date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2018/04/10
| 337
| 1,462
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to rephrase and reproduce some part of the Introduction of a Research publication without giving citation to that publication. Will it be considered an act of plagiarism ?? I am not using and citing any result or any table and figure of the publication.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think it takes you anything to cite this reference. Please do cite, otherwise, if you don't like the reference, get a different reference with similar information and cite it.
* If someone queries or asks you about that information, how do you
attribute it to the original author?
* For many of the things we write, among other reasons, we cite to show who
is responsible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Unequivocally, yes. Plagiarism isn't limited to results or figures alone. As for automatic plagiarism-checkers, they will make even less of a distinction, and will almost certainly flag it as plagiarised if a certain contiguous amount (I am told it is 2 sentences, but I don't have a confirmation on this).
You mentioned rephrasing - this could help avoid automated checks, but if the changes are trivial (changing voice, shifting subject/object, substituting synonyms), a reader may spot and report this.
That aside, why would you want to reproduce it? Different papers should have different introductions if their motivations are different. Is it to save writing time/effort or something else?
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/10
| 1,057
| 4,366
|
<issue_start>username_0: I grew up with a nickname, and I prefer to be called as that. It is quite different from my first name. When I introduce myself I usually just use the nickname.
I plan to use my full name in publication, and I have published papers using the full name already.
My question is, how problematic is this choice? Should I try to change it? I would imagine someone not relating me to my papers/ not able to find me from the nickname.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think this will be a problem. A large part of the research community will know you through your publications, and as long as the name is constant across those, you won't have a problem.
Amongst colleagues/researchers who also know you personally, this wouldn't be an issue since you can convey the dual name to them during interaction. For instance, your email signature could be something like Jay (<NAME>). Similarly, if you use academic networking sites, you could either give the full name or the dual name (i.e. Jay (<NAME>)).
The only case where this could potentially be a problem is, X talks about you to Y as 'Jay', and Y searches for 'Jay' (s)he may not come up with the right results. I think this is largely surmounted if you use Jay (<NAME>) in written communication often enough, so that X passes that information along to Y. I have had colleagues tell me about a person, and also what name he publishes under, so that I can find him. If people hear it often enough, they make a strong association.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To be identifiable on publications you could give your name as
>
> "John (<NAME>".
>
>
>
I've seen this several times, especially by people with Asian names working in English speaking countries where they use a different first name. (However, I do not know if these different first names are in any way official, but anyway…)
MathSciNet is able to collect your paper under a single profile (with a little help sometimes) and also a Google Scholar profile page can do the same thing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: How effective this choice is may depend on the characteristics of your name. How distinctive is your last name? If you have a very rare last name, going by two names is unlikely to confuse search results or people. Also, does your nickname start with the same initial as your full name?
Some colleagues I've known with very common last names make it a point to use the same form of their name everywhere, and create online resources (personal web page, LinkedIn, Google Scholar Profile, Orchid, etc.) that explicitly connect all their work together (especially when a journal or a citation format just uses initials + last name). (See, for instance, [this question from an academic with a very common name](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/512/what-are-some-practices-for-getting-a-name-change-so-that-people-can-find-me-mor?rq=1).)
If you feel comfortable with your nickname in professional circumstances and it does not have negative connotations, I would encourage you to keep doing what you plan and set up some sort of web presence that explicitly makes the connection. Your CV should also reference your nickname, and including both in your email signature (as user153812 suggests) is a great idea.
EDIT: Given what you added about the previous papers being from an REU and being open to using your nickname professionally, you can also just opt to publish that way. It feels nice for even new colleagues to use the name I feel connected to. Your institution will not care. (Source: My institutions have not cared about my nickname. It's sometimes slightly annoying for people to look me up in the system for admin reimbursements, etc., which has my full legal name, but it's usually just a matter of writing on a form: "Nickname (Fullname) Lastname.")
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: On the one hand I don't think it will be a big problem either way. On the other hand, I see no good reason to stick with your legal name and a several good reasons to go with the nickname:
1. The nickname is probably less common and more memorable.
2. The nickname will make it easier for people to connect the name on a paper with a person that they met at a conference.
3. As cactus\_pardner points out it's likely to be more easily googled.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/10
| 526
| 1,874
|
<issue_start>username_0: ### Facts
My visually impaired brother attends university ("UNI") in England. In Jul 2017, he requested Alternative Formats. As of Apr 11 2018, UNI's Library still hasn't contacted the publishers, but avowed that they probably can by May 1. They haven't explained this 8-month stonewall. Still without PDFs, he deferred exams to Aug 2018.
The Chief Librarian emailed that he must wait patiently for the publishers to email the Library the PDFs, which can take weeks and will delay him further.
We filed a formal complaint, but UNI denied wrongdoing and any financial compensation. The Student Union uselessly couldn't help.
### Questions
1. How can he convince the university to expedite?
2. How ought he seek compensation? We worry that litigation may offend them and make them victimize my brother. But haven't they infringed [Consumer Rights Act 2015 s 52](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/52/enacted)?
>
> (2) In that case the contract is to be treated as including a term that the trader must perform the service within a reasonable time.
>
>
> (3) What is a reasonable time is a question of fact.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Do you have a human rights tribunal? In Canada, this would likely go to a human rights case around discrimination and accessibility. Usually universities have clear policies on this - is their an omsbudman? I would perhaps think about contacting a lawyer to see their opinion.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Although it might appear that you are purchasing services from the university, I don't think this is true, legally (although I'm not a lawyer).
If you have complained to the university through the official channels you can lodge a complaint with the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (<http://www.oiahe.org.uk/>).
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/10
| 577
| 2,650
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a 4th-year science student planning to do undergraduate research for credit during the summer. I completed an engineering course the previous semester and discussed research opportunities with the professor a handful of times. From what I gathered during our discussions, he is willing to have me do research with him and his other students; he wants to work out the details shortly before the summer starts.
My department allows me to receive research credit from other departments. However, there are some extra hoops to jump through, and the undergraduate adviser recommended that I find a professor who may be adjunct in my department to enroll me for research credit.
I brought this up to my engineering professor, who mentioned the name of a professor in my department that shares similar equipment for their respective projects. I have never met this other professor before, nor have I enrolled in a class with them.
Would it be appropriate to approach this professor and ask them to supervise the research I'm doing with my engineering professor? They wouldn't even have to actually supervise me; the bottom line is I'm wondering if they would be willing to enroll me for research credit within the department.<issue_comment>username_1: Absolutely appropriate and in fact, you can use your first and third paragraph almost verbatim to approach the professor who'd be your official supervisor.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: It is a bad idea for a professor in your department to enroll you for research credit under his supervision *without actually supervising*. This is taking all the responsibility without any control, contribution to educating the student, or simply a pleasure doing the research.
However, you probably should connect those professors from different departments, so that they determine their shared interest and responsibilities in this project. Between them (and probably the undergraduate advisor) they might determine the formalities to follow department's & programs's regulations; but if somebody's name appears as an advisor of a work, he must actually do some part of advising.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> My department allows me to receive research credit from other departments. However, there are some extra hoops to jump through
>
>
>
I'd suggest just jumping through those hoops; since it is allowed, these don't seem like insurmountable hoops (and good on your department for foreseeing this issue and preparing for it by constructing some procedures), and it makes more sense to do this rather than stretch the rules.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/10
| 661
| 2,672
|
<issue_start>username_0: Last year I submitted an article to a peer-reviewed book to be added as a chapter. Finally, my article got accepted and it is ready for publication. The publisher is going to be Springer.
I would like to share a copy of my article on my website and with my colleagues through the university repository. My concern is that I am not sure whether I can do it or not.
Springer has some [sharing policies](http://www.springerpub.com/journal-article-sharing-policies) for journal articles. You can share a preprint version with a link to the published one (via DOI). However, it is not clear whether I can do that with a book chapter.
Can someone with similar experience clarify this?<issue_comment>username_1: I generally recommend putting manuscripts online *before* involving the publisher, that way the manuscript is already public. For the OP, the manuscript can be put online, if no agreement has been signed. Otherwise, the signed agreement will need to be check to see what is permissible.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Digging in a little more, there is an statement on Springer self-archiving policies regarding books. It was a bit hidden and difficult to find. The statement can be found in this [link](https://www.springer.com/gp/open-access/authors-rights/faq-about-authors-rights/2114) and says the following:
**Does Springer's self-archiving policy also apply to books?**
*No. Book publishing is a different business model, and this policy does not apply to books.*
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Do not be too legalistic. Finding what is legal or not may involve quite some work, and you may easily reach the wrong conclusion if you are not trained in law. Moreover, something can be tolerated even if it is not officially allowed.
In your case, I would recommend that you share your chapter. The worst that can happen is that you are asked to remove it from the website and/or repository. But usually, big publishers go after platforms such as ResearchGate, not after individual scholars.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: This is the answer I got from Springer for a smiliar question:
"Thank you for getting in touch. Springer doesn’t have a green OA policy at this time. Chapter authors would need to choose the gold OA route. We are able to offer gold OA for chapters already published (retrospective OA) in cases where the authors need to fulfill a funder OA mandate.
Our policies regarding OA books can be found here: <https://www.springernature.com/gp/open-research/policies/book-policies>
Please feel free to be in touch if you have further questions—I’m happy to help."
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/10
| 3,684
| 16,239
|
<issue_start>username_0: We're thinking of implementing a policy where if a student asks a question/makes a mistake in a lab, they are required to write down what that question/mistake was and how it was resolved. These "lab notebooks" (for want of a better word) will be evaluated based on the quality of the responses to the problems, not the problems themselves. For instance, if the problem was relatively trivial ("We didn't turn the device on") but the response is great ("we came up with a checklist that we will follow to ensure that the basic setup is done every time") then the submission would be evaluated with a high mark.
For the majority of our students, there will be more than enough stuff in each lab to write about. However, this isn't universally true and some groups will do the lab just fine without asking any questions. Whether they make mistakes or not is an open question, but there really are some groups who just get what's going on, take their data and do very well without needing to interact with us at all. And there's the problem - these students would have an empty notebook because they didn't need to go back and check things out. Would they get a 0 on that part? That doesn't sound fair at all.
How can I reward the students who learned from their mistakes without penalizing those who don't make any?<issue_comment>username_1: One option would be to do the following:
The grade for each lab consists of two components:
1. X% for the actual lab report (that would have been submitted without introducing the "new system"
2. (100-X)% for the "Q&A lab notebook" part of the report.
Now, if the *Q&A lab notebook* is not present (because students completed the lab without questions/mistakes), they automatically get full (100-X)% portion of the grade. If the *Q&A lab notebook* is present, it is graded accordingly.
With that system (in my opinion):
* Students are not discouraged to ask questions because they can get a full mark even if "everything falls apart" with a proper explanation.
* Not asking a question when the problem is not resolved within the group is not an option – as then the repercussions will be on the X% of the grade.
* Students are encouraged to check obvious things themselves (like turning on the equipment) because otherwise, they will be required to write an additional paragraph in the report.
* Those who silently finish the lab get an opportunity for a full grade
anyway (provided they did everything correctly).
Selecting X is definitely an art and highly depends on the structure of the lab and the existing reports. But 75% (actual report)-25% (Q&A) seems a reasonable initial guess to me.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The confusion i see with this is that different groups are going to have different problems. This makes comparisonsense of responses difficult because of the variety in the responses. This is in addition to people being able to skip this altogether. I recommend the following.
\*\* have a set of common problems that every group responds too. There are probably common mistakes that happen every year. Make everyone explain these whether they made the mistake or not. If they didn't make the mistake it reinforces proper behavior while preventing others from making the same mistake.
\*\* for those who do make a real mistake set parameters for what to report. For example maybe they only have to share 2-3 mistakes rather than report everything. A criteria for judging the significance would be useful as well. For example if someone forgets to turn the power on maybe that shouldn't require an explanation.
\*\* lastly a rubric that delineates exactly what is expected would eliminate the confusion and laziness. An actual example would further help the students as well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: At face value, it seems clear that the issue is that you're trying to mix measurements of two very different kinds of performance. I think the REAL issue is deeper than this, but let's start with the two things you're mixing up:
1. **You want to measure outcomes.** Did the group end up with "correct" results from the lab?
2. **You want to measure a specific (learning) process.** Did the group learn from mistakes and questions?
The first measurement is usually the default in classroom settings because it's the most obvious. The second measurement has value, though: You're trying to prepare students for life, not just hand them a set of answers. Measuring their ability to learn, and encouraging them to be learners, is important.
That said, measuring outcomes has the advantage that it's not dependent on the process. It's easy to see if the lab result is correct or not. I don't think that's the focus of your question, so let's concentrate on the second concept - measuring the learning itself.
**That brings us to the core issue with your proposed process:** *Measuring learning from mistakes and questions* is very, very different from *measuring learning in general.* You hinted at this when you said,
>
> For the majority of our students, there will be more than enough stuff in each lab to write about. However, this isn't universally true and some groups will do the lab just fine without asking any questions.
>
>
>
The issue here is that you've singled out a **single type of learning to measure.** The students who learned by failure and questioning are correctly being evaluated by your grading approach. This is good - you're encouraging that type of student to hone their skills. So let's look at the second group - the students who "did the lab just fine without asking any questions." The important thing to remember is that **they weren't born knowing how to do the lab - they learned it too, just in a different way than the question-askers and mistake-makers. The reason why your new approach lacks fairness (as you identified yourself) is that it's only attributing value to one type of learning.**
So - is it a bad idea to grade your students based on the questions they ask and the mistakes they make? If you're trying to grade them on their learning process, which is what I think you're trying to do, you **need to make sure you're accounting for all types of learning** not just the one style. This will be really challenging - people learn in multiple ways and transition between learning styles in a fluid manner, and many learning styles don't leave behind a "paper trail" you can measure after the fact. So let's get to your specific question:
>
> How can I reward the students who learned from their mistakes without penalizing those who don't make any?
>
>
>
I may be frame-challenging your question, but if you allow me that liberty, I would rewrite it as:
>
> How can I encourage students to be aware of, and work on improving, their learning skills, versus just rewarding them for getting the right answer to a specific assignment?
>
>
>
I think the answer to this will be much broader than a single stack exchange question, but some ideas to think about:
1. Include a discussion/presentation during/after the lab where **a selected group walks the other groups through how they approached the lab,** with a focus on how they prepared or learned the material beforehand and how they dealt with issues/challenges.
2. When a group asks questions during the lab, let the other lab groups answer it (instead of you). When an answer is given, **have the answering group provide explanation of where they got the answer from.**
3. Include an entire lab session, or elements of a lab, that are not part of the graded solution and are deliberately "unanswerable" in that they cover material you haven't taught or are otherwise deliberately difficult. **Have the students come up with their own way to resolve this.** This could even be a lab where the process intentionally causes failure, which would "force" the students to use your "learning notebook" as a tool to document and explain the failure and their approach to solving it. Purposefully cause them to go off-script and respond to the failure with creativity.
Basically, you need something that accounts for multiple learning styles, and something that encourages accountability instead of just allowing students to "cheat the system" by pencil-whipping busywork in order to get a grade. Notice I left your word choice of "reward" out of my re-worded version of your question - I think awareness and demonstration are probably more important than a reward - at the least because the reward just causes students to focus on the end, rather than the means, which totally dodges your goal of getting them to focus on learning skills versus just a final result.
**Edited to add:**
Let me further add: I don't think the "learning notebook" is a bad idea. It actually sounds like a great way to encourage people to recognize failure and accept it as part of a (positive) learning process, versus being afraid of failure. It would be great to include along with my three suggestions above. That said, I do think it becomes cumbersome to try to include it as a graded item, and more importantly, regardless of whether you grade it or not, focusing on it (as a graded item) **misses the larger opportunity to consider and encourage other learning styles.**
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I'm answering this from the point of view of, that in professional software development a log book is an important tool for the long term maintenance of a product.
Instead of focusing just on "learning from mistakes", which potentially alienates students who feel they have not made any mistakes. You want to have students built the log book as their "bible of information for the next developer".
This means documenting:
* Potential pitfalls that were discovered or researched
* Solutions that were ruled out for one reason or another
* Areas that can be looked into further, if more time was allocated
* Thoughts on potential improvements that could be made
* Mistakes and major learning items that were found
* Any thoughts or remarks about the work done
* Justifications on why an approach was taken, over another one
Importantly, not everybody's log book will contain all of these. But these are the kind of elements that can provide a real value to another developer on a real world problem. The idea is to be tracking everything that might be valuable in the future - to avoid duplicated work and to help communicate potential ideas for where things could be taken.
Marking is of course difficult, but I'm sure you can see that from the scope of the log book; no student should have an empty one. Students who struggle, will be able to detail what problems they faced, while students who succeed will be able to note down potential improvements or alternate solutions they avoided (and why).
Log books are definitely a valuable professional tool, and I'd suggest approaching it from that angle - rather than trying to gauge a student's learning from their book (and grading them on that).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Why not have two different 'rubrics' (aka marking schemes in the UK) - mark students against both and keep only their highest mark.
One of the rubrics could for example focused on those students how perform in the actual lab or how well they described what they did and why they did it.
The other could focus on Q&A part as described in this question.
This would not penalize those who don't ask questions as there marks would come from the first rubric whilst still rewarding those who do as you describe - as there marks would come from the second rubric.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: **You could use a "point recovery" system.** I haven't seen anyone else describe it, and I don't know if there is a formal name for it. Anton's answer is somewhat similar in practice.
**After each lab, students are offered an opportunity to recover a portion of the missed points from that lab.** This opportunity can be a notebook review, a test/quiz on the lab material, a followup analysis on their previous lab work, or an optional lab exercise. It could even be a group project, similar to Michael's suggestions.
You can choose a proportionate cap (max XX% of missed points), an absolute cap (max score of XX), or both. Setting an absolute cap will deter stronger students from participating in the optional work, as they have less to gain. You decide whether that is desirable.
**Setting the "right" caps on point recovery is a bit of trial and error.** The best values will depend on how stringently your labs are scored and how much you want to encourage participation. If you chose to allow "up to 85% of missed points" with "no maximum on final score", you would allow any student to achieve a B with excellent followup work---even if they missed the lab entirely. (A reasonable way to accommodate absences, too.) In this case, even an A-level student could accrue a few extra points by participating.
**Ideally, you would look for some evidence that the student grasps material which was not evident from their performance in the lab.** This makes notebook reviews or self-analysis of their lab work better options; you can award points specifically for addressing issues with their original lab work. The self-comparison is key for improvement. Otherwise, you can expect to see a lot of students with 50-60% lab scores come in and get around 60% on a followup quiz without much real improvement. **If you want improvement, you need to measure exactly that, and only that.**
**The biggest difference between this method and Anton's approach is that this method favors students who mastered the material initially**---they will end up with the highest scores in the group most of the time. As before, you would have to decide whether this is desirable. Should their faster uptake or lesser need for instruction be a factor in their final grade? Is this program or field highly competitive in nature?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: Just have multiple labs (or whatever) and grade on results. You are making it too complicated otherwise. There is limited time to do coaching and assessment. If I mess something up once and learn from it, it actually shows up in future work. It's even better if I have to live with the bad grade versus getting a makeup. (We are not chopping off body parts...who cares if you take a bad grade once or twice...it's a kick in the butt.)
The ONE key help that you can do is having several labs, tests, etc. Not single chances for failure, performance. But if you do this...no makeups (other than perhaps the final).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: The groups that don't make mistakes will arrange their reward:
1. Think of a great response
2. Make a trivial mistake that would be fixed by that response
3. Get a high mark
A mistakes quota is easily gamed.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: A fundamental principle I've absorbed into my philosophy of life is "one can learn more from being wrong than being right". If students are in a course because they want to learn (as opposed to wanting to get credit for having completed the course well), the reward for getting a lab done quickly and accurately should be the ability to take on something they're less certain about and may thus find more interesting.
Another principle that is all too often ignored (by myself as well as others, I'll admit) is that documentation about why various ideas that seems like they should be good, actually aren't, may be more valuable than documentation that seemingly-good ideas actually work. If an idea seems like it should be good, it's likely other people will try it whether one documents it or not. If it actually is good, those other people won't need one's documentation to benefit from it. If it turns out not to be good, documenting that fact may benefit those who would otherwise have wasted time trying it for themselves.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Build the follow up lab assignment in a way that the experience from mistakes gives the student an advantage (eg knowing your way around certain equipment better due to having had to dismantle it to clean up a mistake).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/10
| 3,090
| 13,343
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student (mid stage) and my work includes the use of mathematics. I try to learn as much as possible. I am facing a problem: I spent enough time on the mathematics required for my research, and according to my research supervisor I am good at understanding proofs, theorems, etc. at an intuitive level, but in writing I still have some work to do. Many times I try to write things and, although I think I am not that so bad, there is still a problem to be resolved.
