to recognize that the problem is isomorphic to an old one and enough understanding of the old solution to see where changes need to be made. Of course this does only work if you hide it in real changes, that is add in some new exercise and tweak their order, otherwise it will be too obvious.
As a final idea, you could even outsource things a bit. This will not work for every course but should be fine for a programming course. Near the end of the course, as an optional additional exercise problem, ask them to design their own exercise on one of the topics of the course, including a short description of why said exercise will be helpful in understanding a certain topic. If you offer some prizes such as a bottle of wine (if your students are username_4wed to drink) and some chocolate for the runner ups, you might get some good new ideas for next year.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: It depends what you think the role of University is. For me, it remains an institution dedicated to learning and understanding. Grades are important for employment but ultimately, University should give those that want to learn an opportunity to learn.
Do new questions enhance the learning experience? Possibly yes, if the old questions and solutions are available to the students, then they can use it to help them learn how to approche such problems.
At the same time, if the old questions were good enough to help students learn last year, then they are good enough to help students learn this year.
I do not think that it is the role of the university to enforce disciplin for students that do not want to learn. There are a myriade ways to cheat, I think it is sufficient to remove solutions for the problems at the beginning of the year.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: From my experience as a student. I would say that you should have a 2/3 year cycle where you repeat the question. Some lecturers in my university did the same assignment every year and most students had a connections with the students the year above and were able to obtain the answer easily and cheat.
The 2/3 year repetition cycle would username_4w you to built in depth answers as well as solve any little problems (i.e. too difficult/easy) in the questions whilst the reducing the chances of student obtaining the answers from the previous students.
Edit 1.
The idea one lecturer used was to repeat the same questions every year however he would very slightly tweak the numbers which caught some cheating students who obtained answers from previous students but forgot to change the numbers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: Although you said “any other course,” my answer just applies to your programming situation:
Specify the requirements at a high enough level that a good solution requires declaring/defining additional variables, data types, subprograms, etc. Then plagiarism will be obvious (unless the cheater carefully goes through the code changing all the identifiers).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: There's an extent to which there's nothing you can do about this. Presumably you're not going to get a new textbook every year. You said this is a programming class: I don't suppose you're going to switch to a different language every year. Etc.
I think a system many teachers use for tests is to build up a body of questions, and then use a different subset in a different order every year. Like one year ask questions A, B, C, D, and E. The next year ask D, B, F, G, and A, etc.
You could do something similar for homework. Have a set of problems and shuffle them around.
For a programming class, I think an easy solution would be to alter the problem just slightly every year. Life if one year a programming assignment is "read in two numbers, add them together, and display the result", (presumably a very early assignment!) maybe the next year it's "multiply them", and the next year it's "add them together and add 2". The suspicious part of me notes that this could make it easy to catch the very lazy cheaters. If this year's problem looks very much like last year's problem and just has a couple of words different, then if someone turns in an assignment that solves last year's problem rather than this year's, good chance he copied it from another student.
For any non-trivial problem, the chance that two programmers will come up with identical solutions is small, but I suppose checking for that would require keeping a database of every homework assignment ever turned in. And many cheaters are smart enough to change a few things around so it's not identical.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: No. I recommend that you do not spend the time making new programming homework every year.
Consider that as a tenure-rack academic (U.S. perspective here), you will be rewarded and promoted based on published research, not on teaching effort. It's self-destructive to not take those goalposts into account; you should be prioritizing and rationalizing your time spent on teaching appropriately. This particular task can take an extremely large amount of time (creatively designing new tasks, creating new grading rubrics, re-inventing the knowledge of where the tricky spots are, every cycle, etc.), and there isn't a very great advantage in educational outcomes.
For the cheating issue, I have been very happy using the free [Moss](https://theory.stanford.edu/~aiken/moss/) (Aiken, Stanford U.) code plagiarism checker. What is highly educational, and gets very rapid student attention, is to have a clear first-day discussion of plagiarism principles and then hand out several zeroes on the first assignment or two for those who violate them. In that sense, confronting them with the opportunity/temptation to plagiarize and correcting for that is itself a more salutary lesson than the rest of the assignment.