Question: Is writing in research so very important? I have seen some research papers of some star people whose writing does seems to be very impressive to me (although I may be wrong).
Edit: Please note that I don't consider myself a star: that's why I am asking this question. I am trying my best to improve my writing skills and it has improved to some extent, but to me it appears that I may not get that much better at writing. Let me tell you a story: once during my PhD I worked with a professor other than my supervisor, and then we got some result so he ask me to write a paper. I took 4-5 days write a paper 8-9 pages long, then he told me that I wrote in a cryptic manner. (This happened in my first year.)<issue_comment>username_1: Writing matters a lot, and a lot of the time probably most PhDs (and even postdocs) face a steep learning curve. This curve is particularly bad in a field where writing is your tool, such as Philosophy. Even when analysis takes the form of symbols, in mathematics and logic, it is essential to convey your ideas clearly. Clarity is particularly problematic for young researchers, because of our tendency to hide behind pretension. Pretension, confusion, clunkiness must be removed for your ideas to come through.
Overcoming these issues is not essential to get an inexperienced researcher to approve of your work, but any researcher worth their salt will know when what you say is bullshit, or when what you say might have value but is unclear. I say this as an experienced, but not necessarily a good, writer. My writing has often been criticised and quite rightly too. I wish I had learned to write better earlier, is my point and the advice I give.
Because writing is important, there is a second question. How to focus on improving it?
1. Read good writing.
2. Read a book on good writing, I recommend <NAME>'s *Writing Science*.
3. Once you have written, wait, and then go back and read it. And then edit it. You will read it from the perspective of another person and hence realise why writing is so important and partly what you need to do to improve.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is writing in research so very important?
>
>
>
**Yes.**
Because you share your work with the world using some symbols. These symbols, might be the definition of a particular function as well as a collection of Latin letters to explain your findings.
No matter how impressive and groundbreaking your theorem is, it is not true until you prove it with a mathematical notation. If you think in a wider scale, no matter how good your research is, it is not complete unless you carefully and technically write it down.
To put it in different words, even if you discover teleportation, without technical writing and proper explanation, it is the same thing some random person claiming that they discovered time travel.
I would refer to [this](http://www.columbia.edu/cu/biology/ug/amgen/paper.html) excellent and short guide to gain an insight about technical writing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You should probably set aside a lot of time on projects for editing your writing. It is a skill that you get better at over time, especially with practice and coaching.
Why does writing matter? I've learned that **writing is part of the thinking process**. All of my education and work has been in my native language, but even so I found working with my university's writing center to be profoundly helpful. Often writing and editing helps you refine ideas as you go. It is while trying to explain or properly capture an idea that some of the limitations or gaps become apparent, such that you can acknowledge them and think of additional lines of argument or additional aspects of the problem.
I am guessing that few writing tutors will be able to help with the details of a mathematical proof, though they might be able to help make sure that the linear logic of an argument is apparent. ("What's your starting point? How are you defining Z? What's your next step? If the theorem requires that X and Y are satisfied, where do you address X, and where do you address Y?")
Can your professors tell you about the types of problems in your current writing? (E.g. confusing wording; ideas are too vague / not specific enough; logical jumps between steps; hard to follow the setup of the initial problem; not considering key cases; etc.) You may want to ask them if there is a class in writing proofs that you can take or audit, or if they have other resources to suggest. (Also, you say that you're *using* math; if your field does not have its own class in proofs, you may want to talk with the math department and arrange to attend the class they have that is meant to introduce undergraduates to proofs, even if the math content is review for you.)
Other advice:
Based on some of the words you selected in the question, I am guessing you do not natively speak English. (I edited the question to help make the grammar more standard.) So if your university has a writing center or writing tutors, or if you can get your more finalized work line-edited, you should take advantage of those resources. (For instance, you could hire a graduate student who is good at writing to edit your work (expect a few rounds--they'll have questions), or arrange a time swap so you can tutor a graduate student in a required math/stats class in exchange for editing help.)
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It seems you are probably asking about "good English writing". I'd like to offer a slightly different perspective, from the point of view of someone who also does a fair amount of mathematics (I'm a CS theory student). I find that formally writing up proofs helps me discover minutiae that I might have missed earlier - in fact there are *always* some technical edge cases that go unnoticed by me on the whiteboard until I actually start writing a formal statement. So I think writing things as you go also helps solidify your math.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I have not seen an answer mentioning the following aspect:
**Writing grant proposals.**
Being a mediocre article writer can be ok, you'll still get your publications, eventually, since mathematicians can get through bad writing with some effort. Or, they might not read your papers.
But, to stay in academia, you will eventually write research proposals, and explain your research ideas and previous results in a very clear, coherent and professional manner. This is a very fierce competition, and the audience is not experts in your field. Well, some are, and some are not, making the writing of research proposals very difficult, compared to writing a research article.
And since grants eventually will pay your salary, I'd say, it's quite important.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Most of the answers assume it's about scientific writing, but not about writing down you proofs. (You have a bigger problem, if it's about the latter.)
While all stress that writing is important, and I agree, I'd like to put in my 2¢.
* **Writing can be learned.** Look around for courses on scientific writing. There should be some. Attend them. Read other's papers, especially those praised for good writing. Read Strunk and White or Chicago manual of style or whatever.
* **You gradually get better over time.** It should not be underestimated how much better at writing you get the longer you are doing your usual academic inner loop.
Remember your advisor with god-like writing skills, who basically rewrote your first paper from scratch and it got so much better? Now look up their CV and look how long they are in academia. When you'd be in academia for the same time, you'd be comparably good.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: It's important but not as important as others here are conveying. The notion of proxy judgements is pertinent; people don't judge you (your thoughts, personality), they judge what they can see. Under this principle, badly formatted references and/or poor grammar could spell someone's doom. But as anyone doing research in STEM knows, there are tons of papers out there that are so badly written that the proxy judgement principle would hardly seem to have any force.
My personal problem with scholarly articles is the tendency towards obfuscation - hiding the intuition of ideas behind unnecessarily complex phrasing (mathematical or otherwise). Unfortunately this appears to be the norm with most such writings.
A way to make your research stand out would be to intentionally expose your ideas in very simple terms that (almost) anyone can understand and then slowly introduce the formalisms. If your ideas are good and you take this approach, you will stand out in a good light.
If your ideas are weak, then obfuscation and high prose will be essential.
Nice writing will still always be a plus, but its absence is not a show stopper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> “Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity. Those who
> would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity.” ----
> Nietzsche (1882) [The Gay Science (The Joyful
> Wisdom)](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0521636450),
> p. 173.
>
>
>
**Even for mathematical research, good writing is crucial:** Mathematical writing requires clear and simple presentation of results. You should be aiming to make your writing as clear and simple as possible, so as not to obscure the mathematical insights in your work. As with all academic writing, you should have a strong command of the English language (or whatever language you are writing in) and this should also be backed up with the ability to revise your notation and presentation of mathematical work to make it as simple as possible.
In mathematical research there is an additional aspect to your writing involving the presentation of mathematical results. There are many stylistic choices that must be made in presenting theorems and other results (e.g., notational choices, use of intermediate functions, lemmas, theorems, etc.), and these make an enormous difference to how easy it is for your reader to follow what you have done. Good mathematical writing requires you to present your results in a logical order, with clear notation of all objects, which is minimally taxing on the reader. This often involves choices about whether it helps to define subsidiary notation for functions/objects you will use over and over again. It also requires revising the presentation of results to get them to their simplest form.
If your work is being described as "cryptic" by other researchers, this is a sign that you are not succeeding in presenting your results in their most clear and simple form. Practice simplifying your notation and presentation until others in your field are able to read and understand your arguments with ease. Simplify, simplify, simplify!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Yes, writing matters a lot. There are many, many papers out there and every reader will be selective in what they read. Math is no exception, even there are two counterbalancing forces that make math special. Good writing matters less in mathematics because expertise is very narrow and someone interested in a very specific question might not have much choice in what papers to consult. Good writing matters more in mathematics because mathematical texts are incredibly dense and hard to read even when executed well. In some experimental sciences, it might be possible to ignore the lousy writing and just go to table 5 with the results; in math, this is not an option.
You write that it appears to you that you may not get much better at writing, but writing is learnable. A big problem with learning to write well is that good writing is invisible. It is possible to show off one's way with words and use clever turns of phrase every now and then, but good writing in an academic context usually means getting the message across with the least amount of struggle on the side of the reader. This requires making a lot of choices that you might not notice have been made. But one can learn what these choices are. Sadly, a lot of writing advice is really bad and comes from people with no linguistic background. Excellent books on writing by people with an academic background are *The Sense of Style* by <NAME> and *Style* by <NAME> (there exist several versions and editions of that book).
If you are struggling a lot with writing, academic phrasebooks might be useful. They will not turn you into a good writer, but allow you to be at least okayish. In the context of mathematics, there is the excellent *Writing Mathematical Papers in English* by <NAME>, which I would recommend even to people who write well.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/10
| 1,082
| 4,518
|
<issue_start>username_0: How common is it for students to take a loan to pursue a theoretical physics degree in Europe, as a non-EU foreigner.
Theoretical physics and mathematics students are advised not to take a loan as there are very few jobs in both the fields. I was admitted to a Masters Theoretical Physics (Quantum fields and Strings) program at Uppsala. So far I am still looking for a scholarship.
Is taking out a loan to pursue a degree as non-EU citizen in one of these two fields always a bad idea?<issue_comment>username_1: There are three things the cost of tuition means here, and they give you information about whether or not taking out the loan for a theoretical Master's degree a good idea.
1. It is expensive to train someone in this work, and someone has to pay for the training. The way that academia has developed, it is usually the sponsors of later research who pay (government, universities, private foundations). (In contrast, professional degrees are often paid for by individuals themselves, although it varies by country and profession.)
2. Financially, unless you are independently wealthy, you need to check how easily you can pay back this money after you graduate.
* I'd suggest researching the pay levels of various careers that you can pursue with that Masters degree. If you want to immediately work in an industry that pays well (e.g. designing infrastructure for the advent of quantum computing??? at a government laboratory???), and grads from that program have a reasonable shot, then it is not unreasonable to take a loan.
* However, if most related jobs do not pay well or require a Ph.D., then you are unlikely to get your money back (soon) by working in the field. You might then be forced to work in, say, software to pay the bills, if your programming skills are transferable enough.
* [This recent question seems to find it is rare for academic positions to be offered to Masters graduates in theoretical physics](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107886/how-common-are-academic-positions-in-theoretical-physics-offered-to-master-gradu).
3. The cost of the program to you (that is, the absence of a scholarship) may be a signal about where you would rank.
* Funding is certainly a signal for doctoral programs, in my (U.S.) experience. I had several doctoral acceptances where I was told I wouldn't be funded in my first year, but that I could probably find a teaching position; I was one of the more borderline candidates they decided to accept, apparently, and when funding is limited schools tend to invest in the strongest students first, to attract them to the school and make sure that they have the best chance of success. This also told me I might have trouble getting professors' help at those schools, because their time is a limited resource, as well.
* If this is true in your case (i.e. others have funding for the same program, and thus you have information about how you compare), then use the information to further inform your actions. It might mean you must be at the very top of your Masters program to have a strong shot at becoming a Ph.D. student. It might also mean that you should in some way improve your application to be more competitive for scholarships or funded programs in the future.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: While this is by no means a complete answer, here is one thing that you have to think about: What happens if you are not able to finish your studies or get a job after your graduation? And how likely is this possibility? Any loan that you take would likely be easily paid back if you get a job in Sweden/western Europe (I think this based on experience from Denmark where it would be possible to pay back such a loan even on a less-than-average salary). However, what happens if you are forced to go back to India? I would think that would make the loan *very* hard to pay back. What happens then? Is that a risk you are willing to take? I'm not saying you shouldn't do it but I am saying that you should be prepared for the worst and know that you will not be completely screwed if that happens.
Lately, Sweden has taken quite a hard approach on immigrants and I am not sure how that would affect you. Across the bridge in Denmark, recent Danish graduates from outside the EU can get a work visa of some sorts relatively easily. Is this the case in Sweden? Would you be able to get a work visa in Sweden/western Europe in case you fail to finish your degree for whatever reason?
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/11
| 1,376
| 4,463
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a computing conference paper, it's for a high quality conference, and my friend and I have a mini dispute. The loser pays for drinks, so no pressure!
Which of the following is better/appropriate/there is no difference?
>
> The loser will: 1. get laughed at, 2. pay for drinks and 3. have to run outside naked.
>
>
>
vs
>
> The loser will: 1) get laughed at, 2) pay for drinks and 3) have to run outside naked.
>
>
>
In all seriousness though, is one more formal/acceptable than the other?
Also, I think I remember that maybe a ";" should be used instead of the ",".
Thanks for reading!<issue_comment>username_1: They're both acceptable, nobody except very careful English fanatics are likely to care, but the latter is preferable. Reasons:
1. Periods are more "final". They indicate the end of the sentence. That implies that you should instead use capital letters if you stick with periods:
>
> The loser will: 1. Get laughed at, 2. Pay for drinks and 3. Have to run outside naked.
>
>
>
2. Because periods indicate the end of the sentence, one doesn't expect to see multiple periods in a single sentence. Using ) avoids this problem.
As for whether or not to use a semicolon, again it's up to you, but the comma is fine here. That's because the three things listed are all pretty related, short phrases, and on an equal footing. Semicolons are better when a sentence is complex or has other punctuation symbols. Example of something where I'd prefer the semicolon:
>
> This new year, I resolve to: 1) cook 100 breakfasts for my wife - she deserves it; 2) set tests such that 50% of the class fails to shake my reputation as an academic Santa Claus; and 3) run for president.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think it's more a matter of personal taste.
When the points are within a paragraph, I prefer to use (i) etc., with the left bracket to clearly separate from the previous text:
>
> The loser will: (i) get laughed at, (ii) pay for drinks and (iii) have to run outside naked.
>
>
>
The semicolons and commas are also subject to personal preference. In various instances I decide to use one or another; also whether to put any punctuation mark before the last *and* depends on context (although, contrary to the above example, I tend more often to insert it than don't).
In case when the points are presented in separate lines, the journal's template usually handles the formatting. Most often it's something like:
>
> The loser will:
>
>
> 1) get laughed at,
>
>
> 2) pay for drinks,
>
>
> 3) have to run outside naked.
>
>
>
Again, the commas/semicolons at the ends of the lines are context-dependent.
If each point is not just a short enumeration, but consists of several sentences, I'd finish each point with a dot and start each (with *1)* included) with capital letters.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: When numbering text inline, I think using parantheses to indicate that the number is not a part of the running text, is the best practice. Because the text might contain some other numbers.
For instance,
>
> 1. The sum of positive even numbers up to 3 is 2, 2. The sum of positive odd numbers up to 3 is 4, 3. The sum of all numbers up to 3 is 6.
>
>
>
confusing.
>
> 1) The sum of positive even numbers up to 3 is 2, 2) The sum of positive odd numbers up to 3 is 4, 3) The sum of all numbers up to 3 is 6.
>
>
>
also not very clear.
>
> (1) The sum of positive even numbers up to 3 is 2, (2) The sum of positive odd numbers up to 3 is 4, (3) The sum of all numbers up to 3 is 6.
>
>
>
Now, it is understanable.
However, my personal favorite is what @corey979 suggested. Using lowercase Roman numbers.
>
> (i) The sum of positive even numbers up to 3 is 2, (ii) the sum of positive odd numbers up to 3 is 4, (iii) the sum of all numbers up to 3 is 6.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You will want to check your style guide. For [APA Style](http://www.apastyle.org/learn/quick-guide-on-formatting.aspx#Lists)
>
> In running text, a series of items is designated by letters in parentheses: (a) first item, (b) second item, and (c) third item.
>
>
>
These lists are often called run in seriation. See also [In text listing style - how to use? Any downsides?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12814/in-text-listing-style-how-to-use-any-downsides/12900#12900)
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/11
| 901
| 3,784
|
<issue_start>username_0: My university has a 5 year BS/MS degree for mathematical sciences and I am graduating a year early, so I can do the BS/MS in only 4 years. I am considering applying to PhD programs at other universities after I complete my MS. Do PhD programs want students right out of undergrad? Or will I be at an advantage showing that I can take grad courses (assuming I do well)<issue_comment>username_1: My answer reflects the situation in the US and Canada. In the US, most Ph.D. programs accept people directly from undergrad; at a few US and most Canadian schools you'll be expected to start in a master's program, but it is generally relatively easy to move up to the Ph.D. program (not significantly harder than avoiding getting kicked out of most US Ph.D. programs). Whether it says "MS" on your degree will matter less than what courses you have taken. Having another year of coursework will probably strengthen your application (or at least gives you a chance to), but if you have to pay a significant amount of tuition, then I have serious concerns about whether it will be worth it. If you can get into a funded master's or Ph.D. program, then that will save you a LOT of money, and you can get roughly the same boost to your future applications spending a year there that you would by being in the BS/MS program.
**EDIT**: Since the OP has clarified that the extra year would be funded with a stipend, my comments above aren't really applicable. In that case, it probably is the best plan to stay at the current university and get the BS/MS.
Maybe I'll just make a general comment here which seems relevant: its generally pretty advantageous to stay longer at the current stage of career where you already are, as opposed to moving on in a rush. Our culture makes a powerful mystique around completing things quickly, but all other things being equal, it is to your benefit to be a little ahead in actual accomplishments of where you are in your career (which extra time is one way of accomplishing). You get "clock resets" at various points of your career (when starting or finishing a Ph.D., for example), if you can get more done before those, all the better. Of course, often financial or personal considerations have to be weighed against this.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Some of my friends went to a U.S. university that had many students do BA/MA and BS/MS programs ("coterms"), and for the most part it seemed like a good chance to spend a little more time to do more graduate-level coursework. I hadn't asked what their funding looks like, but (especially if you'd be graduating in 4 years) there might be a way to make any financial aid or scholarships help cover the coterm.
I'll emphasize two potentially related benefits to this:
1. If you have classmates and roommates you like, this is a way to spend a "senior year" with them, which could be personally very meaningful.
2. Let's say you got into an equivalent 1 year MA program somewhere else. It would require you to relocate, create a new support structure, learn new systems, change your email address, etc. You will have to do that sometime, but for many people that would be important to take into account if you plan to be there for only one year and then move on.
Those "touchy-feely" considerations mean you may be more likely to succeed at your graduate coursework (e.g. through fewer life disruptions, unless everyone around you starts partying heavily). You can also continue to build relationships with professors, which will help you in applying to schools and in calling on them as mentors over time.
**TL;DR: If this school is working well for you for your BS, then you have strong priors that you can succeed there for your MS.**
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/11
| 1,061
| 4,177
|
<issue_start>username_0: Almost immediately after becoming a corresponding author, my academic email account quickly become inundated with unsolicited communications from predatory open access journals and “conferences.” My spam filter does a fairly good job, catching maybe 50-75% of these messages. But now that I will be using a *new* academic email address, I’ve thought about what I can do to prevent this problem from recurring. My idea is to publish the following text in the corresponding author field:
>
> Email: <EMAIL> (remove digit “9” for correct email address)
>
>
>
Will journal editors let me do this? To my surprise, I’ve never seen another author try something similar. I’m confident that no one has (or will ever have) the “fake” email address indicated above, so there is no risk that the spam will go to an innocent third party.