But in short: The priority is your limited time. The payoff for the time making new exercises year is woefully insufficient.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: **Creating new assignments every year does not prevent students from copying solutions from fellow students in the same semester, which imho is just as big of a problem.** From my own experience this was rampant in my courses where something had to be submitted as a solution to very specific tasks.
Students would come up to you and just ask "Hey, did you already finish this task? Could you send me your solution for inspiration purposes." It is usually hard to decline this kind of request if you are friends with these people. Some really only use it as a help if they are stuck but some just change variable names and the "worst" submit a verbatim copy.
Therefore you should focus on making sure students actually solved a specific homework regardless of when it was created.
I see three possible solutions:
1. Make the content of the homework highly relevant to the exam.
================================================================
I had several assignments where e.g. I would have to create a small software project and spent nearly a week finishing it. Then in the exam, there were only few questions about very basic stuff that you could have gotten from reading 2-3 slides. This would be OK if all students were honest and everyone would have dealt with the subject already so you could skip it in the exam. But because many weren't it was very frustrating for me who actually did spend one week on it and **then in the exam there was no reward for having done everything myself**. This decreased my motivation to do things properly next time. All the work felt wasted. If you work hard, you want to get some kind of appreciation grade wise.
So make as much of the final exam about subjects covered in homework. Then people will feel the need to actually study it and "the good" students will feel like it was worth investing this much time.
1.1. This is also solves the same problem for group projects
------------------------------------------------------------
The majority of many group assignments are done by a minority, i.e. the one most motivated student. It was my experience that a lot of my group work ended with me doing most of the work but the others still got the same grade.
If the homework is very relevant to the exam, they will be penalized then. And again the one who put in all the work will feel rewarded.
2. Be specific in the requirements but vague in the implementation
==================================================================
As @username_10 already [wrote](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/107858/42313), make the task description specific in the requirements but very open in the implementation. This will lead to more individual solutions and plagiarism will be easier to detect.
3. Let students present their solution individually for 5-10 minutes.
=====================================================================
If someone submits a solution but can not explain a simple loop or why certain methods are called or what they are doing, you will be able to filter out cheaters quickly.
Caveat from personal experience: Sometimes the presentation was a week or two after the submission so when it came to presenting it, I had forgotten some things, and was struggling to explain basic things in the first few minutes. This was because I did not prepare for the presentation thinking I could do it on-the-fly. A hint to students to prepare might alleviate this.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: Do you change how you teach the class based on how it goes each year? Unless you're a veteran professor, you should be doing this. So your homework questions will naturally change.
Putting that aside:
Make two years worth of different questions, and then alternate every year you teach the class. Most students don't know classmates 2 years ahead of them, making it hard for them to cheat.
So if you teach the class 2 semesters per year, 4 "full sets" would prevent the vast majority of cheating.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_15: The Stack Exchange volunteers' perspective.
===========================================
You have in other answers the perspective of other academics, and the perspective of students. Now have the perspective of wholly third parties not at your institutions that are nonetheless involved in this because your students are coming to us.
We get the fallout from this here at Stack Exchange. For some several years now volunteers like me have been spotting computer science/programming coursework problems that students take and simply re-post to Stack Exchange, to get people from around the world to solve for them for free. They aren't copying prior answers.
From *this* perspective:
* Hiding coursework questions behind a kind of adventure game interface, where they are not visible except to people who have completed a quest (i.e. handed in the preceding coursework), does not help us volunteers. It actively thwarts us, as we rely on the questions being public in order to find whose course work, at what institution, they come from. The same goes for restricting WWW spiders from crawling the questions.
* Varying coursework from year to year does not address the problem. Students just submit this year's variant to Stack Exchange, and some eager volunteer happily swoops in to do someone else's school or university coursework afresh.
* Slight variations, enough to make the answer different whilst still triggering memories of years gone past, are better than drastic variations for us. We volunteers only have pattern recognition for your chosen example names and scenarios, and seasonal memories such as *Oh, is it the end of the Epiphany Term again so soon?*, to go on.