Previous questions on Stack Exchange relate to email forwarding; none addresses the spam issue.<issue_comment>username_1: We all deal with this curse. Sad as it is, I suspect that your only option is to endure it -- my take is that papers ask you to provide an email address of record in some sort of official way, and playing games like the one you suggest would look inappropriate in this context.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If your email server supports this version of email aliasing, you could set up:
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
>
Alternately, if you have your own domain name, you could host your own email:
>
> <EMAIL>
>
>
>
These are legitimate email addresses for correspondence, and so the journal should not object on that front. You would just know to expect a lot of spam there.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If this is really important to you, I think the only reasonable thing to do is to contact the journal's managing editor and suggest that they implement such obfuscation across the board. Journals tend to pay a lot of attention to publishing all their papers in a consistent format, and I don't think they will want to allow obfuscation for your paper alone. I suppose you could ask, but I don't think such a request would be well received.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I sometimes read these spams, for the purpose of finding key phrases/words that can be used to filter them out (not delete, in case they are legit), I've noticed the following wording/phrasing:
* Dr [your entire name] or reversed your first + last name, or your initials followed by your full name
* "Greetings of the Day!" or "Greetings and Good Day!"
* followed by "Hope you are doing well"
so far it's working okay for me, it's not fool proof, but it helps cut down clutter a bit.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The emails I get tend to bypass my Bayesian filters by including the full title of our paper and sometimes our abstract in their email text (and I don't want to train-spam on this in case I get legitimate mail about it), but most of them so far have started with `<NAME>.` or even `De<NAME>.,<NAME>,<NAME>.,<NAME>.,<NAME>.,<NAME>.`. Our paper was in fact published with the full versions of our names (in both PDF and HTML); I'm not sure which third-party data sources abbreviate the names in this way while also giving abstracts and emails, but it has so far been a useful 'red flag' for the filters (at least to file in the spam folder to be checked infrequently). I have to be lenient to the possibility of being written to by a human who really does not know how English names work, but I can combine that rule with one that looks out for `American Journal of` (very commonly used as part of predatory journal names) or `peer-reviewed international journal` (it seems they can't resist saying this), and includes the word `unsubscribe` (obviously I wouldn't trust a spam 'unsubscribe' link to work, but the fact that it's there is a hint): I can say in my [ImapFix](http://ssb22.user.srcf.net/setup/imapfix.html) configuration that if it matches these criteria it goes into the spam. No false positives so far. (`your unpublished` is also a common phrase)
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/11
| 1,175
| 4,425
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a research paper. A small but important idea for the paper was found on MathOverflow. I know the real name of the user. I tried contacting him and offered him co-authorship, but I got no reply. How do I acknowledge him now ? Do journals encourage citations under pseudonyms?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't acknowledge, cite the Mathoverflow post!
>
> The following theorem is taken from [1] ...
>
>
> [1] A. User, blah blah,
>
>
>
Mathoverflow has also a cite function at the bottom of the posts to retrieve a possible reference in various formats (e.g. BibTeX).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Let's say it was a big enough contribution to require a citation. You could cite the MathOverflow post, as username_1 suggests, especially if the entire conversation was generative, and it would be worthwhile for readers to visit.
However, linking to a pseudonym is not going to be clear or able to be attributed to that scholar. While [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student%27s_t-distribution) stuck to a pseudonym, he also had a non-academic job to protect.
There are citation formats for message board postings, etc. in various citation systems, as shown here for MLA from [Purdue's Online Writing Lab](https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/08/):
>
> Include screen names as author names when author name is not known. If both names are known, place the author’s name in brackets.
>
>
> Editor, screen name, author, or compiler name (if available). “Posting Title.” *Name of Site,* Version number (if available), Name of institution/organization affiliated with the site (sponsor or publisher), URL. Date of access.
>
>
> Salmar1515 [<NAME>]. “Re: Best Strategy: Fenced Pastures vs. Max Number of Rooms?” *BoardGameGeek,* 29 Sept. 2008, boardgamegeek.com/thread/343929/best-strategy-fenced-pastures-vs-max-number-rooms. Accessed 5 Apr. 2009
>
>
>
The best practice is to use both screen name and real name, "if known."
HOWEVER. I think the best practice, instead of violating pseudonymity, would be to send an email to the academic email address of the person you believe this is. Say that you are interested in citing this, and wonder if they would prefer this to be cited with both names, as "personal communication" with their academic name, as some closely related work they had on a blog post under their academic name, etc.
If the person declines to confirm that they are this person, you can ask in a MathOverflow chat or as a comment to that answer whether/how that user would like to be cited.
If you are truly hoping to honor and thank them--especially if it is an acknowledgement rather than a citation--then give them the courtesy of having some say in how they are recognized and whether their pseudonym becomes published knowledge.
---
EDIT specific to MathOverflow: MathOverflow is indeed cited fairly often, and it appears that most of the top citations are to real names, according to [a Google Scholar search](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C3&q=mathoverflow&btnG=). One could avoid (newly) revealing the person's identity by searching to see if the person's real name is already associated with MathOverflow on Google Scholar, check the post to see if it's the same username/permanent identifier, and if so, cite in the same way the previous person did.
Discrete Lizard offers a [Meta MathOverflow post](https://meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/3460/how-does-one-cite-a-mo-post-with-an-anonymous-author) dealing with a very similar issue, which suggests leaving a comment asking, and/or asking moderators to send a message to the user and ask. Finally, <NAME> mentions that the norm on MathOverflow is to use real names, such that many of the user names already reveal one's identity.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I would cite the contribution. Web citation is common. Yes, it is NOT as good as citing archived paper journal literature (web is very unarchival). But so what. You do the best you can. People cite personal communications, unpublished work, etc. You do what you can.
You could also acknowledge the person in the "Acknowledgements" section. Most people just list funding agencies here, but I ended up having a lot of great mentor type conversations with people during my Ph.D. (more so than with my advisor). So I just acknowledged them.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/11
| 2,201
| 8,520
|
<issue_start>username_0: There is a proverb going around for a long time
>
> *Doing a PhD from an Asian country is a career suicide.*
>
>
>
* What is the significance of this proverb in case of *Computer Science*?
* Does this also include high ranking universities in Russia and the middle East?
* Does international ranking have any positive effect in this regard (e.g. there are some universities from [China and Singapore among the top 20](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2018/subject-ranking/computer-science#!/page/0/length/25/locations/CN+SG+TW/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats))?
**Reference**
1. [What are some down sides of doing PhD in a Japanese/ Korean/ Chinese university than that of the USA?](https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-down-sides-of-doing-PhD-in-a-Japanese-Korean-Chinese-university-than-that-of-the-USA)
2. [Are there any professors with PhDs in Humanities from Asian Universities working outside of Asia?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/46812/are-there-any-professors-with-phds-in-humanities-from-asian-universities-working)
3. [Why is a PhD from a university outside of the white sphere called ‘career annihilation’?](https://www.quora.com/Why-is-a-PhD-from-a-university-outside-of-the-white-sphere-called-%E2%80%98career-annihilation%E2%80%99)<issue_comment>username_1: There are known metrics to evaluate students' PhD performance regardless of where they studied for their PhD. One of such is the quality of their publications, where they publish their work and the level of impact in their research domain. Another is the supervisor and his/her reputation. So whether obtaining the PhD is from Asia or the West is not a strong yardstick.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, your question is broad, but to be on point, Asia needs PhDs, if you have the competent advisor and the relationship is not "master and servant", then you have high prospects to become a good independent scholar. Competition for the job is lower than in West.
About ranking, I really can't comment if it is beneficial in future employment, I think what is important is the ranking and the impact factor of the journals where you publish.
That being said, there are departments in obscure places in Iran, Thailand, Turkey, Taiwan that have higher H index than well know and regarded departments in West.
Also as far as I noticed, gender relationship and position of women in STEM is much better than in West.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **tl;dr - Because of an expected cultural mismatch between East x West work practice.**
Disclaimer: I am from a Western culture background, but I have worked in China for 2 years.
As mentioned by @username_2 the question is too broad, but I will drop my two cents. In principle I do not agree with the premise of career suicide in the broad sense, but I do see how graduating from some faraway, *poorly-understood* university may damage one's career.
I take the question from the standpoint of someone earning a PhD in the East seeking a job in the West. Originally the OP used the term "East" instead of Asia, which was culturally more appropriate, here. **There is a large cultural gap between the "East" and "West" directly affecting on how professionals interact.** Apart from a number of stigmas associated with distant cultures, one would expect frequent misunderstandings central to teaching practices (as per Academic jobs) and work relationships in general.
Taking a PhD in a radically different cultural background associates such cultural traits and perceived stigmas with an important line of your CV. I will that illustrate with key examples below.
(i) Western culture is strongly influenced by Greek philosophy and Christian principles. That results in that doubts and disputes are expected to be sorted out with logic and open dialogue. Also one is not morally accepted to seek [usury](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury), in the sense of short-term openly-declared advantages at the expense of one's partners. This mentality can be radically different in distant cultures. For instance, in Eastern cultures some unofficial hierarchy (e.g. age, status, caste) may dictate teaching/decisions overruling any objections, and even imply that a "leader" always expects advantageous deals. It is easy to foresee how that will quickly turn professional relationships awkward to an employee or manager coming from a different cultural background. For instance, anyone openly seeking advantages over the other part in negotiation will be perceived as a **cheater** in my country. Another simple example, I can say for sure that most of my colleagues would immediately refrain from hiring an Asian teacher, for fear of his/her methods.
(ii) Eastern cultures are strongly emphatic on a fashion "face culture" which is hard for Westerners to understand and accept. Again, this can quickly render a professional contact sour, as a westerner feels skating on thin ice without a map. Asking direct questions may offend like demanding explanations; the meaning of silence in a conversation is an emblematic example of communication mismatch. ...which bring us to the next main point.
(iii) Finally the language barrier is expected to be large. By language I mean both the idioms and the logic behind communication. Western languages are dominated by Latin eloquence and Germanic precision. One can fairly easily shift as a francophone to communicate ideas in English and still be understood clearly. Many Eastern languages emphasise on (face) interpersonal formalities and appraisal, on the need to communicate implied messages. These can be easily seen as undisguised flattery followed by "beating around the bush" which are behaviours frequently frowned upon at the work environment in the West.
The above list should embody associated issues, such as different methods and approaches to problems, mutually intrinsic behaviours perceived as arrogance, a mismatch regarding gender differences, etc. Therefore I believe **an expectation of major cultural mismatch** is the main obstacle to someone coming from , for instance, Asia seeking work in an American institution. As a closing remark, I emphasise I do **not** think a *career suicide* exists where one stays within the same cultural sphere where he obtained his PhD, as illustrated by the majority of employed residents having graduated at local universities, to be found anywhere. Also in such cases I believe the preference for local culture and standards are dictating the edge of locally-educated candidates.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: **Yes and no.**
<NAME> and his student at Brown University compiled data from over 2,200 computer science professors in the United States. The data is only from the top 50 CS graduate programs. A writeup is available [here](http://cs.brown.edu/people/apapouts/faculty_dataset.html), and the raw data is available [here](https://drafty.cs.brown.edu/professors/).
If you believe the data, then out of over 2,200 computer science professors at the top 50 programs, many got their Bachelor's degree from Asian universities, but only a few got their PhDs there:
* 8 from China
* 17 from India
* 1 from Singapore
* 47 from Israel
* 11 from Russia
In fact among all universities with at least 10 graduates who went on to become CS professors in the US, only one, the Hebrew University in Israel, is not in the US. In other words CS professors in the US, at least in top programs, are overwhelmingly likely to have gotten their PhDs from a US university.
That's the yes part. Now for the no part: this data is only in the US, and it's natural to expect that the data for any country is biased in favour of students who did their PhDs in the country (for example, there are only 16 CS professors in the US with a doctorate from France). The students awarded PhDs by these Asian universities can't have just disappeared; they must've gotten jobs elsewhere. In all likelihood, they were successful, just not in the sense of becoming a professor in the US.
So what is career suicide to you? If your aim is to become a CS professor in the US, then you should get a PhD from a US university, preferably MIT, followed by UC Berkeley, Stanford, <NAME>, and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in that order. If you don't mind working elsewhere or perhaps taking on a different job, then there's nothing wrong with studying elsewhere also.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/11
| 929
| 3,584
|
<issue_start>username_0: I knew from some newspapers that Taiwanese education system [prefers rote memorization over creativity](https://jsis.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/taiwan.pdf). This culture was imported from [Japan](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/04/14/national/global-education-experts-urge-japan-look-beyond-rote-learning/). This problem is also present in [Singapore](http://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/families/article/2111822/downsides-singapores-education-system-streaming-stress-and), [Hong Kong](http://cei.ust.hk/files/public/pdf/13-96.pdf), and Korea.
Although late, China seems to be the only country which is [reforming](http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1269429/no-more-rote-learning-chinese-university-ventures-broad-based-education) its rote learning culture.
* How can rote learning, in the universities of those countries, affect someone who is not used to with rote learning?
* How do they maintain their quality of higher education with rote learning (apparently, a lot of universities from South East Asian countries are sitting in the top 50 positions)?
**Note**. I am talking about computer science.<issue_comment>username_1: As a European doing a PhD in Hong Kong, I've had the occasion to TA a few CS undergrad classes as well as take my own higher-level courses. I honestly can't say that I noticed much difference in class structures beyond the fact that people are much more shy about talking in class.
So, how will it affect someone not used to it? You will stand out a bit if you ask questions in class, or if you are the type to yell out answers immediately when the lecturer poses one to the class (this is usually met with resounding silence). If you are someone affected by peer pressure, you may end up asking less questions during lectures. Join the trove of students surrounding the lecturer after class for answers.
How do they maintain their educational standards? As far as I can tell, "rote learning" mostly is code for "exercises out the wazoo" here (newspaper articles abound about kids having 30 minutes a day of play time, the rest being occupied by school and homework), and there's nothing better for learning to do a thing than doing it over and over.
TL;DR I'm sure people here had a radically different experience in primary school, but by the time they reach university it seems to all come out in a wash.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This problem is not specific to these countries mentioned, or merely computer science.
I am from Turkey and 16' Chemistry graduate from Middle East Technical University, and currently M.Sc. student in Earth System Science in METU as well.
Two-fold issue.
If one is not disciplined to do otherwise, he/she will always choose the shorter path (in)/conciously to overcome struggles. Same with learning; understanding the issue, "analyzing its components and connecting these pieces of information with other information and synthesizing a bigger part of knowledge to comprehend the real picture more" etc. takes time, effort, besides no one will give you any credit for doing all these more than they give to the ones who does rote learning.
The other, also most problematic part is creativity is , by its nature, unpredictable. Not only it cannot be controlled but also it can very well outshine "rote" ideas, may very well be one's advisor's ideas, and again no one will get over it. Current academic institution favors extremely ambitious people over anyone and this is impeding creativity, and of course the pace of the science
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/11
| 686
| 2,584
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the French system and other francophone systems, tenured faculty is divided in two categories: [maitre de conferences](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma%C3%AEtre_de_conf%C3%A9rences_(France)), equivalent to associate professors if I understand correctly, and [professeurs](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professeur_des_universit%C3%A9s), equivalent to full professors.
I'm preparing a list of people for a meeting. I am required to distinguish between no title, Dr., and Prof. The question is simple: should I call the maitre de conferences "professors"? On the one hand, their title is not formally "professor". On the other hand, their rank is equivalent to "associate professor", and so they deserve to be called "professor".
I am interested in a general answer. Not necessarily only for my situation. Call this curiosity if you wish.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a very general answer, so for your case you may wish to wait for an answer specific to the French system.
My opinion is that you should never 'translate' someone else's title in this way. You said that a *maitre de conference* 'deserves' to be called professor. However, the title 'professor' is not a value judgement on a person, it's just a job title.
In the US, this job title is used quite liberally. Outside the US, the title is often restricted to the most senior staff. In the UK, for example, the job positions of lecturer and reader are equivalent to a US associate professor and full professorship respectively. So a *maitre de conference* wouldn't be equivalent to a professorship in the UK. If you call a *maitre de conference* a professor, will you also title British lecturers and readers 'professor'?
Many scientists work at institutions which are not universities, and hence, cannot be professors unless they have also have a university appointment. For example, even the director of a Max Planck Institute is not (automatically) a professor. Are academics employed in such institutions also to be upgraded to professor?
It would be strange to invent a professor title in any of these cases. At best, it will cause bemusement, at worst they will think that you haven't properly researched their background.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, *Maître de conférences* is equivalent to Associate Professor. There [is the equivalent table between all the countries](https://www.galaxie.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/ensup/pdf/EC_pays_etrangers/Tableau_comparaison_au_26_septembre_2012.pdf) and it is equivalent to Associate/Assistant Professor.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/11
| 1,112
| 3,759
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am wondering if it is okay write something like:
"Many scholars hold the view that this is like that" and then give one example reference (e.g. Gans et.al. 1965) ?
The reason I am wondering because it is generally accepted and no one seems to disagree on that. Is it better (1) not to reference at all, (2) reference the most original paper and skip e.g., or (3) mention few?<issue_comment>username_1: If something is considered common knowledge in the field (for instance, Newton’s second law in a physics paper), then no reference is required. If it’s been developed multiple independent times, though, I’d use more than one reference to establish it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have used the following construction:
>
> *Many scholars hold the view that x is like y (Smith et al. 2000; Brown et al. 2001; and many others as cited in Stone et al. 2005).*
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Here are a few ways you can keep the citation with just that one resource. I'd rewrite to avoid the "many scholars hold the view" part (which you would need to defend by citing multiple papers). Instead, you can emphasize the idea itself.
If you're setting it up to disagree with it:
>
> It has long been held that X is like Y (see, e.g., a comprehensive argument in Gans et al. 1965).
>
>
>
(Though if you're getting ready to argue against it, you will want to go into further detail and cite several different sources.)
If you're just trying to get that fact in there as background you're building on, you can say:
>
> It can be useful to use Y as a model for X (see, for instance, a treatment of this question in the context of Z in Gans et al. 1965).
>
>
> X can be thought of in the same way as Y (e.g. Gans et al. 1965).
>
>
> X resembles Y (e.g. Gans et al. 1965).
>
>
>
All of these formulations shy away from asserting X is exactly like Y, or that X is a type of Y, but they get the point across and give people further reading.
Given all the time in the world to track down every bit of nearly-common knowledge, you would find and cite the original scholarly reference for the idea, AND (if needed) recommend a later paper that would help the reader because it is easier to read or is written in a context similar to the context of your own paper or it uses modern notation. Readers who are aware of the original source might be amused/disturbed to find only a "lesser" reference there without explanation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are certain that several scholars hold the view, then presumably you know where they said that, and you should cite several sources. If you are not certain, you should look for sources.
Be careful to avoid propagating untrue information and wrong citations. For example, Friedman & Koller (2003), a machine learning paper about learning Bayesian network structure, says
>
> in small domains with a substantial amount of data, it has been shown that the highest scoring model is orders of magnitude more likely than any other (Heckerman, Meek, & Cooper, 1997).
>
>
>
But Heckerman, Meek, & Cooper (1997) only showed the claim to be true in one specific case. Friedman & Koller's claim might be true, but their implication that Heckerman, Meek, & Cooper (1997) showed it to be true is not.
### References
[<NAME>, <NAME> (2003), Being Bayesian about network structure: a Bayesian approach to structure discovery in Bayesian networks. Machine Learning, 50, 95–125](https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020249912095)
[<NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME> (1997), A Bayesian approach to causal discovery. Technical report MSR-TR-97-05, Microsoft Research](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.48.9593)
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/11
| 524
| 2,268
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper to a conference sponsored by IEEE. After 3 hours, i received an email that said
>
> your paper has been accepted and recommend to present paper. Your paper will be recommended for publication in IEEE Xplore�. The conference date is after 23 days.
>
>
>
Note: I didn’t receive any reviewer comments on my paper. Only 6 points are written which seems to be general for every paper.
Is it really possible that they have reviewed the paper or did they just accept the paper without review?<issue_comment>username_1: It's impossible that the paper was reviewed (at least by a human). 3 hours is way too short. Weeks is a much better order of magnitude estimate for the time required to review papers.
It sounds like you're dealing with a predatory conference. I would approach with care. Check if the conference's scientific committee are actually established researchers in the field, check the keynote speakers to see if other established researchers are intending to attend, check if the conference has been held before and if so, how those conferences went.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It definitely is abnormal, although reviewers usually spend quite little time in practice. I highly suspect this is a conference for MONEY. You'd better withdraw your paper.
There are several (at least some) serious conferences in almost every field. I do not mean the conferences are large or their papers have very high impact factors (but usually they do). I mean they all have high reputation. A direct way to find such conferences is to see who submit their papers to and who attend the conferences. My suggestion is only to submit to these conferences, for your own reputation.
---
It seems that the conference is 'related to EE but has wide research topics including signal processing'. I may assume your paper is about signal processing. For signal processing, there are a bunch of serious conferences including: ICASSP, GlobalSIP, Allerton, Asilomar, etc. You may also consider some communications conferences which also cover signal processing topics, such as ICC, GlobalCom, WCNC. If your research lies in the theoretic part, there are information theory conferences like ISIT, CISS, ITW.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/11
| 570
| 2,440
|
<issue_start>username_0: A large number of US schools I applied to have put me on their waitlist, and since I also applied to a few programs in other Europe that release their decisions later, I still need more time to make my decision. (Especially because I've been put on the waitlist for the best graduate school in the world (or at least US) in my field, so it would be painful to accept a different offer, and then receive an offer from them that I cannot accept!)
I started receiving offers just this week, which is only a few days to the April 15th deadline, and I have at most 2 weeks to decide. That being said, I understand that there are other people on the waitlist, and I think the grad schools may say it's not possible to get an extension. But another problem I have for making the decision, is that I'm in a super-stressful situation for my finals now, and with all grad school stuff, the psychological pressure is high and I really believe I might make a bad decision in this situation.
Is that (the stress and pressure) a good reason to ask for at least a few days more time for making the decision (so I'll be done with my exams and have a couple of days to make decision in a more relaxed condition), or is that too personal to explain to grad school and not acceptable?<issue_comment>username_1: Most of your colleagues are going through stressful scenarios right now as well, finishing up exams, projects, term papers, and the other parts of their undergraduate careers as well. So it’s unlikely that you’d get an extension just because of deadlines.
If you had extreme extenuating circumstances—personal illness, family issues, or other events—you could make a request that is more likely to be accepted. But in general, there’s not much you can do.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't see the trouble with asking for a few days extension. In general, an inquiry in advance doesn't cause problems, as long as you make the request professionally. You should, however, be prepared for this request to be denied at least some of the time.
First, I would reiterate your continued interest in the program. Then I would use the short turnaround as the justification for my request, rather than stress.
If you were not invited to/able to attend the visit day as a waitlisted student, you might also request to be put in contact with some faculty or grad students to help you make your decision.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/11
| 456
| 1,912
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there some kind of academic norm that says "when I reject an applicant, I don't want anything to do with him?"
*edit:* If a professor is reading this, personal experience from himself and colleagues will be really helpful!<issue_comment>username_1: It very much depends on *why* you were rejected.
For example, a year ago, it's possible the professor couldn't fund a student. Or there were limited spots, and someone else urgently needed a student. Or they were just getting a project going, and didn't want to add another person into their lab.
All of those are circumstances where it might be possible to revisit your application.
If you don't *know* the reason, you might still try. After all, if you don't apply functionally the answer is "No".
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I recently had a similar experience, and after (me and my advisor) consulting with people at the graduate schools my answer is, no, there's no such norm.
Basically, some of the faculty said they couldn't recruit me not because my application isn't strong but rather because they simply aren't recruting any graduate students this year. Others said my application was great but somehow it just didn't make the cut this year.
So, it might not be a bad idea to consult those people and ask them what happened to your application. Maybe it was simply because someone couldn't recruit one extra student. In that case, you're going to have a very good chance, aren't you? Odds that a research group doesn't recruit students in two consecutive years is probably quite low.
After all, I assume you'll be spending the rest of this year doing stuff and potentially strengthening your application, aren't you? In any case, the case for you would be stronger by then. Even if your application is simply "not good enough" this time, it wouldn't be a bad choice to try again.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/12
| 450
| 1,819
|
<issue_start>username_0: For example: Do graduates *receive* a Bachelor of Arts degree or *become* a Bachelor of Arts?
Are Bachelor degrees grammatically and/or etymologically distinct from advanced degrees?
I note that the titles Master and Doctor are still in common usage, even though in practice frequently divorced from the associated academic degrees. (E.g, a Master as a formal designation is now most frequently associated with a skilled trade – like *master electrician*. And many holders of doctorate degrees eschew the use of the title outside of medicine and the academy.)
Etymologically it appears that *Baccalaureate* would be the correct term for a person who has received a Bachelor's degree. But I can't find that in modern usage, and its etymology (*laureate*) emphasizes the award of the degree, rather than the achievement of mastery or doctoral skill.
Or do I have it backward, and it is modern academia that has appropriated these different titles without establishing such terminological consistency?<issue_comment>username_1: They're *degrees,* indicating advancement on a course of study. Hence, bachelor, master, and doctor are different *degrees* of accomplishment in (usually) the same discipline.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Depends on the country and education system.
For example, in English, 'bachelor' doesn't mean anything but that you finished that level of education. In Spanish, finishing university doesn't mean a person gets recognized as having the degree: there are further methods to achieve that (titulaciòn), after which the government officially recognizes the degree and the title that comes white it like 'ingeniero' (engineer) or 'abogado' (lawyer). That is why in some countries the degree is added as a title at the start of a person's name.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/12
| 509
| 2,015
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have two questions:
* How can I know which university/school uses Bell Curved Grading system,and which one doesn't?
* Suppose, I have two acceptances from two schools *(a)* one applies Curved grading, and *(b)* another one doesn't. Is there any reason I should choose the one without curve so that I can be on the safe side?<issue_comment>username_1: **All universities use bell curves to some extent.**
* Sometimes they are very clear about this, stating in the syllabus: "the top 15% of students will get an A", etc.
* Others claim not to curve: "if you get a 90%, you get an A. I'll give an A to everyone in the class if everyone gets a 90%." But in practice, the difficulty of the exercises/exams reacts to the students' performance, so as to reverse-engineer the desired bell curve.
So, I would argue that this is a false distinction.
That said:
* **Some universities may have guidelines or culture that encourages one or the other.** As noted in the comments, the only real way to find out is to ask them (though they may be confused by the question)
* **Things will vary even within a university.** In my experience, some graduate programs will give an A to everyone who completes the course, while some intro-level science courses in the same university have a bell curve such that the average grade is a C. Decisions about how to grade generally lie with the instructor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is simply no way to know, because there are no uniform grading standards within universities. I know that I do not enforce bell-curve grading, and neither do many of my colleagues, while others do.
Also, many universities do not recommend bell curve grading, because it makes grading more challenging, because technically you’d have to change lots of grades if you make a grading mistake. Instead, they recommend choosing one “fixed grade”—for instance, the mark between passing and failing—and the increment to the next level.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/12
| 628
| 2,529
|
<issue_start>username_0: How strange is it to want to spend three years on a Master's degree to take an extra six courses? A lot of programs have different curriculum for introductory PhD students vs introductory Master's. I want to be able to take some of those PhD classes, and I want to have spare room for exciting electives both within my Master's and outside it in associated fields.
When is this not possible, and does spending an extra year in a Master's program sound bad? I'd simply end up spending all my time self-studying the extra material after a two year degree anyway.
Edit: I don't know how I'd feel applying for a PhD then dropping to a Master's in a couple years to have a separate core sequence. I don't want to waste anyone's time.
Edit: I'm not enrolled yet. Funding would hopefully be a combination of resident tuition and a TAship/RAship.<issue_comment>username_1: **All universities use bell curves to some extent.**
* Sometimes they are very clear about this, stating in the syllabus: "the top 15% of students will get an A", etc.
* Others claim not to curve: "if you get a 90%, you get an A. I'll give an A to everyone in the class if everyone gets a 90%." But in practice, the difficulty of the exercises/exams reacts to the students' performance, so as to reverse-engineer the desired bell curve.
So, I would argue that this is a false distinction.
That said:
* **Some universities may have guidelines or culture that encourages one or the other.** As noted in the comments, the only real way to find out is to ask them (though they may be confused by the question)
* **Things will vary even within a university.** In my experience, some graduate programs will give an A to everyone who completes the course, while some intro-level science courses in the same university have a bell curve such that the average grade is a C. Decisions about how to grade generally lie with the instructor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is simply no way to know, because there are no uniform grading standards within universities. I know that I do not enforce bell-curve grading, and neither do many of my colleagues, while others do.
Also, many universities do not recommend bell curve grading, because it makes grading more challenging, because technically you’d have to change lots of grades if you make a grading mistake. Instead, they recommend choosing one “fixed grade”—for instance, the mark between passing and failing—and the increment to the next level.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/13
| 797
| 3,141
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose Alice wins the Nobel Prize and $1 million. Does the prize money go entirely to personal matters, or is she likely to use some (most/all?) of it for academic pursuits? If the latter, how does she go about it? Does she just "award herself" a grant similar to grants that academics apply for?
I'm particularly curious about the Fields Medal since it has a stated purpose to encourage awardees for further achievement, which can be interpreted as saying that awardees should use the prize money for academic purposes.<issue_comment>username_1: Unless there is a particular criterion requiring that the money be spent on research causes, there is generally no restriction on how the prizewinner spends the money. It could certainly be used for things like travel on sabbaticals, donations to charitable causes they support, or even [personal expenditures](https://www.editage.com/insights/ever-wondered-how-nobel-laureates-spend-their-prize-money).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect awardees do not use the award money to do research in the majority of instances. My opinion is not judgemental: in most cases, it would not make much sense to spend that money for research purpose.
In fact, the average Nobel (or Fundamental Physics Prize, probably the largest sum awarded as prize to scientists) is shared among several people, and amounts to a few hundred of thousands of US dollars each. While that is a large sum for personal purpose, it is not necessarily a large sum for research purpose.
More importantly, a Nobel medalist is certainly in the league, and with much better prospects of success, to obtain research grants that range in the millions (European research council grant for example). If you can fetch millions of research money every 5 - 10 years, what difference your ten times smaller, once-in-a lifetime Nobel prize sum would make? Of course the argument above is even stronger for the Fields medal, given its relatively low monetary value.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Other have noted that it depends upon the Award. In the case of MacArthur "Genius Grants", popular press articles have examined how recipients spend this prize.
This [*New York Times* article](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/26/your-money/how-macarthur-geniuses-handle-their-money-windfalls.html) describes how most recipients used the money for things such as their charities, own research, debts, and other causes.
This [*Time* article](http://time.com/money/4946447/macarthur-genius-grant-fellowship-winners-money/) examined how 6 recipients used their prizes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Another important factor to consider is the tax policy of the country the winner is a tax resident of, and issues of international taxation.
I personally know of someone who was wealthy enough and living in a country to be in the tax bracket that a large portion of a monetary award to that person would have gone to tax. That tax was avoided by using the money for research instead. It funded a few PhD students for several years, and sufficient lab resources.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/13
| 281
| 1,156
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a citation of an online article that I used in my research for an essay, yet I haven't referenced this citation anywhere in the essay. Should I keep the citation, or delete it because nothing refers to it?<issue_comment>username_1: I would not include an entry in the bibliography of a paper if it is not mentioned in the essay in which it appears, for exactly the reason you cite. If a work is not mentioned in the essay, why should we believe that you used it in the article?
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: A **Works Cited** by definition includes only the...works that you cited. So any extraneous entries should be removed.
In contrast, a **bibliography** can include all related work, even if you don't specifically refer to it. The goal of a bibliography is not only to cite the author's sources, but also to provide recommended reading for the reader.
In scientific journals, my experience is with the former. If you think a particular article has value, you can refer to it in the text, even obliquely (e.g., "X is widely discussed in the literature [1-15]. In this work, ...")
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/13
| 661
| 2,751
|
<issue_start>username_0: Let me first say that the I am a first semester student studying in North America coming from a very different cultural background, so I get confused as to what would be okay in not just college but also this part of the world. I am reaching towards to the of my first semester one of my professors has really inspired me and I would like to appreciate them. However I am confused if I should just write an email or give little handwritten card/note. Some questions that come to my mind are:
* Should I give the note to the professor at the end of the last class (would my class mates judge me?) or give it during office hours?
* I am performing really well in the professors class do I need to wait till the grades are in or is it okay to give it before that?
* Is it okay to say “I hope I can take another class of yours in the future semesters”
My question might sound silly to ask this but I just don’t want to make the teacher uncomfortable especially since this is the first time for me in college and in such an environment.<issue_comment>username_1: In the U.S., probably best to not express thanks publicly, unless you are thinking to get others to join in. If you can put a thank-you note in the professor's paper-mail mailbox in their department, that might be optimal. It does demonstrate a bit more effort (and, thus, more non-trivial expression of thanks) than just an email, for example.
But an email thank-you is good, too.
And, yes, probably better to wait until after grades are settled, if there's any potential volatility there. Don't want to create even a hint of conflict-of-interest on any side.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Any expression of thanks is generally going to be accepted well. As has been noted, you might want to wait until after grades are assigned if you are concerned about potential conflicts-of-interest (or appearance of). But, I don't think you should be too concerned if you are just giving a note or small gift.
However, I would encourage you to give your gift face-to-face if possible. It is especially heartening to hear directly from my students and be able to chat with them about what they enjoyed about the class. This is particularly important if the class was a large one where you didn't have as much opportunity to become well-known to the professor.
Drop by during office hours if possible.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Please, no gifts! In Germany I am not allowed to accept a gift from students at all. It puts me in a very uncomfortable position, and has happened a few times. I give the gift to the dean, who probably trashes it (unless it is drinkable). A nice postcard in my snail-mail-box would be a lovely way to say thanks.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/13
| 882
| 3,779
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have noticed that most .edu domains have a very "academic" looking simple HTML websites ([Do academics look down on well-designed academic websites?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/69275/do-academics-look-down-on-well-designed-academic-websites)) for professors and departments. My graduate school follows a template for the main department website and the professors and graduate students upload their own HTML websites on their sub domains.
I was recently tasked with uploading a simple HTML website for our group's research page. I have created websites before but my advisor asked me to put in minimal effort as I am busy writing research papers right now and should not be spending a whole lot of time playing with HTML and CSS.
I have noticed that a lot of professors have the same minimalist design of HTML websites. I know professors are pressed for time and so will adopt a minimalist HTML template and tweak it.
**My question is**: are there known resources where free simple HTML templates are available that *require no attribution*? I found several HTML templates that require attribution (linking back) to original designer and I would like to avoid that as I need something very simple that I can tweak.
I understand that professors might be writing the HTML from scratch. But if someone knows of a template I could use, that would be great.<issue_comment>username_1: When I was looking for a CSS style for my personal academic website, I got a recommendation to use Twitter Bootstrap. Then, I bascially ripped only the style out of it, but acknowledged them in the page footer.
As I just [checked](https://getbootstrap.com/), you can directly link to their style without copying it locally and the code is licensed under an MIT license.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: *Why not* use one of the templates with a CC or MIT license that you found? (Avoid Share-Alike unless it is only about the markup and not the content.) In academia, having proper attribution will be looked on favorably, and it's clear that the professor just wants it done. If you find a nice solution that you can attribute and tweak, your advisor will see that you worked efficiently, by not reinventing the wheel.
My guess is that academic pages not attributed to a template:
* Are hand-coded from basic HTML or created as exports from editing programs (even Word does this), as OR Mapper suggested in a comment
* Are part of a university-level template or CSS scheme after all
* Borrow code in ways that one could argue should be attributed
* Take someone a lot of time to put together (possibly university staff rather than the professor)
If there's an existing academic's page you really like, you can check the source code and see if that gives clues about how it was produced. (Human-readable with indentations probably means hand-written; lots of needless tags being opened and closed probably means a WYSIWYG editor. Sometimes a code generator will be mentioned in meta tags or comments.) **Do not copy the source code**, just see if it leads you to a workable answer.
If you truly want to be minimalist, you can also work from a resource like [this HTML tutorial](https://www.w3schools.com/html/) which in my mind would not require attribution.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: One common method is copying the html source of someone else's page. If you're worried about ethics, you can always send an email asking for permission. If it's someone you know, the chance they'll respond is obviously higher.
A colleague once told (not asked) me that he had copied my html source, and my only reaction was feeling mildly flattered. My page is basic enough that it would have been laughable to ask for attribution.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/13
| 712
| 3,210
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to know the paper rejection probability (very rough) after two round of major revision. At the 1st and 2nd revision, I have revised the paper properly according to the reviewer's comments. The reviewer has raised a new issue in the 2nd revision and the reviewer has recommended me to revise the paper again. I have revised the paper properly again and submitted to the journal. The number of assign reviewer for the paper is only 1 (Reviewer 1). The paper has been reviewing for 7 months.
In the 2nd revision, I could not understand the editorial manager paper status meaning. The paper status has changed from "major revision" to "with editor" after submitting the revised paper. After 1 week later the paper status has changed to "under review" and then after two weeks later the paper status has changed to "with editor". I have not received any email from the editor so far. This morning I have checked the paper status and I found that the paper status again has changed to "under review". I would be grateful if someone could help me to understand the meaning of the status.<issue_comment>username_1: Why not check with the editor whether she already has received the review or when she expects to get it? You could even ask her how to interpret the status changes. I would find those a bit confusing as well.
At the risk of giving you false hope, I'd say I think you are in a good position and the chance of rejection at this stage is slim. Why do I think this?
1. The editor has already decided they are interested in the paper; it would not have been send out for review otherwise.
2. Being asked to revise your manuscript after reviews again indicates that both the reviewer and the editor think those revisions are doable and that the manuscript would be publishable after revisions.
3. In both revisions you managed (I am inferring this from what you wrote) to answer the reviewer questions to your own satisfaction and the reviewer also found your answers at the first revision sufficient.
All this together makes me think you have a quite high chance of acceptance currently.
Please see [What does the typical workflow of a journal look like?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55665/what-does-the-typical-workflow-of-a-journal-look-like) for general information on journal workflows.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, few editors would allow for several rounds of resubmission unless they would like to publish the paper. Therefore, the probability of eventual acceptance should be much higher than the base acceptance rate at the journal.
With regards to the status updates: "with editor" means that the editor is about to look at your resubmission and make a decision on whether to send it out to referees. "Under review" means that reviewers have been assigned. In some cases, it does not mean that the reviewers have actually agreed to reviewing. The switch back to "with editor" suggests that the reviewer has either declined to review the paper again or has completed the review. In the former case, expect the paper to switch back to "under review", in the latter case expect to hear from the editor soon.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/13
| 1,115
| 4,771
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently writing a paper of my results in a field of pure mathematics.
My work is a generalization of an already existing result, which is not mine. My adviser and I think that there is a substantial differences between my result and the already existing result, and so it's worth a publication.
Since I'm generalizing an already existing paper it will be very convenient both for me and the readers that I will use the same notations and definitions as in the other paper. So I wrote those down and cited the other authors.
The part of definitions and notations is roughly 10%-15% of the whole paper, and even though I properly cited the other authors, I'm worried to be accused of plagiarism by the "automatic plagiarism detector", which I heard most journals use.
How can I avoid being falsely accused for plagiarism?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't copy that part of the other paper word-for-word. Just introduce the notations and definitions in your own words.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: What you don't want to do — is to copy their definitions exactly. Even though you are in pure mathematics, definitions, phrasings, and explanations *can and should be different*. Moreover, in a paper, the things are introduced in a specific order – and I doubt that you have exactly the same focus as the previous paper. Thus, even a very similar section with the definitions & notations will be different.
I also suggest to include in the paper:
* in the introduction: the sentence/paragraph that highlights the connection (problem statement, similarity, differences) between yours and the original paper
* in the main part: the sentence that discloses using the same notations as in [1].
* possibly in the submission itself (if allowed): a PDF of the preceding paper that has to be read by peers to judge the novelty of this publication and how it extends the obtained results.
In general, for peer review **in a reputable journal**, you should not be afraid of automatic machines too much. Especially, if you/your advisor have a history of publications in this journal/field and good reputation. Also, if you follow the general guidelines for "writing in your own words for your own paper goals", you should automatically pass even the strictest automatic machines.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: It is generally known that definitions and restated theorems can cause significant textual overlap between papers to an extent that could be considered problematic. There is no point in worrying about automatic plagiarism checks for journal submissions: If a journal is relying on that alone without an editor checking, it is not a reasonable journal to submit to anyway.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: It becomes plagiarism only if you intentionally present [parts of] someone else's work as your own, otherwise it is citation. Robots may not be smart enough to distinguish, but that's why nobody relies on them much: they help to make decisions, not make decisions by themselves. What those automatic systems do is mark parts of your work as resembling parts of some other works to attract attention of human reviewers, who decide if that is plagiarism or not. Don't bother rephrasing the quotes just to game those systems.