* A hyperlink to your institution's academic honesty policy that is *direct* (e.g. no Word documents), *stable* in the long term, and *specific* (i.e. your policy should not be tens of paragraphs down a single page containing lots of policies without an anchor for its specific section heading), is a useful thing.Also note that people will read "archived" as "no longer applies". That's not a useful way to present a current policy, either.
In a sense, you are committing the same error as military organizations do of preparing to fight the last war rather than the next one. The students of the world have already, *years ago*, worked around the detection of copied answers. They nowadays use WWW sites *including the very family of Q&A sites that you are asking this on* to get eager people, from potentially multiple far away countries, without pay or indeed any connection to the students or to you, to solve their year-to-year different coursework problems for them.
Further reading
===============
From my own direct experience, and I am just one volunteer who can only recognize a limited number of patterns.
* ULI101/UNX101
+ <https://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130208180515AAV778P>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/168076/unix-grep-confusion#comment558984_168076>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/164762/remove-parent-and-sub-directory/164764#comment558985_164762>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/162354/how-can-i-copy-a-file-from-another-directory-to-the-current-one#comment558983_162354>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/353471/linux-unix-tree-diagram/353478#comment626268_353471>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/209262/what-command-would-i-issue-in-order-to-complete-this-question#comment353747_209262>
+ <https://superuser.com/questions/996053/>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/318075/>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/317816/>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/211656/>
+ <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/19193933/>
+ <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45194004/>
* CSCI132
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/396925/>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/396574/>
+ <https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/396912/>
+ <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46739658/>
* Meta
+ <https://unix.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4206/>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_16: Failure to create new material each year is the reason fraternities and sororities in the US gather homework and test banks.
Professors give an advantage to students who are members of any organizations that may use such tactics if they don’t make new homework and new exams.
<https://www.reddit.com/r/GreekLife/comments/2hiz1p/how_is_your_organiations_test_bank_run/>
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/09
| 1,904
| 7,898
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished my postdoc last year end of Aug. and have been unemployed ever since (not completely, I've been doing freelance work to support myself, but not research-related). The rest of time I've spent (1) applying to academic positions (mostly R1, some R2), (2) finishing writing manuscripts leftover from my postdoc (although I haven't submitted yet, except 1 which I'm only co-authored that's already published) (3) reviewing journal papers (apparently I'm still being asked), and (4) studying to get a professional certification (which IS related to my research, although getting the certification itself is not ever required for people doing research in my field, but the process of *getting* the certification contributes to my research).
So I have been getting several interviews from R1 institutions and been invited for campus visit and job talk. When I applied, it's clear on my CV that I stopped having academic affiliations since the end of my postdoc (I didn't try to hide it or fudge it). And at no point did anyone asked me what I'm doing since my postdoc ended during the initial interviews.
But now that I have to go on campus visits and give job talks, and they are asking me to give them brief bio so they can introduce me before the presentation and advertise my talk in the department. What should I tell them? Or rather, **how should I phrase my current situation**, so it won't sound pathetic and put me in a dejected mindset (which for sure will wreck my presentation and self-confidence). **What affiliation should go on their posters and on my slides?**
I'd like to think I'm not being asked/interviewed for "fake searches". In fact, in most cases, I actually applied *after* the stated "deadlines" (they are those "open until filled" positions). so I'd like to think no fake searches would last months (and almost the entire academic year). So I don't think they would invite me just to ridicule me or make me the obvious inferior candidate (although I guess this is possible). In any case, I'd just like some advice on how I should handle this. BTW, the end of this year would be 4th year since I got my PhD. And I didn't take anytime off (or ever been unemployed or have a gap on my CV).<issue_comment>username_1: How about "I've done my PhD at [PhD university] with [PhD supervisor], working on [PhD subject]. For my postdoc, I went to [postdoc university] to work with [postdoc supervisor] on [postdoc subject]." If you want, you could also say "I did my postdoc at ...," from which a good reader can infer that your postdoc has ended.
I don't think you need to stress your temporary freelance status any more than that. It's clear enough in your CV and you got an invitation for a campus visit + job talk, so apparently the interviewers do not think it's a big deal. Of course, you should have a good explanation for that gap during on-site interviews.
Finally, try not to worry too much whether you're being invited for fake interviews/to be ridiculed/as a filler candidate. I think mostly you are a bit uncomfortable about your current situation and that's putting some doubt in your mind that (I'm guessing) does not have a basis in reality. Simply concentrate on giving a good talk and having fun chats about the research you'd love to do.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest putting the focus where it belongs, on your work and its merits, which after all were good enough to get you the interview. The affiliation is a purely cosmetic issue and has little significance. Give the best talk you can, and don’t call even more attention to your status than necessary by trying to come up with some creative label (“freelancer”, “independent researcher” or whatnot) to fit some imaginary “affiliation” box that you imagine needs to be filled in the slides or your bio. If asked, tell the truth about your current employment status, but don’t mention it otherwise. Most importantly, as I said, the talk and its contents are what matters, so focus on those things and don’t let yourself be distracted by unimportant trivialities.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I've seen plenty of faculty candidates from industry give academic job talks without an affiliation, so it's not so uncommon, in my opinion to not have an affiliation on the flyers or on the slides.
In part, this choice by these candidates is due to the fact that they are not giving the talk as part of their current industry job, and they most likely do not want their current employer to know that they applied to a different job (they may even request the talk not to be advertised broadly or at all).
As for the second part of your questions, many of the same industry candidates apply for academic jobs well after 4 years from their PhDs. You're most likely not being invited for "fake" interviews. Good luck!
Obviously their reasons are quite different than yours, but like them, you shouldn't worry too much about not having an affiliation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: This answer will be quite similar to [@username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/107831/4249)s answer, but I hope I managed to avoid the risk of duplicating answers as I want to focus on a slightly different aspect.
You seem to ask ***What should my affiliation be?***, however, based on the information you shared, this seems to be a slightly wrong question. What the university actually requested was ***A brief bio so they can introduce you before the presentation and advertise the talk in the department.***
I think this kind of short bio is very typical, and is equivalent to **what can be seen at the end of most journal publications**; a short bio of each of the authors. Unlike in [@username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/107831/4249)s answer, I would say that you typically do not name any other people in those biographies, just institutions and dates of obtaining (most recent) qualifications. It is usually written in third person and has a fairly standard layout:
>
> Panda Pants received his BSc and MSc from the University of Bamboo, Pandaland in 2013, and his PhD in 2017 from the University of Pants, Trouserland, *while working in the ClothedAnimals Team* on the topic of pandas wearing pants. *He currently holds a position of Panda Researcher at New Panda Institute. He served as a reviewer for Panda Journal / received a student paper award in Panda Conference / received a prestigious scholarship from Future Panda Foundation.* His research interests lie in the filed of panda behavior, more specifically behavioral changes observed in pandas wearing pants and more recently, pandas wearing dresses as well.
>
>
>
The sentences written in italics are optional; if you can not include any such information, simply don't. You can find endless examples of short biographies in this form - many from young researchers struggling to get to a decently sized paragraph - in fact, *I keep one at hand as simply amend it for each of my submissions.*
This is, as you said, to introduce and advertise you - so people from the department can better figure out if your research interests match and if the talk is potentially interesting. Since you are giving a presentation, you could also add a sentence more specific to what you are going to talk about.
The information about your current status is known to the interviewing team; the presentation is there to assess your *academic fit* into the department. So I believe any specifics about your work, including projects you worked on, people you collaborated with (supervisors and otherwise), reviewing work you did (I would only mention reviewing work in the short bio if it was for an outstanding journal) any anything demonstrating your suitability for the position you are applying to should go into your supporting presentation.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/09
| 1,202
| 5,289
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Background:** I am a first-year PhD student in pure mathematics studying subject X. With my supervisors, I recently published on arXiv a paper on a particular example A that explores how X works when applied to A. My contribution to this paper was partial (a couple of proofs and calculations) but I did read and check the whole paper before submission.