I saw one of such systems at work, it would paint shorter indirect quotes yellow, indicating it has "79% overlap with [7]", a long direct quote it would paint red, because it's "100% overlap" with [19]", then add something like another "References" section, where those [7] and [19] would be, so the reviewers can examine them, if they want. Would be no problem for you if you made it clear that those are quotes and provided the references. (Also, it painted the entire "Reference" section red, because every reference was already used in like 200 other papers, but of course nobody takes that as plagiarism.)
The reviewers may still reject the paper because it has "too much quotations/too little original content", but that's a different story.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: If it is your formula, then I would think you would be safe. You have cited those that you took directly from others. Also, some may be so generic that they don't need citing, such as 'E=MC Squared'that obviously came from Einstein but it is so well known it doesn't need to be cited.
In my experience, when I write a paper it is usually tagged by some percentage as plagiarized. Once as high as 15%, and when I checked the sources, I was one of the people who I plagiarized. Those automatic, computer-generated, reports are very inaccurate to a degree, so I wouldn't worry about it. If you genuinely think it is a problem, talk to your professor, advisor, or publisher.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/13
| 2,067
| 8,865
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Short version**
I am a senior postdoc in a research lab mentoring a first-year graduate student from another country, and he has very poor English:
1. Would it be rude or unethical or just silly to suggest he improve his English?
2. If it is appropriate, what should I suggest he do, and how can I do that without coming off rude or racist?
**Longer version**
Person X is bad enough with English that it is holding back our ability to do science. It is very hard to understand what he is saying, and he has trouble understanding very basic (e.g., first grade) level sentences spoken fairly slowly. It is so frustrating at this point that I basically try to communicate via email, which is sort of unfair to him. I am his main source of scientific guidance in the lab, as the PI is not usually around.
If it matters, he is from China and in his 20s (I only bring that up because maybe there are cultural or language issues here I should be sensitive to, but also he isn't a teenager so maybe he will have trouble improving).
I should add that most students, by this time in their tenure as grad students, have improved dramatically in their English (we have a lot of international students). His case is unusual in that he has really not improved at all. My guess is that this is because he speaks his native tongue at home (I have noticed this) and doesn't speak English much outside of lab.
Communication is crucial in science, and this person cannot communicate well (in English). OTOH, I worry about violating all sorts of professional or personal ethical boundaries, and offending him, if I bring the topic up.
Another option is that it is pretty much useless. That is, he is in his 20s, and isn't going to improve significantly, so maybe I should just look for advice on how to make the best of the situation. I'm not saying this is true, just throwing it out there as a possibility.
There has been a related question about students in classrooms. This is different, as I work with this person almost every day in a laboratory setting (
[Should we tell students they need to improve their English?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79449/should-we-tell-students-they-need-to-improve-their-english)).<issue_comment>username_1: As an adviser or mentor it can be interesting to learn how the person you are advising/mentoring is feeling. Based on the response, you might gain a clearer idea on how to approach finding a solution. It seems that the individual in question understands written English quite well given you mention you have chosen to communicate via email. I would suggest sending them a message asking them how they are feeling with the program so far and with their work in the lab, and what are some challenges he has faced or is facing. You could ask whether he feels his English proficiency has been problematic so far, and add a couple of other items to like working with the equipment and colleagues, for example. This opens a space for conversation that is minimally face-threatening to the individual and invites them to seek advice and guidance to help their better functioning in the lab.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: We see this often in high-tech and when I teach both graduate & undergraduate computer engineering.
The thing is: For international students who recently came here (I assume US) usually it is that (from his point of view) you are talking too fast and pronounce words in a weird way... which reminded me of a scene from old British TV show "yes minister": <https://youtu.be/sQhgjl9qk2w?t=16m40s>
You mention he is in his 1st year so probably he hasn't got used to hearing American spoken language esp if he is not trying to speak English outside the lab.
But: we care about solutions here. So, if you need to directly communicate with him, then use a laptop in between both of you and switch on the voice typing. it is now a standard feature in all operating systems. Typically these students are proficient with written language and "Business English" so that should help him keeping up with what you are saying.
A simple way to justify it to him is to say something like: I noticed you have hard time keeping up with the way I talk and probably I also speak too fast. I think this may help us communicate better.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I have taught a few thousand Chinese students by now and observed several common problems.
Most are able to learn English very well, but if they don't, the problem in my experience is one of these:
About 1 in 20 problematic cases there is a learning disability, speech impediment, or some other physiological problem. These cases are very rare at the university level, out of ~3000 students I had about 4 of those.
About 19 out of 20 is they lack motivation. In China there is a habit to do a bare minimum to achieve a goal. Also most students study what they study because their parents chose it for them and they don't really care as long as it makes their parents happy. This applies to adults as much as to teens. Also many use academia to get out of China and move their wealth overseas. Academic goals, including mastering English, may have a distant priority.
With that being said, first you should make sure he is aware that his English is sub-par for the job. Just let him know straight up, it's OK. In fact, it's your obligation to give him feedback on critical issues. Chances are he will improve slowly. Google Translate is very very good nowadays with Chinese translation. Be pragmatic and make the best out of it. Use his math skills or whatever he is strong at and work around his lack of English. If it is not good enough, use the standard legal procedures at your university to deal with it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: First, you should talk to your department head, your HR, and maybe even your school's legal counsel, to see how much authority you have in telling a student to improve his English, or possibly fail out of your Science program.
If it were up to me, I'd designate a person (or preferably a panel) who specializes in teaching English as a Second Language to judge your student's progress in improving his English. These people would also be able to recommend corrective actions and a personal plan for improvement. And alternatively, if the student doesn't improve quickly enough, I would make these people the ones who decide whether he fails out of your Science program for language reasons, or not (although, I would make them take into account your academic experience with him, ultimately, I would want them to have the final say over this issue).
And if it were up to me, I'd also designate a former student (or a current faculty) of the same national origin (or at least foreign-born) who successfully struggled with the same problem to mentor him on this issue and to advocate on his behalf. As an English non-native speaker and as someone with a heavy accent myself, I find it's a lot easier for me to constructively criticize others with worse accents than mine since I have one myself.
And if neither of these options are available to you, I would bring it up myself at the very least. Improving English is a necessary part of passing your Science program. And if he doesn't improve fast enough, he may fail out of your program. He needs to realize that.
As to him speaking Chinese with friends or family members on his cell phone, stay away from mentioning any of this to him or to anyone else. You don't want to micro-manage his learning of English. He's an adult, he should already know that if he speaks English at home, he will improve his English. Besides, as someone who has power over him, you do not want to meddle with his personal life, even with a well-meaning off-hand comment, or you could get yourself into legal trouble.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I suggest recommending him to attend a language improvement course that emphasizes conversations. It seems he knows English (evidenced by his understanding of emails). There are language centers that teach English all over the world, but it could still be overwhelming for the student to figure out how to register, etc. So I suggest you check out one for him and recommend him directly to book a course there.
That's the easy part, the hard part is to bring this topic up. Maybe a friendly thoughtful email asking him if he can follow up with conversations or if 'we should talk slower' (even if you already do, but just to show him you're also willing to do something to improve the situation). Then later in the email you can suggest the language center. If you want to be extra nice, you can also tell him that there are many dialects of English and even if you speak perfect English it might require some practice to understand all of them.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/13
| 1,893
| 7,632
|
<issue_start>username_0: My family originates from Russia but I only have experience with American academia. My parents constantly describe oral exams whereupon a student is required to choose one of many cards that have a certain amount of questions on them and then after some time preparing be able to answer the question verbally to the professor, who can then ask follow up questions.
In my mind, this offers numerous **benefits**; it's much harder to cheat this system as you have to verbalise your answer so copying is not an option, verbalisation is shown to help with memory's retention, because you don't know what topic the teacher/professor will follow up with you have to more deeply to impress the professor, and many more.
The **drawbacks** seem limited to me; more people standing around waiting to do the exam isn't great, nor is the fact that this will be a bit more subjective to the teacher/professor.
Is there some specific reason as to why this isn't done?<issue_comment>username_1: An oral exam takes me about 30 minutes (including preparation and discussion afterwards). I have about 110 students in my class. Doing an oral exam for that class would take me about 55 hours. This is not the only class I teach. I teach about 5 classes per semester. In order to avoid some of the subjectivity my department requires that an additional staff member is present. So implementing this for my courses would take about 55\*5\*2=550 person hours. That is just not practical (not to mention that my colleagues won't thank me for the additional work I give them as they have to sit in for these exams).
I know how long an oral exam takes because I do use it sometimes, but for practical reasons I can only do that for a small number of courses and I have to justify why this is necessary to my colleagues.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Cheating can be a problem with oral exams just as much as with a written exam. The issue is foreknowledge of the questions, rather than the ability to verbalize the answers. So you’d be dependent on having a large stack of questions, which leads to a question of fairness. If you randomly select questions to answer, how are you sure that students across the class are getting roughly equal difficulty in the questions they’re supposed to answer. All of this has to go into the preparation time for the exam.
And none of this deals with the enormous time constraints of administering the exam to a large number of students in a class. While I have done such exams when I had 15 or 20 students in a co-taught class, I would never even consider doing it for a lecture course of 50 or more students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I actually did that once, as a TA in basic computer science for CS majors. 90ish students, 10-15mins each group of 3 students, it took me the best part of two weeks, including days from 7am to 9pm.
I was only able to do it because I had a lot of "free" time as a TA (MS student, but I didn't have any courses of my own and my work was ahead of schedule).
>
> **NEVER AGAIN**
>
>
>
Why? Because it takes an insane amount of man-hours (even if you do in parallel) and it doesn't inform you of anything you don't know already. After a while, it is fairly easy to spot the good students, the lazy but good, and the bad students. In that specific course, the marks for that oral exam were remarkably similar to the ones of a regular written exam I applied two months later.
Unless you want to see how the student behaves when "put on the spot", it serves no purpose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As others have pointed out, oral exams take a lot of time.
I'm not familiar with the US education system, but I'm in a country where, from the elementary school to the university, verbal tests and oral exams are quite common, and I've administered oral exams for about 20 years (with a duration from 20 min to 1 hour, depending on the class). I'll thus try to outline what factors, apart from tradition, allow to administer oral exams in a manageable way.
The most significant factor is probably the structure of courses and exams. In my country, there are usually several exam sessions in a year and students can take an exam in any one of those sessions. And, frequently, for very small courses, professors allow students to take the exam whenever they wish along the year. This means that if you have a course of, say, 100 students, 50 will probably take the exam at the first session, 30 at the second and 10-15 at the third session and the rest along the year (of course, at each session there's also a bit of backlog).
Second, for many courses, there are both a written and oral tests. Those who don't pass the written test are not admitted to the oral test and fail the exam. This means that of 50 students that try the exam at the first session, maybe only 20-40 pass the exam (in the past, just 10 would not have been uncommon), and this further limits the number of oral exams that you have to deliver each session.
Third, there is a certain freedom on how to administer the exams. Some professors will thus make the oral test optional: students who decide to not take the oral test cannot get a top grade (e.g. they can get a B, or equivalent, at most). And, usually, it is remarked that the oral exam can also worsen the grade. This, again, allows to further reduce the number of oral exams (in my experience, only about 10% of the students try the oral exam if it's optional).
In addition to the above points, there is also the acceptance of the stress of the oral exam and the subjectivity, or perceived fairness, of the evaluation (and a few comments here show that this is a controversial point, probably worth of a different question).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Another aspect not mentioned (I am not sure if this is made concrete somewhere) is that oral exams do put students on the spot (they are in now way anonymous). This opens up the universities of being sued, if a student feels uncomfortable.
Even worse, a student could accuse the professor of some bad behavior in this situation, as a retaliation of a poor grade.
Grading a written exam can be done together with the TAs, and it is easy to get a second opinion, and spread the grading over several people, thus reducing the grounds for a student accusing a teacher for treating them unfairly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I am going to speak solely from personal experience as a student in Russia going through 5 oral exams right now. In my university, the lecturer is usually just one of about 10 professors from the department in the lecture hall where we take the exam. These people most of the time have drastically different views on how you should explain one concept or another and what level of understanding deserves an A. This brings me to my main point - grades which are given during such an oral exam simply are not equal to the knowledge of a particular student. I have many friends who didn't deserve their grades and many who deserved much better. This, unfortunately, means that your luck, charisma, and sometimes your looks/gender determine your GPA and consecutively your further education.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm teaching in the US system and, because of the pandemic, I started using oral online exams for my midterm and final exams. I find I can get an A/B/C/D/F decision on a grade within about 5 minutes, and a more nuanced grade within 10. This is approximately the same time as I spend grading traditional written exams (I'm a slow grader).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/13
| 1,514
| 6,273
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been facing the following "problems" with my department head at an undergraduate institute. I joined it just under a year ago and am already facing (what appears to be) a lot of negativity from her. Here are my main problems:
1) Last semester, she would always come to me/email me telling me what a couple of students said/complained about me - mostly being that I am tough and expecting them to study more - well, it is Physics, you can't just enter the classroom as if you are entering a cinema and expect entertainment - one has to be prepared! Anyhow, I am pretty sure she was asking students "how is the new guy?" which encouraged this behaviour from students - she implied it once during lunch.
2) Towards the end, she failed to put an end to disruptive (and borderline racist) behaviour from one of the students in spite of my complaints, but kept on encouraging it instead of nipping it in the bud when it happened first.
3) Moreover, I am continuously discouraged in collaborating with another department - I haven't had any problems with them so far.
4) A few months ago, when I sent in the new syllabus for this semester (it has to pass through the Dept Head before being posted on the website), she said she wasn't OK with it - it didn't have anything unusual!
5) And now, when I wanted to add points for interaction in the syllabus for the next semester - as positive reinforcement (instead of penalising students), she gave a straight no, and asked me to give her a scientific paper proving that it is effective! I mean.. really?
6) To be in students' good books and get good feedback, she is encouraging a manipulative student - she helps him in doing homework and he will be taking a summer "reading course" with her. So, now this student doesn't have to sit in my course or pass it, and yet complains all the time which is encouraged by her.
I know these things are pretty vague but are definitely giving me a lot of negative vibes... Any advice as of how to face this situation? It looks like she is building a way to get my lose this job or make me go... Or am I just being too "sensitive" about it?
PS - She pretty much has the regular Dept Chair power -- my annual performance review should pass through her, teaching assignments pass through her, etc.
PPS - The disruptive student's concern was that the grade on the website wasn't correct where as everything was as it is supposed to be - she acted like a middle-man everytime he was trying to cause trouble instead of either directing him directly to me or atleast recommending that or telling him that disruptive behaviour is not OK. The manipulative student gets a slap on the wrist for blatantly lying about grades, quiz, etc, she helps him in getting his homework done - he is supposed to do it on his own!<issue_comment>username_1: Department chairs should solicit feedback from students and they should insist that teaching practices be based on evidence. That's normal. But it sounds like this department chair is using these mechanisms to be a bully. That's bad.
My advice would be:
1. Document everything.
2. Consult your university's omsbudsperson.
3. Study up on your institutions procedures. There may be something that keeps the department chair accountable, such as an election. We do not know your institutions specific regulations.
4. Develop good relationships with the dean and other faculty in your department. The chair often has little power on their own.
5. Look for a new job.
6. Keep in mind that department chairs often have no training for the job and may not like being chair. Do not be surprised if they are bad at their job.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you need to
1. Keep detailed records.
2. Stand your ground and be assertive.
3. Make a formal complaint if you genuinely think you are under undue/unfair pressure
and are being treated unfairly.
4. Challenge her on all the points you raise. Make it in writing.
Someone above asked why you 'specifically' mention the gender of your HoD. I don't think you did specifically but it may well be relevant. Sexism and gender bias works both ways. If she is undermining you and your authority (in collusion?) with a student it is unprofessional at the very least. At worst you need to be aware that your HoD might be crossing certain lines.
I'm not an academic but in industry. If someone came to me with these issues in regard to a senior manager I would be looking hard, very hard at the situation, and would be expecting the senior manager to have damn good answers.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Can you imagine a scenario developing, say within a year, in which you and the chair can truly trust one another and work together effectively? This doesn't seem possible to me, given what you say, though I think that the problem here isn't all one sided.
I'm guessing your answer is no, and will comment based on that assumption.
*Find another, more compatible, place to work*. But as you search, try to figure out the culture at any new institution before you plunge in. There are places, maybe like the one you are now at, where the new hire better keep his head down for a while. I've been at such institutions. I've also been under an extremely hostile head - worse than yours, in fact.
Spend the first year at the new job building relationships and getting advice on things. I too, once held a job in which students complained that I was too hard. In my meeting with the Dean, I showed her that yes, I demanded that the students do the work and that the work would be hard, but that it would be evaluated fairly. But I was under a cloud for that year and later became one of the Dean's top faculty.
But a new faculty member butting heads with others, especially those who have built up a power structure isn't going to get you anywhere. If you think the culture of the place needs change, and it might, know that it is a long term process and it isn't going to be affected by a newcomer who is seen as hostile. But it seems to me that you have passed the point of no return here. Even if you work out grudging acceptance, your future doesn't seem bright. Find a better situation, as I did. Don't fight a war you can't win.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/13
| 942
| 4,148
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an electronics engineering sophomore at an Indian university, particularly interested in quantum computing, quantum information theory and quantum engineering. However, the problem I'm facing is that we do not have the possibility to take up extra theory courses in computer science (e.g. complexity theory, analysis of algorithms) or mathematics (topology, differential geometry, discrete mathematics, etc). I feel these theory courses are extremely important to understand quantum computing properly (more so, with stuff like topological quantum computing and relativistic quantum information, coming up). By the end of the 4 years of my undergraduate course while I'll likely be having sufficient background for further study in the area of quantum "engineering", I feel I'll be lacking in the theoretical aspects. For the record, I do have some experience with research in the area of quantum computing (I'm currently pursuing a undergraduate research project at a nearby university in my city). Also, I've been trying to learn some of the mathematics and computer science topics on my own, using various online resources.
For that reason I was thought if it would be possible for me to apply for a masters degree in computer science/mathematics, after my undergrad, before directly applying for a PhD in quantum computing. I feel that such a masters degree focused on the theory would make my PhD application stronger. A course like the one offered by Oxford: [MSc in Mathematics and Foundations of Computer Science](https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/graduate/courses/msc-mathematics-and-foundations-computer-science?wssl=1) would probably be perfect for me (at least that's what it seems from a reading of the course contents). But, I'm a bit worried because the acceptance rate in such courses is already very low (for example Oxford has only 17 places available in [this](https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/graduate/courses/msc-mathematics-and-foundations-computer-science?wssl=1) course while on average 115 people apply for it per year).
So, in short my question is: Is it okay if I mail the head of the Math/Computer Science department head, asking whether they accept applications from electronics engineering students and what I can possibly do as an undergraduate, to improve my odds of getting accepted to such a course? (For example, the heads of activity of the Oxford's Quantum Group are listed [here](http://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/activities/quantum/)). Also, if yes, how should I frame my email? Suggestions are appreciated. Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: I would advise against emailing them to ask this. The masters program has probably admitted EE students in the past, but their willingness to do so will depend on the specifics of the situation. They will likely be inundated with emails and may have to refrain from commenting on an individual case; they may or may not have time to answer your query about improving your odds.
Why don't you **look at the descriptions of the courses in the masters program**, including requirements of prior courses needed. If there are just one or two courses that you have not taken, you may be able to handle that. But if all the courses you mentioned are stated prerequisites, then you are unlikely to get admitted to this program. If the websites, application, and course descriptions do not provide clear answers about what courses are required prerequisites (or what is assumed incoming knowledge), then that may be a good, specific question for someone from the program.
Because you've already done research in this area, you may have a chance of admission. Good luck.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: There is nothing wrong with sending an email, but it should **not** be sent to the chair or head of the department. Instead, the relevant contact person is either:
* the chair of the admissions committee, or
* the head of the graduate studies program
Either of these officials in the department should be able to provide you with the requisite information. Sending it to the chair of the department is a waste of everybody's time.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/13
| 701
| 3,028
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in a peculiar situation, which I'll try to describe as concisely as possible.
Around three years ago I worked on something and I published a preliminary conference paper, which described the idea in great detail. I'm currently working on a PhD that's about this topic I published 3 years ago. Today I found out that there exists a patent that was accepted last year and it's like 50% about the same idea I published in that conference paper. Not 100%, it has some unique stuff in it and I'm pretty sure they didn't try to steal my idea, they probably came up with it on their own, that's why it has some additional features that I don't even need. But it's similar. I still haven't finished my PhD, but I'm worried—can this patent be a problem for me? I can prove with that conference paper that I was working on this idea years before the patent was submitted and published.
What would be the best course here? I was thinking of citing this patent in my PhD, but if nobody said anything about it until now, I'm worried I just might start opening too many questions.
Any kind of ideas are greatly appreciated. I'm really, really worried that my PhD thesis can become invalid because of this patent. Is that possible?<issue_comment>username_1: You are right to be worried about a patent in the same field as your thesis research.
You do have some protection in the form of having "prior publication" that shows your work predates the thesis. But this is not necessarily sufficient to protect your *future* work.
I would get into immediate contact with your thesis advisor, as well as the legal department of your university. They are trained in handling such issues, and can advise you as how best to proceed so as to protect yourself.
Note that the goal of talking to the legal department is **not** to file a lawsuit. The goal is to understand what are your rights as a researcher working in an area with an existing patent, and how you can show that you are avoiding infringement.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no reason to fear that your PhD thesis will be invalidated. It is entirely possible for independent work to happen simultaneously, and so long as your work is technically sound, the thesis and defence should not be affected.
However, looking ahead, if you want to further develop your device (assuming it is a device for simplicity), you may run into difficulties. If you are looking to monetise it somehow, you will certainly have a conflict with the patent and legal advice will be necessary. I believe this is what @username_1 meant with regard to future work.
While this may not be an immediate concern to you, I think the department would do well to look into it and protect it's IP if the idea has potential for further development, not necessarily commercial development alone. So while your PhD seems safe, you may still like to pursue these options because you may not want your work to be appropriated by someone else at a later stage.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/14
| 509
| 2,178
|
<issue_start>username_0: As noted in <NAME>'s "Higher Education in America," there is a trend in increased funding for large interdisciplinary research programs since the 1970's (Think NSF MRSEC, for example).
What is the root cause or viewpoint for a shift towards this style of funding, as compared to single-PI research grant? Additionally, if this trend continues, administrators will increasingly pressure their departments into focusing on this type of funding source. Will academia eventually approach a similar climate to a national lab (ie, large teams working on interdisciplinary projects)?<issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps because interdisciplinarity is a trending upstream from our innovation-reliant society to our education systems, which are trying to catch up and more properly prepare students for ecosystems that not only produce but require interdisciplinarity. I'll reference a LinkedIn article "Inter-disciplinarity in Higher Education" by <NAME>. to maybe better illustrate my point. PS I have yet to read Bok, so thank you for mentioning his work.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Personal experience, and a lot of inspiration from nature (I'm a biologist) suggests that interdisciplinary teams can view a single problem from different perspectives.
This enables teams with varying knowledge to attack a problem from the easiest angle.
For example,
When Canadians faced the problem of snow accumulating and freezing on power lines, men were sent up power-poles armed with poles of their own with a hook on the end to shake off the snow. When they were complaining about how tough the job was to each other (and coming up with pole & climbing related ideas to make the work easier), the secretary to the manager overseeing their work chimed in to say that when she was a nurse in the army, she'd seen the downdraft from helicopters knock objects around with ease.
Her fresh perspective introduced a new line of thought that would not have otherwise been introduced into the problem solving atmosphere.
When you're a hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail. When you're a toolbox full of different tools, however......
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/14
| 1,166
| 4,983
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to finish a master’s degree in data science/analytics. (Yes, I realize these are all the rage now, but let’s leave that alone for now.)
I have enjoyed the program and have learned quite a bit. However, I feel that overall the program is a survey of analytics/ML/AI techniques and there was little opportunity to truly dig deep into any of the topics that were covered.
I would like to find a way to continue my formal education and perhaps do some research, or at the least do a much deeper dive, into a more narrow field of study. However, I don't believe that a PhD program is right for me. I'm a father, a husband and a full-time employee. I'm not willing to give all of that up to pursue a PhD. (In retrospect, perhaps a thesis option in the masters program would have been appropriate, but it's too late for that.)
Is there something out there that's between a master's degree and a PhD?<issue_comment>username_1: I will answer your question in a few ways. First, I applaud you for your self-awareness because that's extremely important in your pursuit of personal and professional goals. Secondly, I have worked in higher-education for the past five years or so and have experience with this particular case. In your case, you could reach out to your local university and see if you can take courses as a visiting(non-degree seeking) student. Or you can see if a certificate in your field is offered at the graduate level. If you're not seeking to take the next step in academe, you can pursue a certificate. A certificate will give you additional knowledge and possibly a raise in pay in the work-force.
Also, it may be possible that your employer will pay for additional coursework (tuition reimbursement).
It is quite possible that you could network with people in your field, in your area and begin working to gain experience.
I'm currently at the beginning of my doctoral program in Education Administration and I am seeing the importance of placing yourself in the right crowd of individuals. You will learn a lot and gain a lot of valuable information when you are leveraging your education with people that are at your level or beyond.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Outside of what Lauren has suggested (auditing higher level courses, attaining a certificate, and networking with others in your field), I'd suggest a few more things. You mentioned that your program provided an overview of a number of subjects, but didn't go into a lot of detail. I'd start by assessing my weak areas and look for opportunities to build on those. If your coursework was heavy on theory and light on practical skills like programming, you might consider coursework or private study in that area. You don't necessarily need to pursue a certificate to do it, but it does provide documentation of your effort.
What are your interests and do they align with any of your instructors? If so, you might approach them about assisting them with their research or how you might extend research they've done in the past. If you are interested in getting published, be sure to iron out what would constitute authorship and how you can fulfill that prior to starting. Perhaps your interests are not academic -- find an open source project that you can help out with.
You might consider what have you built lately. If there's an area that has your attention, there's nothing better than trying it out. Besides, a project in your portfolio shows that you can do something and is sometimes better than having a degree or certificate. If the majority of your portfolio comes from your work towards your degree, depending upon the complexity of it, you may want to put more effort here. Also, do you have a GitHub account and is your work there?
Ironically, I'm asking myself these same questions. I'm also in a Masters degree program for Data Science and set to graduate at the end of this semester. Would also like to go on for a Ph.D., however, I have other obligations that are just as important.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm kind of in the same boat - I'm getting an M.S. Analytics but I'm in my first semester instead of my last and I am just so... undecided. Second masters? (edit: multiple advanced degrees is not as uncommon as you'd think) Ph.D? Statistics or Computer Science? On the bright side you shouldn't have any trouble getting good recommendation letters if you want to go the formal route.
I'm eyeballing UT Austin's upcoming online Computer Science M.S. via EdX (estimated 10k tuition total but hasn't launched yet). There's also the pricey but IMO high quality earn-your-way in Harvard Extension School where I'm eyeballing the Software Engineering Masters. A lot of our alumns and even PhD's I know really like coursera.
One strategy I use because I'm poor is scope out the textbooks in use at the programs I want to be in and just read them. It's almost 2019 no one can stop you from learning :)
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/14
| 1,199
| 5,217
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a recent fresh graduate who came from math and physics. Recently (< 4 weeks), I've taken on a junior research role in a research institute within a University.
This particularly university - and those in this country - have extremely strong collaborations with industry partners so work in Universities in this country is divided into pure/ fundamental research and industry-driven research. The University houses corporate research labs.
The project I am working on right now is in the area of air traffic. I report to a fellow (academic title) who comes from industry who is only focused on *research* in operations/ convincing stakeholders and sponsors.
*Research* because everything he proposes and investigates are qualitative and conceptual without any justifications with mathematics in an area which presumably requires mathematical models to validate ideas.
Granted that I have been in this role for <4 weeks, I am miserable and I believe I will continue to feel so.
1)
I believed I was overpromised.
I was promised that I would be working alongside professors to develop new mathematical models for air traffic.
It turns out I am the only person from math and physics. The rest are from engineering or industrial design field.
2)
Much of my time would be involved with producing white papers and policy recommendations for management of future air traffic
3) I am pushed to pursue a PhD (comes with scholarship) which, with internal discussion, would allow me to move into a PhD program even with an average BSc grades since the director of the research institute is the PI for the PhD program.
**However**, my thesis would have to be in the area of air traffic.
My interest is in Abstract Algebra, Topology and Quantum mechanics and I'll like to pursue this in a year or two time when I return back to University.
4) The fellow I report too is really a project manager in disguise. Every discussions with him mainly revolves around stakeholder expectations and targeted objectives.
A good case scenario is this: He engages a visiting scholar who has done a PhD thesis in air traffic modelling, look to see how the idea in the thesis could be extended to specific circumstances (without much modification to the mathematical model in the thesis) for national interest before suggesting a feasibility write up on why this works.
From here, it is already obvious that nothing of substance could be published in respectable journals.
I am afraid that my current research role will not provide me with a stronger exposure to math or physics in the fundamental sense.
What is the best course of action?<issue_comment>username_1: Sadly, it seems that the link between industry and academia is weak even in universities where, in your words, industry collaborations are strong.
I'm not from the same field, so this isn't domain specific. But having had some similar experience along the industry-institute faultline, maybe I can point out a few things to think about:
(1) There is a big gap between what you were expecting and what you're getting, and this may not change significantly as you go along. Best to accept that. You may like to take a rigorous look at academic careers and see how much of your expectation will be met there, and whether other hurdles could offset these advantages.
(2) Graduate courses in these fields, one way or another, prime us to think of academic careers as a default option. Truth be told, not everyone is cut out for those. So you could take a hard look at whether this line is your own goal or your conditioning.
(3) You mentioned getting a PhD offer despite average grades- this is a lesson that in the long term, the initial years may matter less. Maybe this could apply to your career as well, this research project being the initial years and your career being the long term. Perhaps the 'national interest' bit is significant; it can be a strong motivator if it really is true.
(4) There is an undercurrent of dissatisfaction with the fellow you report to; this can be symptomatic of cultural (institute culture, not national/community culture) differences. Such research institutes often have very specific mandates, and people who work there fall in line despite their initial desires. Some find satisfaction after doing so, others don't. It's difficult to know in advance where you will stand. But you can be sure of one thing- if you cannot align yourself culturally, you are unlikely to be happy.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My answer is rather a statement about what not to do rather what to do:
Do not do a PhD in a field you are not interested in. And do not choose a field of research for your degree just because of convenience (offer/opportunity). I cannot emphasise that enough.
In addition, switching topics drastically after a PhD is very difficult. It is possible, but I have seen it rarely succeed.
Usually, people start with a related topic and then drift away in the direction they are interested in. However, drifting from ATC to Topology/QM does not look obvious; Quantum airplanes? Topological path planning? Braid groups for flight patterns? Perhaps...
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/04/14
| 591
| 2,591
|
<issue_start>username_0: In computer science (particularly AI), in a project where a postdoc proposes an idea and guides a junior PhD student, and the student does most of the dirty/labor work, what is the typical author order? Is it one of the following?
* Student Postdoc Professor
* Postdoc Student Professor
* Student Professor Postdoc<issue_comment>username_1: In my part of computer science (theory), the student and postdoc should be listed in alphabetical order, and the professor should not be listed.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, author lists in CS are usually in order of contribution. For practical reasons this often means that you end up with student/postdoc/professor, simply because that's also the order of effort that the various parties can typically put into the project. This would also be my "default" if there are no special circumstances that warrant a different author list.
Some possible special circumstances:
* You, the postdoc, don't only have the idea but also do most of the actual work in the project. In that case it would be warranted to put your name first. However, note that for a PhD student being first author is often more useful than for you, so take this into account when distributing tasks for the project. That doesn't mean that the postdoc should gift the PhD student with first authorship if not warranted, but often it's better for everybody if the project is laid out in a way that the PhD student gets enough tasks so that their first authorship is actually warranted.
* The professor is not interested in the project and does not want to get involved. In this case he *may* not even be part of the project at all and it becomes student/postdoc. **However**, if you want to go for that, make very, very sure that the professor is also ok with not being on the paper. There are many CS labs where the professor assumes to be on every paper that their students write. If you can't live with taking such a professor on, don't work with their students. If you decide to kick off the professor (even if warranted due to contributions), you may not only get into a fight yourself, but you may also make life much harder for the student.
Note that there is in my experience rarely a case where the ordering student/professor/postdoc would be warranted. Actual contributions rarely seem to work out like that, and it's also much less useful for the postdoc than some may think - the postdoc does not become the senior author in the collaboration just because they have been put last in the list.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/15
| 1,927
| 7,457
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be conducting research in a Latino-studies research institute next summer. I will probably be the only non-Latino researcher in the institute that summer. I’m also approaching my research from a computational sociological point of view, which is vastly different from the qualitative orientation of my peers’ research. I do wish to explore the field of Latino studies more and possibly even conduct research in it (of course as a respectful student who is outside the culture).
How can I not only conduct research but move up more into this world of Latino studies research without being disrespectful and giving precedence to those who not only research Latino studies, but are part of the culture?<issue_comment>username_1: The fact that you are not in the same group as your study subject should not have anything to do with it. Do your job to the best of your ability and that's it.
Real world considerations: Someone may think something along the lines of what you fear. People are terrible. As long as you are academically precise, based on well-known facts, and sensitive, what you are should not be an issue.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It is often an outsider with a different tool- and mindset that can bring a new perspective on things, keep that in mind. The fact that you're an outsider should only be something positive in my view.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Congratulations on your upcoming research position! I understand why you might be nervous, especially since you expect to have two major differences with all your coworkers (ethnicity and methodology). Quantitative researchers are often treated as if they have higher status than their qualitative counterparts (funding discrepancies, accessibility of their research to colleagues in STEM fields, ability to "dabble" or "consult" in different situations without as much background knowledge, easy transfer of skills to jobs outside academia). So, you have (at least) two areas, central to your job, where it may be hard to communicate with coworkers and where you may have had very different experiences you're working from.
Here are a few things to keep in mind:
1. Your coworkers will (presumably) all be from different backgrounds. Even setting aside migration-related cultural differences, there are very different cultures across different parts of Latin America and the Caribbean, and the extent to which people identify with indigenous heritage will also add diversity. Afro-Cuban religion, Andean culture, the Chican@ movement, and Brazilian social stratification are in the background of Latino studies, and probably none of your colleagues will have lived cultural experience with all of them.
2. That said, it is entirely possible that many people will feel comfortable chatting in Spanish or Spanglish, or making cultural references you don't know. It may be valuable to brush up on your Spanish and brush up on whatever Latino culture is local to where you are. (For instance, you might see if there are guest speakers or film nights at a cultural center on campus or arranged by your school's Latino studies program.)
3. (I am white and non-Hispanic.) I grew up with the idea that there was no longer racism in American society and that most apparent continuing racial differences were attributable to economic factors. In college, I learned from African American friends that **yes, racism persists**. In graduate school, I learned from the social science literature and colleagues' research that **race definitely matters**. Stated in the most conservative way, even after accounting for many, many other factors, race and ethnicity still help predict many life outcomes in modern America.
* Racism is an active factor in society. <NAME> writes in his 2012 paper ["Race without Racism: How Higher Education Researchers Minimize Racist Institutional Norms"](https://web-app.usc.edu/web/rossier/publications/231/Harper%20(2012)%20RHE.pdf):
>
> I do not believe that every racial disparity or negative experience a minoritized person has is attributable to racism. However, ... most higher education scholars rely on everything but racism in their attempts to explain, theorize about, and discuss findings that emerge in their race-related studies. This trend is consistent with approaches sociologists commonly employ in their research (Bonilla-Silva & Baiocchi, 2001). (pp. 22-23)
>
>
>
4. There are many barriers that your colleagues have faced to get where they are. In this very readable article, Harper and <NAME> III present ["Eight Actions to Reduce Racism in College Classrooms,"](https://web-app.usc.edu/web/rossier/publications/231/Harper%20and%20Davis%20(2016).pdf) and they will probably be good to think about for a scholarly research environment, too.
5. Let's say that something you say is (mis)perceived as racist. It's hard to talk about race, and your job will involve talking about ethnicity and (likely) race. So you may want to think about what happens if you say the wrong thing and/or someone calls you out. This blog post, ["My Fellow White People, Here's One Simple Trick You Can Do About Racism TODAY!"](https://captainawkward.com/2018/02/05/my-fellow-white-people-heres-one-simple-trick-you-can-do-about-racism-today/) covers this situation. (You did not mention your racial/ethnic background beyond being non-Latino; however, at least some of the advice may apply even if you are often minoritized yourself.)
6. Show interest in your colleagues' research and methodologies. If any of them study/studied at the same place you do, ask for course recommendations.
7. If they are interested in your computational sociology, help them understand it, and (if appropriate) recommend resources they might benefit from.
8. Make sure that your research is written in a way that qualitative sociologists can fully engage with it, and help de-mystify quantitative work.
9. As in any position like this, remember that you're new but that you have interesting ideas. (If you tend to be more outspoken, use this to hang back more at the start. If you tend to be quiet, use this to speak up.) Talk with your advisor/boss/PI if you have questions about things, including office culture.
10. For the longer-term goals, your work at this institute is a good start. Be open to mixed-methods collaborations with the colleagues you meet here; many of them will probably work in fascinating settings and may have the opportunity to collect novel quantitative datasets alongside their detailed qualitative work.
Finally, here are some lengthier suggested readings:
* <NAME>'s [Racism without Racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in America](http://www.worldcat.org/title/racism-without-racists-color-blind-racism-and-the-persistence-of-racial-inequality-in-america/oclc/913841814&referer=brief_results)
* <NAME> and Bonilla-Silva's [White Logic, White Methods: Racism and Methodology](http://www.worldcat.org/title/white-logic-white-methods-racism-and-methodology/oclc/973051116&referer=brief_results)
* Acquaint yourself with the [Culture of Poverty](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_poverty) debate and [its modern versions](https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2009/03/black-people-culture-and-poverty/6860/).
* Acquaint yourself with the work of the top scholars at the institute.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/15
| 717
| 2,854
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student currently in the middle of my PhD. After talking to some senior PhD students, I came to know that during the last or second to the last year of PhD, advisors don't advise their students (advice to very small extent ). There are many things last year students have to do on their own. I don't know if this is true or not in general.
>
> Question : Don't last year PhD students need supervision?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: On the one hand the amount of support needed on how to do research should decrease as the PhD student progresses. On the other hand, at the end is "crunch time" and a lot of projects come to an end at the same time. Each project should require less support by the advisor, but now there are more projects to discuss... Moreover, there is the process of finishing the dissertation, ceremonies, etc. etc. So the amount of time I spent on a PhD student would follow more a U-shaped curve: a lot at the beginning, then decreasing, but increasing again at the end.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: While my answer is specific to CS, might be general enough. After writing it, I noticed that I'm mostly focused on the writing, the technical parts were never an actual problem for me...
>
> Personally, I try to decrease my involvement with Ph.D. students over time. The objective is for them to be independent researchers by the end of it after all.
>
>
>
First years usually require a lot of supervision and hand-holding. Often they don't really know what they want to do, or how, or how to properly write it. I found that putting them to help as "middle authors" of more senior PhDs is a good idea so they get a sense of the process.
When they start writing "by themselves", I usually do not directly edit the text, but rather comment on the PDF explaining why I want stuff changed. Each review takes forever, but at least they should be able to extrapolate the rules and develop a "sense" for it...
By the third year, I fully expect them to "lead" a paper, but I still keep a close watch, albeit with less interference... I see most of what they do but intervene only when unavoidable. Most are starting to develop their own writing style there.
4+ should know enough by then to deal with their own issues and help the "lower" students, so they require *minimal* supervision if any. And they have a dissertation to finish. Except for a few "dissertation specific" details, I never had to touch the dissertation, especially when it is in the "collection of papers" format.
>
> Of course, that is just the general lines. I had students leading papers as undergrads and hand holding on the fifth year of their Ph.D.s, each person is different, stuff happens, and the advisor needs to be on top of it to "personalize" the supervision.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/15
| 2,519
| 10,289
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question concerns PhD programs that, unlike most U.S. programs, don't start with a 2 year coursework program. That is, programs where you're expected to do a 2 year master before the PhD and then finish your PhD in about 3 years consisting solely of research. Let's say this concerns a PhD program at Oxford or Cambridge, UK.