I have recently been asked to referee a paper for a reputable journal also on the application of subject X but to a different example B. The two examples are distinct but are of roughly the same flavour overall.
Initially I thought that I was too junior to agree to referee this paper. I am only a first year PhD after all and my only paper so far hasn't been peer-reviewed yet. But having looked through the paper, I do believe that I am qualified to judge its veracity.
My main concern however is that I do not feel able to judge whether this paper is substantial enough or the results are new enough to merit publication in this journal. My opinion having read the introduction is that the paper is an interesting application of X and is worthy for publication. However, I have not read many papers from the journal, and the total number of papers I have read is small so I do not necessarily feel qualified to judge whether this paper is suitable for publication in this particular journal.
Despite this, I still think I could provide a useful review in the sense that I could do one half of the referees job: that of verifying the results in the paper. So my question is this:
**Question:** Should I agree to referee this paper even if I do not feel I can judge whether the paper is worthy of publication on the grounds of importance and interest? Should I talk to the editor about this before accepting?<issue_comment>username_1: I also started reviewing just recently (pure Math; mainly Algebra/Combinatorics) and when writing my first review with some assistance from my advisor, she taught me that it is not the reviewers job to judge if a paper fits well into a journal or not, that is the editors job.
Apart from checking the paper for correctness, giving helpful comments to make it nicer, etc. you can and should of course also judge it. However, I would not say "this is a good fit for journal XY because ..." but rather something like "this paper is really well written and generalizes the prominent result by A. and al." Or, if it is not well written, then you might also say that, e.g. "while the paper seems technically correct (up to minor points listed below), the page long calculations make it hard to follow and the authors fail to give an abstract overview of what they are doing."
The editor will then decide if the paper should be published in the journal or not, taking into account all reviews, maybe also how many papers were sent for this issue, etc.
Of course, as user2768 pointed out, you can let the editor know that while you will happily judge the correctness and readability of the paper, you are still to junior to properly give a statement on its expected impact.
That is totally ok and editors are aware that there isn't an infinite amount of perfect reviewers, who can comment on every aspect (in finite time...).
I would suggest that you also discuss this topic with your PhD-advisor; if he/she is willing to, you might even let him read over it before you send it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Go for it. Suitability for journal is one aspect and not the entire review. Your technical comments, as someone familiar with the field and who has worked in it will be valuable. There's always a first time for review, and I think most researchers do hesitate that time. But it will be a good learning experience in putting your thoughts down and communicating in a scientific manner. Do run it by your guide once, as suggested by username_1 and Yemon. They will help you put your thoughts in an acceptable and helpful manner.
If you are worried about your ability to judge the importance of this work vis-a-vis other current papers, maybe you could err on the side of caution (have a slight positive bias rather than negative) in those particular fields. Judging importance is subjective, and the editor will make the final decision.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I would go for it. Sounds like you have a pretty good handle on the topic both from what you said about this paper and what your contribution was to your own paper.
I wouldn't sweat the importance subject so much. The editor can handle that more than you. (But can't handle looking at the content as well.) If it is some top/top journal (math equivalent of Science/Nature), the editor will have his own filter (e.g. "no papers on cuprates unless they superconduct"). If it is a middling journal, who cares.
You can also use it as an opportunity to go learn something. Scan that journal and just make your own assessment of importance. You learn MORE from making a guess and being wrong/right and learning it than from refusing to make a guess.
But I would lean towards approving the paper if the work is correct and not worrying so much about the importance. Just my two pennies. Very cool that you were contacted, you are in the game.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/09
| 1,249
| 5,012
|
<issue_start>username_0: The title says it all. In many universities you see coaches for a team in some popular sport hanging around for many decades. I was wondering if in general those people had a status of tenured professor or equivalent, or if on the contrary they can be "fired at will", if for example the performance of the teams they are in charge of are considered disappointing?
If the answer is really "it depends, there is no rule", then let me say I would like to know what status the Basketball Coach of Brandeis University who has just been fired had (see this [Boston Globe article](https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/04/05/brandeis-fires-men-basketball-coach-after-discrimination-complaints/lWe8TSPhuYuEIzcIpVJc8I/story.html)).<issue_comment>username_1: No, athletic coaches are generally not considered faculty and do not have tenure. I've never heard of any place where they are.