I came to this question after reflecting on the fact that some PhD students finish their PhD in significantly shorter amount of time than average. I thought: What if we carry this to the extreme:
Consider the following scenario: Let's say that after obtaining a master's degree, a student spends 3 years working independently on their own research, and produces papers that in amount and quality would be sufficient for obtaining a PhD. Would it be acceptable for this student to simply register for a PhD program, and immediately hand in this work?
* In this way, the student is registered for the PhD program for only a very short time (the time required to hand in the work, and do the thesis defence). Therefore presumably the student has to pay tuition only for this short period rather than for 3 years.
**This question is not about whether trying this is advisable, but solely about whether universities will accept this.**<issue_comment>username_1: Your question is based on a false premise.
In many countries (virtually all?) where the *nominal* PhD duration is 3 years, students are actually paid during their PhD, through a scholarship or a salary, and there is no tuition at all or a minimal one.
It doesn't make any sense, thus, to spend 3 years working independently, with no support from the adviser and for free.
Whether that would be accepted is highly dependent on the country or on the specific university regulations, and we cannot give a general answer. It seems that in my country, Italy, it was once allowed, but now it is no longer possible, by law (I didn't check very carefully though).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Universities are unlikely to support the extreme scenario where a student is registered just for 1-2 years, even in the rare scenario that the advisor is in on such an agreement. There are a few reasons for this:
(1) Administrative requirements: Most universities require periodic meetings, reviews and approvals from the doctoral committee. In a very short time, it is unlikely that these will be met.
(2) Academic requirements: Some universities require students to attend a certain number of conferences as a mandatory requirement. This may not be possible in a short time. Same goes for symposia, colloquium and seminars to be delivered by the student.
I think 3 years would be the minimum required for all this, barring exceptions. It is a good idea to start some work in advance if you want to finish early, but what you are proposing may be unrealistic.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Since Cambridge is mentioned explicitly:
The regulations for PhD students in Cambridge require being enrolled and resident in Cambridge for (almost) three years. The residency requirement can be partially waived for fieldwork, but it is not possible to submit one’s thesis any earlier than 2 years 9 months after the start of the PhD studies.
The regulations do not prohibit the inclusion of any work done prior to the starting date into the thesis (except if they were used in the dissertation for some other degree), so if one wanted1 to, one could work ahead to ensure that one meets the 2-year, 9-month minimum time. The average time to completion is closer to 4 years, so this is non-trivial.
If the goal is to show up with an almost complete dissertation at some real university and get a doctorate asap, I’d look at German universities.
---
**1.** As specified in the question, I do not discuss whether this is a good idea.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> This question is not about whether trying this is advisable, but solely about whether universities will accept this.
>
>
>
Yes.
[Ramanujan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan) got a degree from Cambridge (described [here](http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Search/historysearch.cgi?SUGGESTION=ramanujan&CONTEXT=1) as equivalent to a PhD), and was even elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society, without satisfying any of the usual formal requirements some of the other answers mention. This shows that universities (and Cambridge specifically) “will accept” basically anything in extreme, highly unusual situations in order to grant someone a degree that they feel the person is intellectually deserving of.
This is of course not a typical or realistic example, but the scenario described in your question isn’t much more realistic than that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> That is, programs where you're expected to do a 2 year master before the PhD and then finish your PhD in about 3 years consisting solely of research. Let's say this concerns a PhD program at Oxford or Cambridge, UK.
>
>
>
I don't know where you get the idea that you are "expected to do a 2 year masters" before starting a UK PhD. Only an undergraduate degree is required though many students in the UK will do a 4 year "undergraduate masters" (Meng, Mmath Mphys etc) instead of a traditional 3 year bachelors degree and having such a degree is likely to be a plus when applying (I have seen PhD positions advertised as first class bachelors or 2-1 undergraduate maters).
>
> This question is not about whether trying this is advisable, but solely about whether universities will accept this.
>
>
>
Trying to do this under a traditional PhD program is likely to be problematic. Many UK PhD programs, even those that don't have any taught component will have a minimum time requirement or things like end of first year and end of second year reports that must be completed and marked.
There is another option, many universities in the UK offer special PhD programs designed to allow people with a PhD standard body of published work to convert that work into a PhD.
Cambridge have such a program under the name "special regulations" <https://www.cambridgestudents.cam.ac.uk/your-course/examinations/graduate-exam-information/higher-degrees/phd-special-regulations> but it is limited to Cambridge graduates. My google-fu isn't turning up whether Oxford have a similar program.
I suspect the reason for restriction to Cambridge graduates is one of workload. The university has a limited capacity for such requests and opening them up to anyone would result in them being inundated. According to <https://www.independent.co.uk/student/postgraduate/postgraduate-study/the-alternative-way-to-get-a-phd-1942607.html> such a restriction is quite common.
However as you move down the list to lower status Universties you will find ones that don't have such a requirement. Warick's for example seems to be open to any "graduates of at least seven year’s standing normally holding a Bachelor’s degree or equivalent." (I presume they mean people who graduated at least 7 years ago, but i'm not 100% sure on how to interpret that phrase) <https://warwick.ac.uk/study/postgraduate/research/phdbypublishedwork/>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Another angle is that universities\* think of themselves as nurturing scholarship, not certifying work.
\*All true universities. :) My sense is that wholly exam-based models, or of certifying past experience, are more limited to undergraduate study.
Let's say that you produced a set of papers of exactly the same quality as the doctoral thesis student S successfully submitted and defended for a university's program. There are many reasons why the two are not the same (at least in the eyes of the university).
* S contributed to the academic community for several years (being mentored and mentoring), and this matters.
* The supervisor will have watched S develop these ideas and is reassured not only that the work is original, but also that S knows how to think through problems. The supervisor can vouch for S's potential for further research but does not have the same information on you.
* Every supervisor and committee will ask for something different, and a high-quality thesis you developed independently will not necessarily match the standards/preferences/whims of these particular academics.
+ This need not be a superficial or petty thing: some departments have different methodological or theoretical histories and leanings, and it is important to them that their graduates all demonstrate fluency in the "correct" way of doing things.
* Making a regular practice of granting doctorates for work completed elsewhere would create horrible incentives. Some people would enroll as doctoral students at low-ranking universities, spend however many years it takes there to write a good dissertation, and then shop their thesis around to the most prestigious school they can to get their stamp of approval. The low-ranking universities would probably suffer, and students at the high-ranking schools would be disgruntled that their exact same degree is being offered to so many other people in a different path.
* Finally, and most importantly, professors and universities often have a goal of imparting skills to people and fostering the growth of knowledge. If you have the talent to come in with a complete dissertation, then they will (ideally) want to challenge you further and see what you can do surrounded by other brilliant minds and with the institution's resources. They want you to perform further research under their aegis, though it's only in the rarest cases (cf. Ramanujan) that they would approach this by awarding you a doctorate and making you a fellow.
Based on the model of the university proposed in the question, it should be of equivalent value to get a doctorate as to publish three strong papers in a top journal as an independent scholar. (Or to publish a peer-reviewed book, say at a university press, if that is in line with one's disciplinary norms.) If you do not believe that the two are equivalent, then examining the differences might tell you what is lost in this process and/or why universities would rarely grant doctorates for work conducted prior to enrollment.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/15
| 560
| 2,273
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose a university provides a five-year PhD studentship (i.e., tuition waiver and monthly stipend). What are possible outcomes if the student doesn't complete their PhD in five years?
* Will the university continue waiving tuition and paying a stipend?
* Can the student complete their PhD?<issue_comment>username_1: When a school makes a funding commitment, it is generally true that the commitment is contingent upon a student making satisfactory progress to the degree, as judged by the department.
What happens when a student can't finish in the stated period depends upon a combination of factors:
* Where the funding to continue supporting the student will come from
* If the student is, in fact, making adequate progress and will finish in a reasonable period of time
* What the regulations of the department or university are with respect to enrollment (that is, is there a limit to how long a student can be enrolled)
So long as a student is making satisfactory progress, and a source (such as PI funding or teaching assistantships) can be found to pay the student, departments are usually not inclined to dismiss a student based on failure to meet an arbitrary timeline. Usually, the student, supervisor, thesis committee, and department will agree on some sort of timeline to finish the degree program as quickly as possible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: [Almost everyone who wants a PhD and sticks around long enough ends up getting it](http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2010/201021/).
You can imagine what happens if the student isn't able to complete during the funding period: he or she has to self-fund. If they can't do that, then they have to leave. If they can, then they just go on and on and on until they complete. Here's an [example](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogdanov_affair). I quote: *In justifying the conferring of doctoral degrees to the Bogdanovs, Sternheimer told the Times, "These guys worked for 10 years without pay. They have the right to have their work recognized with a diploma, which is nothing much these days."*
As for whether or not the university will continue waiving the tuition fee: no. Supervision takes time, hence it's only normal that the university charges for it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/15
| 1,039
| 4,306
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've recently got my PhD in Europe and I am doing applications for the postdoc positions in Europe and in the US. I've got two possible offers and I am a bit confused to decide which position would be better for my future. One of the offers is from the US and the other one is in Europe. My initial plan was to choose the position in Europe and to spend some more time to expand my academic network by staying close to home. Meanwhile, I am almost sure that I eventually need to go to the US either I decide to stay in academia or go into the industry in the future, since it is very difficult to settle in the Northern European countries as an expat or a foreigner researcher due to different reasons (mostly because of the social life, language and funding options etc.), at least I need to spend some time there to be not seen as only moving inside of Europe. I am also not planning to go back my country at the junior research level since it is too challenging to secure a job as well (Mediterranean country).
I still would like to take the position in Europe and then try to find a better position ( as research associate, Assistant prof or instructor/ senior postdoc) in the US later. Do you think would it be better to go there directly after my PhD? Would it reduce my chance to find a position in the US if I do a postdoc in Europe first?
PS : The position in the US is so close to my current field, it is very similar to my PhD topic. I will still learn different methods and expand my skills technically but the scientific approach is not so different what I have done in my PhD. It has good job benefits for two years (e.g. health, pension etc.) except the visa (J1) though.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to this question will come down to your personal circumstances and goals. There will be advantages and disadvantages to both options (both professionally and personally) that only you can know and weigh up. And, of course, it matters more how good the postdoc will be for your development than what continent it is in.
However, it sounds like your goal is to eventually end up in the US. In that case, my suggestion would be that there is no time like the present to make the move. Getting a position in the US is tough and it helps to have as many local contacts as possible, so you should start building them up as soon as possible.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Take a dice. Roll it. If it's an even number, go to the US, if it's an odd number stay in Europe. If you feel bad after rolling the dice, roll it again.
Sounds stupid, but might be the best advice in your case ;-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Do you think would it be better to go there directly after my PhD? Would it reduce my chance to find a position in the US if I do a postdoc in Europe first?
>
>
>
The first question is personal opinion, but I can offer some thoughts about the latter question.
* For primarily teaching positions, yes. I don't know if either of your postdocs involve teaching (if so, they're not super relevant to primarily teaching posts anyway, but math postdocs in the US typically involve teaching) but if so, teaching in the US system is a boon. Also, it's easier (cheaper to fly you in) to interview if you're already in the US, but you could always try another postdoc in the US first.
* For a research position, a US versus European postdoc doesn't matter too much in and of itself, but you should go to conferences in the US and meet people and tell them about your work. For this type of position, you should take the postdoc that you think will be most beneficial to your research. (Caveat: if the research you would do in Europe is not so popular in the US, this will make it harder for you to get a job in the US.)
* For an industry position, I don't know too much about this, but I guess like for teaching positions it would be somewhat easier for companies to interview you if you are already here.
* One thing that may be a possibility is to take both postdocs and defer one. At least in the recent past this was not so uncommon in mathematics. E.g., you may be able to do the postdoc in Europe for 1 year, and then postdoc in the US, or start the US postdoc first but take a year off to postdoc in Europe.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/16
| 390
| 1,565
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the answer to [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107963/how-to-acknowledge-a-mathoverflow-user/108004#108004) and [similar questions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1580/attributing-contributions-to-academic-work-that-occur-in-stack-exchange) it is recommended that you cite an idea or useful answer for your research work on StackExchange.
Now, if you have asked a question requiring a walk-back mathematical process (lets assume its a contribution) using fundamental knowledge to walk-back, if you do cite in this case, how do you keep the privacy of your account name? Since, people would check the answer and could look into the account history of the questioner and the answerer. Also, these StackExchange websites are linked and it seems that not everyone would like that for privacy reasons. So how could this be managed appropriately?
**Note**: This is a modification of an existing question marked as duplicate.<issue_comment>username_1: Do you "have" to cite: Maybe, depends.
Should you ask the one you want to cite first: definitely.
Is there a way to protect your privacy: There are many, but I can't see a perfect one right now.
All in all, I think your question is hard to answer as it is, as it depends on too many things (field, kind of paper, kind of question/answer, persons involved,...).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The post you reference has the solution to your doubt. Just cite when you encounter an original contribution or thank for helpful critics.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/16
| 864
| 3,556
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student who works in a theoretical field. Often times, I have discussions with my research supervisor, and I try to do as much work as possible.
It seems that many times these days my research supervisor does not seem happy with my performance. He often doesn't seem satisfied, judging from his facial expression and body language, but when I ask him, he just says *ok*. Most times, I leave the meetings in illusion (meeting was good or bad). I feel pressure due to these things. I don't know if it is a common thing in academia or not.
**Question:** How to deal with the (hidden) feedback from a research supervisor? This is constantly creating pressure on me.
There is a difference between *feedback* and *hidden feedback*. For *explicit* feedback, we can ask the supervisor once in a month or something like this.<issue_comment>username_1: *Actively ask for actual feedback.*
Of course, you need to be prepared for any feedback that is to come.
I am reading things into this... but I suspect you are reading feedback into their facial expressions and body language because you in fact **need** more feedback.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A short supplement to username_1's answer: I have made the experience that when actively asking for feedback it helps to emphasize that you welcome criticism. That way an *"Everything is ok."* answer is less likely.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Maybe your supervisor sees a problem and wants you to figure out what the problem is? From your question, it is hard to evaluate whether this is the situation, but since no other question mentioned it, I will.
There is no greater success when mentoring to get the "mentee" to realize the problem and find his/her own solution. That is true learning. Just handing out the answer is extremely dissatisfying for any supervisor - unless said supervisor is acting more as a QA checkpoint than an actual supervisor.
Keep working on it. As an aside, if you feel he "ok's" too much, well bring him two alternatives and ask him which is better. That will help you as well, attacking the same problem from different angles often yield fruit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You can get more meaningful verbal feedback when you ask specific questions rather than really broad questions.
Consider broad questions like:
* Am I good PhD student?
* Is my dissertation good enough?
* Does my research make sense?
vs questions like:
* Do you feel I am on pace to complete enough work to graduate within X years?
* Does the organization of my dissertation make sense?
* Are the central premises of my research making sense to pursue further or should I be investigating?
So, start by asking better questions. Then you will have a lot more context surrounding the feedback you *think* you are getting. Likely this will resolve all your assumptions around the subject.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I had a supervisor who made an "upset face" whenever I talked to her, especially during my presentations.
I told her **my observation** and asked her (politely) whether **my interpretation** was correct.
>
> You seem to be frowning. Is it because you disagree with what I am saying?
>
>
>
It turned out her "upset face" was actually her "focused face".
>
> No, I'm just a little tired and trying to concentrate. Please go on, it's interesting.
>
>
>
In short, "hidden feedback" is an interpretation you're making. It may or may not be true, so make sure to double-check.
Upvotes: 5
|
2018/04/16
| 907
| 3,758
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a computer-science PhD student. I like to work on things and I enjoy doing computer science. But here is a problem: I am not that much into debates. When I meet with my supervisor, he asks me some questions and I try to answer those. I don’t go into debates on the research questions. I like to do research independently, also in a collaboration, but only to a small extent. Many of my friends ask me to enter into debates, but I don’t like it much. I like mostly objective sorts of questions. I like subjective questions also, but to a small extent.
Question: Is it possible for non-debating person to survive in research?<issue_comment>username_1: You don’t need to debate as a researcher, but you do need to be able to defend your ideas to someone who’s going to want to know the details. This will apply not only to your advisor, but attendees at conferences and seminars, and people who read your work and respond to it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Overall, this sounds like a personality difference. There are lots of successful academics who want to think about things for a while rather than exploring the ideas out loud. Ideally, you'll find a way to work with your supervisor's style while also retaining the benefits of a more contemplative style. (And you're not alone. There are jokes about how many hands academics actually have, because so often they say, "On the one hand... on the other hand...")
What I'm picturing when you say "debate" is some of my friends. (A synonym here may be "BS" or "brainstorm.") They have personalities where they love saying crazy ideas out loud and then poking holes in them and figuring out which parts are wrong. There are often cultures that build up around this, where people who want to do this find each other and build off of each other. If this is what you're talking about, then I don't think it's a problem for your research that that's not your dominant mode.
If these debates are more grounded (along the lines of what you might see at a thesis defense), then you might be feeling conflict-avoidance, where you avoid disagreeing with people and feel extremely uncomfortable when others are in disagreement. Or you might be nervous and find it hard to come up with arguments when people are putting you on the spot. Or you might be answering fine, but not enjoying the process. You can definitely develop those skills and get better at them.
Finally, you may be interested in the book [Quiet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet:_The_Power_of_Introverts_in_a_World_That_Can%27t_Stop_Talking), about the benefits of being an introvert. It has many examples of how people can succeed in a variety of jobs even though their personality does not match the stereotypical person there.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In order to be a successful researcher you will certainly need to be able to justify your work and deal with counter-arguments and objections to what you have done. Even highly objective research topics often involve matters of judgment where reasonable disagreement can arise, and it is good if you can anticipate potential objections to your work (or seek these out) and respond to them in a clear and coherent way.
Having said this, it is not necessary for you to be able to do this *extemporaneously* in conversation, and so it that is your aversion to debating then it should not be a problem. Research work gives you plenty of time to think about your views on a topic and write them down clearly. You will need to be able to "debate" in the broad sense of justifying your work and responding to objections, but you will not generally need to debate in the narrower sense of an extemporaneous argument.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/16
| 1,242
| 5,071
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to cite a journal itself, not an article in it, the publication. I think the same would hold for a magazine, not an issue of that magazine. The specific citation information will be enough.
Bonus points for showing how to set this citation information with biber and biblatex, so it displays properly formatted.<issue_comment>username_1: There are certainly interesting kinds of research where you would do this, such as bibliometrics, meta-analyses, history of science, intellectual history, or a subject bibliography.
[The APA style blog](http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2012/09/citing-a-whole-periodical.html) opines that **you would not need to make the actual citation for a meta-analysis**: rather, you would simply mention the names of the journals (and the time periods you survey) in the text.
However, let's say you're looking at **periodicals that are hard to locate today**. Then a citation should help the readers find them. If they all came from the same database or archive, then perhaps it would make sense to **cite that database or archive itself** in the bibliography, with a mention or footnote about which journals were in which database or archive. Here's a [page showing how to cite a collection of institutional records](https://bluetigerportal.lincolnu.edu/web/browse-our-collections/browse-our-collections1).
Or, if you're doing more of an **intellectual history**, you may be able to mark the beginning of each journal by citing the opening editor's note.
Then again, JSTOR allows people to download some journal information for research purposes. [JSTOR's metadata fields for journals](https://www.jstor.org/dfr/about/technical-specifications?utm_medium=display&cid=dsp_j_dfr_01_2018&utm_campaign=home_right_jstor_dfr&utm_source=jstor) are journal-id (along with an identifier of who assigned this unique id), ISSN (possibly more than one if it changed over time), journal title (as of the time period you are discussing), and the publisher (as of the time period you are discussing).
Again, if you're doing a meta-analysis, the journals are part of the methodology but you probably don't need to fully cite them if they are current, modern journals. If you're doing more of a history or a source bibliography, then you might just have a long "bibliographic note" appendix describing the journals, including where to access each and a history of changes to the names and publishers.
If all else fails, this is quite an ad-hoc citation, but you might try to find (or build) a reference type that uses the following:
Title: journal title
Publisher: publisher (might use organization field for this if there is no publisher field)
Organization: organization creating the journal (if available)
Address: city of publisher
Identifier number: ISSN (if available)
Year: Span of years
Archive: (database or archive info)
Location in archive: URL, shelf number, etc.
Note: How often is/was the periodical published; anything about disruptions to the run.