The conditions of their employment would be based on whatever contract they negotiate with the university. Typically the university would have the right to fire them for any reason, including poor performance of the team, but the contract might call for a severance payment in some cases.
(There could be small schools where someone is a professor and *also* an athletic coach. In such cases I'd expect they would have tenure protections in their capacity as professor, but could be removed from the position of athletic coach at the university's discretion.)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: At large D1 universities, the athletic department is usually set up as a quasi-independent entity. They are part of the university and are considered university employees, but their finances and fundraising are largely separate. When a coach is hired by the athletic director, they have to be formally approved by the university president and board or directors (or whatever the specific titles are). The coaches are almost never professors of any kind (though other athletic department employees sometimes teach) and are governed solely by their contracts. When a coach is fired, there is usually a buyout clause in their contract. This can be clawed back if there is evidence of a crime or wrongdoing.
This setup is why coaching salaries tend to be so high, in some cases the highest of all university employees. People often get upset about this because they think the salaries are taking away from the academic mission, but this usually isn't the case because those funds tend to be drawn from the athletic department's own pool of money. For less profitable athletic departments, the university will sometimes subsidize the department, but the more profitable departments often return money to the university. A better argument would be whether donors should donate more to academics than to sports, but it's their money, so...
The dynamics are much different for smaller schools with smaller donor and alumni bases. These athletic departments are almost never profitable. Coaches as professors are still rare in those situations though.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Typically, no. But there have been exceptions.
<NAME>, in addition to being Head Football Coach at Ohio State, was also Professor of Military History. When he was fired as coach in 1978, he stayed on as Professor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Historically, some coaches in the US were tenured professors. My very small, D-III institution had a "teacher-coach" model into this century, meaning that tenure-track faculty in one department were expected to coach, and most coaches were expected to teach. Under this model, the tenured faculty coaches could not be summarily fired *as faculty*, but so far as I can tell they could be replaced *as coach* without any special process.
However, this model has fallen out of favor, to the extent that it ever was in favor. Our own faculty stopped coaching around the turn of the millennium (and the last of these have just retired), though some of our coaches do still teach. It would not surprise me to find some small schools who still follow a teacher-coach model, but they would be a vanishing breed and I don't see evidence that Brandeis is one of them (in particular, [the online athletics overview](http://www.brandeisjudges.com/information/about) doesn't mention anything similar, and Brandeis has no major that would easily fit such a model).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: My experience at a military academy, decades ago, was that all of the coaches except for football and basketball were also PE teachers. And there was a very active, required, graded, PE aspect to the curriculum (boxing, swimming, etc.). So it was sort of like high school where coaches are also PE teachers. I don't know if they ever got any tenure though. Would make it hard to fire them. But it did help with getting them a better salary. In some cases, they would even bring them into the military, which was a good deal in terms of benefits.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/09
| 392
| 1,615
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am interviewing within a couple of days for a position. As far as I know, that position has been rejected by at least one candidate before me.
I know why the position was declined in the past, this aspect of the job was discussed with me.
However, I just realized that the College has started to advertise the position again on the usual academic job boards.
Should I be worried about this? Is this something that was mandated by the people leading the search or something that HR Departments do on their own?
If anyone with insights on this process could give some perspective that'd be great.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Should I be worried about this?
>
>
>
Nope. It is totally out of your control and impossible to guess what it means. It could mean they have already written you off and are just wasting time (and money) bringing you in for an interview. It could also mean that they are hopeful about you and need to satisfy some HR requirement. It could also mean lots of other things.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Basically yes. This is how I would interpret things in the job world. (Have had the exact experience.) And this is more of a job world issue than a pure academia one. (No worries, mods, still fits the forum.)
They might still be holding on to you as a deep fall back. But when they send a new request out, it almost always means they don't like who they have seen so far.
All that said, you need to have a gazillion hooks in the water and not pay too much attention to one until it is very serious. Keep prospecting.
Upvotes: 0
|