---
Update: **If the otherwise best format requires an author/editor**, you could use the name of the organization that created the journal, which is often promoted to "author" in the absence of a single author or editor. If that is not applicable, you might be able to use the name of chief journal editor(s). You would want to make a note somewhere that you chose to record the information (editor, publisher, journal title, association, etc.) as of X date (journal founding, first issue in your time period, last issue in your time period, as of a given date across all the journals you're looking at).
Mendeley's [Ultimate Citation Cheat Sheet](https://www.mendeley.com/guides/ultimate-citation-cheat-sheet) might help you figure out desired formatting for your substituted-in components in the style you're using. It covers MLA8, APA, and Harvard, and if you're using a different style that might help you abstract the principles to that other style, if there is not sufficient documentation on that style's principles.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: BibTeX doesn't appear to define an entry that captures *a journal* (unlike a proceedings, which is captured by `proceedings`), [it does provide](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BibTeX):
```
book
A book with an explicit publisher.
Required fields: author/editor, title, publisher, year
Optional fields: volume/number, series, address, edition, month, note,
key, url
booklet
A work that is printed and bound, but without a named publisher or
sponsoring institution.
Required fields: title
Optional fields: author, howpublished, address, month, year, note, key
```
I'd suggest using `book` and listing the `title` as the journal.
---
The question's title and description are somewhat distinct, in particular, the title broadly asks *How should one cite the entirety of a journal?*, whereas the description asks how to cite the entirety of a journal using bibtex. I provide an answer to the latter.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/16
| 1,265
| 5,539
|
<issue_start>username_0: Why would a scientist or mathematician want to publish a paper under the Creative Commons CC BY licence? This licence allows the work to be modified. Why would you want to allow a scientific paper to be altered?
Yet Arxiv at <https://arxiv.org/help/license> seems to offer only licences that allow changes.
Similary Nature Communications at <http://www.nature.com/ncomms/about/open-access>:
"Nature Communications articles are published open access under a CC BY license".
The CC licences that do not allow change are the ones with ND (no derive). So the natural choice would seem to be either BY-ND or BY-NC-ND. Can anyone shed light?<issue_comment>username_1: My organisation uses CC-BY as its default license for published work. We're government rather than academia, but there are similarities between what we do and scientific research (we're in the business of collecting, processing, and publishing data) and some of the same considerations apply.
Part of the reason for using CC-BY is that we *want* people to use the stuff we publish. It's our reason for existence, and they've paid for this work through their taxes. (The USA goes further, and makes work done by government employees as part of their jobs copyright-free.)
Another reason is more pragmatic: it saves us a lot of time that would otherwise be spent responding to individual requests for permission. It's less trouble just to give a blanket "yes".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think it is first important to understand *what* exactly an adaptation is according to the CC licenses. [Creative Commons has a FAQ about it.](https://creativecommons.org/faq/#when-is-my-use-considered-an-adaptation)
>
> Generally, a modification rises to the level of an adaptation under copyright law when the modified work is based on the prior work but manifests sufficient new creativity to be copyrightable, such as a translation of a novel from one language to another, or the creation of a screenplay based on a novel.
>
>
>
And the legalese is:
>
> Adapted Material means material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights that is derived from or based upon the Licensed Material and in which the Licensed Material is translated, altered, arranged, transformed, or otherwise modified in a manner requiring permission under the Copyright and Similar Rights held by the Licensor. For purposes of this Public License, where the Licensed Material is a musical work, performance, or sound recording, Adapted Material is always produced where the Licensed Material is synched in timed relation with a moving image.
>
>
>
For example, changing the format of a work is *not* an adaptation. If you publish something in PDF format under a CC license that forbids modification, I could still print it and distribute the printed pages even if it's a new format.
Moreover, these licenses are only about copyright. Reusing the ideas from your work is *not* an adaptation either – copyright isn't about ideas. If you publish a method, even under a license that grants no rights to adapt and modify your work, everyone will always be able to "build upon" your method, because you cannot copyright an idea. (Note that in most jurisdictions it's not even clear if you can *patent* an idea either.) Ideas belong to everyone.
Many of the rights related to adaptation granted by a CC license would be considered as plagiarism (or, even if you attribute it properly, not novel). So I don't think there's anything to be scared of in this regard.
It may still be interesting to grant these rights. For example, with a CC license that allow derivative works, you allow people to translate your work in other languages. If you don't see yourself suing people for doing this kind of thing, it may be interesting to explicitly grant them these rights.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I work for a literature archive, and this is a very important question for me. Here is an example of how restrictive licensing affects our work. We host a large collection of biomedical publications. We developed a tool that identifies mentions of research data in the text. The tool highlights these mentions for readers to find it easier. If the article is licensed as CC-BY-ND (no derivatives) we cannot display the highlight, because it changes the article.
We are a publicly funded, free service that offers free open tools for researchers. But we can only develop new functionalities based on public data. The more restrictive you go, the less value we can provide for the benefit of all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: See the essay [Why CC BY?](https://oaspa.org/why-cc-by/) by <NAME>.
"Derived use is fundamental to the way in which scholarly research builds on what has gone before. One of the many benefits of open access publishing is that elements such as figures from a published research article can be reused, with attribution, as part of teaching material, or in other published works, without needing to request permission of the publisher. Similarly, article translations, image libraries, case report databases, text-mining enhancements and data visualizations are all examples of how additional value can be created by allowing derivative use."
"To fully realise that potential of open access to research literature, barriers to reuse need to be removed. The Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) strongly encourages the use of the CC-BY license, rather than one of the more restrictive licenses."
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/17
| 670
| 2,900
|
<issue_start>username_0: (My field is Computer Science, where conference publications are the norm.)
I reviewed a paper submitted to conference A six months ago. The paper was borderline, and was eventually rejected. I wrote a reasonably lengthy review.
I've now been asked to review a re-submission of the same paper from the same authors for conference B. At first glance, the differences between the versions A and B are quite minor.
While I would have no problem reviewing the re-submission, **I am worried about any bias (real or potential) that could occur** from having access to a previous version of the work. This may be seen as preventing version B from standing on its own merits and having a "fair" shot at this conference.
It's possible that my review of paper B will have the same comments as paper A, or at the very least my review will be written in a similar style. As such, while the reviewers are anonymous, it's quite possible the authors will realize the same person reviewed the two versions of the paper.
Should I accept this review, or suggest an alternative referee?<issue_comment>username_1: **Yes, accept.** You can start your review by stating:
>
> I reviewed version A of this paper @ [previous conference]. The differences between versions A and B are quite minor. My review remains largely unchanged:
>
>
>
You can then provide a revision of your previous review.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Did you receive the full manuscript or just an abstract when you were invited to review? In some fields, potential reviewers are sent the abstract alone, and based on this they choose whether to review. Only if the reviewers who consent are sent the full manuscript.
If this matches your case, you should go ahead and review. If not, consider the following:
(1) Did most of your review comments in the first review deal with accuracy and use of good scientific methods?,
or,
(2) Did most of your review comments in the first review deal with originality, scope and relevance?
If the answer to (1) is yes, then you should review, and mention your previous review as suggested by @username_1. The reason is simple- if there are factual mistakes, they ought to be pointed out, irrespective of history. In fact, it shows that the authors are trying to conceal mistakes/shortcomings and hoping to get lucky with a lenient review.
If the answer to (2) is yes, then maybe forget about the first review, and evaluate how different the two conferences are. It is possible that one may demand greater originality and the other may demand greater rigour, and so on. Similarly, scope and relevance expectations could be quite different. If you find yourself unable to evaluate this, possibly you are being biased by your previous review, and you should consider declining the review. Otherwise, by all means, accept the assignment.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/17
| 547
| 2,255
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an incoming math PhD student in the US. I am thinking of starting a math blog. The intended audience is myself plus maybe other math graduate students.
I am a little concerned about citations to avoid plagiarism. Of course if a theorem or proof comes from a paper, I need to cite it. What about theorems and proofs coming from textbooks. For example, say I give a definition of a group, which appears in virtually all standard textbooks in introductory algebra.
I guess the latter case will happen more frequently since my blog is mostly entry level graduate material math that you can find in many textbooks.
**Questions:**
1. If a theorem or proof comes from a textbook, can I assume that it is considered common knowledge, with respect to the targeted audience, and just state and prove the theorem?
2. At what point does a theorem or proof stop becoming common knowledge, maybe it only appears in some very advanced textbooks?<issue_comment>username_1: The citations may not have to be quite as formal, either. If you know you have favorite textbooks you cite all the time, you could have as part of the footer:
>
> Common References:
>
>
> JKL: Jennings, Klondike, and Lawrence. (2018). Best Textbook Ever. Unicorn Press.
> ...
>
>
>
Then you can say at the top of a post: Most of the definitions in this post are based on JLK and XYZ.
If formally dealing with citations is going to hold you back from getting the blog posts written, then doing something like this can help you properly attribute.
(There may be a different kind of copyright problem if you basically reproduce all of the useful parts of the textbook on your blog, even if the content is paraphrased and attributed.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Blog posts don't need to have a formal bibliography, but you should always provide attribution to others work, whether it is an original piece of research, or just a textbook whose presentation you are following. In a blog post, you can do this in a conversational style: point out results you enjoyed (with links!) and textbooks you find helpful. Not only will the folks you mention appreciate this, it will be helpful to your readers who want to follow up and learn more.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/17
| 598
| 2,486
|
<issue_start>username_0: If a professor asks to write your own recommendation letter, is it really a good opportunity to grab? There may be multiple reasons for him to ask this, but I want to know what if you write your own LOR? What are the pros and cons, keeping in mind the person who is reading it?<issue_comment>username_1: In the U.S., in mathematics, this might be a bad idea. The "voice" of letters of recommendation surely needs to be that of a relatively senior person, writing *to* the relatively senior people who will be reading the letters.
While it may be true in principle, or approximately, that one knows one's own best features better than anyone else, in practice this is often not quite the case. That is, more senior people may value, and observe, longer-term virtues that are not well understood by a very junior person. At the same time, things highly valued by a novice may be viewed as transient by a more senior person.
(Of course, there is nothing that prevents more senior people from being immature and "clueless", etc., and that leads to unhelpful letters, obviously.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Having come across situations like this, I urge you to proceed with caution. Try to judge how serious the professor is about the LoR; is (s)he dismissive of your application? If so, start looking for another letter immediately. The only thing worse than a weak LoR is a casual, flippant LoR.
Similarly, if the professor seems unwilling to put in much effort, there is a chance that the letter written by you goes through with minor/no changes. This is not a good situation, because you are likely to over/under sell yourself, and the evaluators may quickly pick up that it's written by a student. There is a certain authority when a senior academic writes that is hard to mimic. A sub-par job will create a poor impression of you, your institute and maybe your country.
It is also possible, that the professor is busy and wants to save some time by getting you to put down a draft, which (s)he will work on and mould into shape. In this case (not infrequent), the final product may be hard for you to recognise, indicating the effort that has gone into it. This is a good option- since it's basically two minds working on it, so there's less chance of something getting missed out by accident.
Ultimately, you need to use your judgement and maybe the departmental grapevine to decide which of these is most likely to be your case.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/17
| 1,599
| 6,187
|
<issue_start>username_0: Why don’t most graduate schools in Eurasia and Ocenia accept/impose GRE?
Suppose, someone completed his bachelor degree 10 years ago, or, someone had bad grades in the bachelor’s, he can still manage to get into a graduate research program if he can demonstrate a good GRE score.
On the contrary, non-GRE schools do not offer such advantages to the applicants.<issue_comment>username_1: Many of the premises of this question are fundamentally wrong. The GRE is not a good predictor of university success and does not measure someone's ability to do research. You’re also ignoring the plethora of people in the opposite position, who demonstrate good skills on a day to day basis at school but test poorly or had a fluke or didn’t get any sleep the night before and did poorly on the GRE. My example is far more likely to be hurt than yours is to be helped, as universities primarily use the GRE as a filter to throw out applicants rather than a way to improve a bad application.
The GRE [does little to predict research success](http://news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/study-graduate-record-exam-shows-it-does-little-predict-graduate-school-success), [primarily correlates with test prep rather than intelligence or performance when one is not actively studying for the GRE](https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-86-22-Powers.pdf), and [does little to predict or explain graduate grades](http://www.fairtest.org/facts/gre.htm). It has a strong cultural bias in favor of white upper-class students, as evidenced by the fact that it punishes students who are Spanish/English bilingual as opposed to ones who just speak English (Bornheimer), under predicts the scores of Black students (Scott and Shaw), and exacerbates the effect of socioeconomic status in admissions (Pencock-Roman), further disadvantaging poor students.
Given all this, one obvious answer is "it's a bad test." A far better question is "why do so many universities in the US require the GRE"
**Citations:**
<NAME>. & <NAME>. (1985). Black and White Performance in Graduate School and Policy Implications For Using GRE Scores in Admission. Journal of Negro Education, v. 54 (no. 1), pp. 14-23.
<NAME>. (1984). Predicting Success in Graduate School Using GRE and PAEG Aptitude Test Scores. College and University, v. 60 (no. 1) pp. 54-62.
<NAME>. (1994). Background Characteristics and Futures Plans of High-Scoring GRE General Test Examinees, research report ETS-RR9412 submitted to EXXON Education Foundation, Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Your premise seems to be that a good GRE score can compensate for bad grades. This is not how PhD admissions work. While a bad GRE score may sink your application, a good GRE score will not save it.
Getting to your title question: Fundamentally, the GRE is a weak predictor of success in research. The [real question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/11812/44249) is why any universities accept it, not why some don't.
PhD admissions committees may receive hundreds or even thousands of applications. They may use the GRE to filter out applicants that are completely unqualified without wasting time reading their applications in detail.
Why does this reasoning not apply to Europe etc.? Firstly, the GRE is administered by a US organization and US universities are familiar with its standardized testing system, but this is not the case elsewhere. Secondly, in many places (particularly outside north america) the admissions model is different. Rather than a committee reviewing applications and admitting students to a program, individual faculty choose students that reach out to them informally first. Thus there is less need for a filter like the GRE.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The simplest answer is that the GRE is administered in American English, and the test is normed on students applying to U.S. universities. I'm arguing that it can be a valid test measuring the exact subject matter that it covers, for the intended population (people seeking graduate study in the U.S.), without being valid for a wider set of uses. (username_1's answer suggests it may not be valid for U.S. use, due to test bias. I might argue that the citations are thirty years old and that ETS (Educational Testing Service) works hard to eradicate test bias, and that schools might appropriately inform their decisions based on the tests, even if they shouldn't set score cut-offs. (I do not and have not worked for the ETS, in case there are suspicions.))
Is English enough of an academic *lingua franca* that every academic in the world should be given a high stakes test in it? In particular, the GRE tests people on abstruse English vocabulary and on composition in English. I am not surprised that most schools outside the U.S. do not make the GRE mandatory.
It might be interesting to have a translated quantitative section or translated subject exams, though it is also valid for universities to choose what kind of information they value about applicants and make choices different than ETS.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: The GRE general test covers college-level vocabulary and high-school mathematics. The GRE subject tests in specific disciplines have more relevance to their specific fields, but are also disappearing with time. They’ve shown to correlate only with academic performance in coursework. So their value as a predictive tool is limited.
Why aren’t they more widely required? In part because they’re not widely administered outside of the US—at least nowhere near as they are in the US. The tests are US-based, and the admissions processes that developed in other countries did not base themselves around testing. So there’s not an inherent reason to require them, nor would any PhD admissions committee use GRE scores as the reason for accepting a candidate.
Some schools may use the security measures imposed by the GRE to help combat fraud in admissions—to ensure the person who is interviewed is the person actually applying. This used to be and can still be a problem in admissions.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/17
| 578
| 2,565
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose, a student left a negative comment about a professor in the university's confidential review page. Somehow the professor guesses who the student was.
What can the student do if the professor intentionally gives the student bad grades?
Can the student file a request for a exam paper review to the dean?
How would the whole situation work out for the student?<issue_comment>username_1: This totally depends on country, culture etc. (unfortunately, no country tag is given).
A student can of course always file a request. However, this situation sounds so unlikely (how should the student know that the professor guessed and takes revenge) that, without any more evidence, this request will always certainly be dimissed. (And there are also places where no stuff members cares at all about any requests, even if there was proof given.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The student needs to establish that the the work submitted is better than the grade received.
1. Understand the grading distribution for the class (should be in syllabus)
2. Collect the assignment/exam requirements, what you submitted and your grade
3. Honestly evaluate what you submitted and see if the grade matches the work
4. Check a classmate's submission and grade to get a sense of what was right or wrong
5. Ask the professor for clarification about the assignment/exam grade (within a week of the assignment grade being given)
6. Check that the final grade is calculated correctly based on the weights in the syllabus
7. If you still feel like you met the requirements, you can contact your student advisor, student support services or the head of the school. Be very clear about your concerns of bias, and offer to have others review your work.
Number 7 is a bit tricky. You should take local culture into account. All of this assumes you are at a university that does have some support systems for students.
Communication is really important. Sometimes the Prof makes a mistake in grading, sometimes the student didn't understand the assignment. Once you rule out both of those, then you could consider a review.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In the US, at least, in general: there should be some mechanism for disputing the grade; and there will likely be something in your university policy about retaliation not being permitted.
The important thing is to **check your university's online catalog and conduct policy**, to find out how you're supposed to proceed when you wish to file a grade dispute.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/17
| 1,467
| 6,178
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'd like to perform a meta-analysis on the efficacy of web-based counsellor interventions across different modalities (text counselling, video counselling, etc.)
To do so I created the following search term:
(Internet OR Online OR Web-based) AND (Therapy OR Counselling OR Intervention) AND (RCT OR Randomized Controlled Trial) AND (Counsellor OR Therapist OR Psychologist OR Psychotherapist)
In Google Scholar this returns over 145 000 results, and still over 19 000 if I filter for 2013 and later.
This is my first attempt at a meta-analysis and I'm wondering if this is considered normal - if there are researchers who sift through tens of thousands of papers to find <100 relevant ones? It seems like other reviews have managed to tackle similar topics yet only returned ~1000 studies. For example: [Guided Internet‐based vs. face‐to‐face cognitive behavior therapy for psychiatric and somatic disorders: a systematic review and meta‐analysis](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wps.20151)<issue_comment>username_1: The short answer to the last question is that **yes, for some questions people do sift through tens of thousands of results to find a small yield of relevant studies**. (And the pool becomes smaller when later screening for details like N and standard errors and adequate description of the population and intervention to allow for a technical meta-analysis.) **But that may not be the ideal way for you to do this.**
The [Campbell Collaboration](https://www.campbellcollaboration.org/) helps coordinate literature reviews and metaanalyses on many social issues, as the [Cochrane Collaboration](http://www.cochrane.org/about-us) does for health. The Campbell Collaboration has [a document on how to write a good protocol for such a review](https://www.campbellcollaboration.org/images/pdf/plain-language/C2_Protocols_guidelines_v1.pdf), including specifying your search strategy, and there's [some longer guidance on search strategies and information retrieval here](https://www.campbellcollaboration.org/library/searching-for-studies-information-retrieval-guide-campbell-reviews.html).
The latter document says:
>
> The decision as to how much to invest in the search process depends on the question a review addresses and the resources that are available. It should be noted, however, that article abstracts identified through a literature search can be ‘scan-read’ very quickly to ascertain potential relevance. The process can be facilitated by answering a few specific questions that relate to the inclusion criteria when scanning the abstracts, such as “Does this document report an empirical study?” or “Are children age 3-18 in the sample?”. If the answer to any question is No, then the reference is excluded. But any study that makes it through all of the questions answered either Yes or Can’t Tell, is retrieved. At an estimated reading rate of two abstracts per minute, the results of a database search can be ‘scan-read’ at the rate of 120 per hour (or approximately 1000 over an 8-hour period), so the high yield and low precision associated with systematic review searching is not as daunting as it might at first appear in comparison with the total time to be invested in the review. (p. 23)
>
>
>
Much of the work done by these collaborations involves large research groups and/or volunteer labor and/or automated screening. For your workflow, you would probably want to find a system that lets you view the title and full abstract without clicking through--easier in some databases, maybe a deep option somewhere in Google Scholar. This difference in the view may allow you to more efficiently screen the literature even if there are many potential results.
It seems to me that a good reason for using Google Scholar would be if you want to seek out "gray literature," technical reports, unpublished results, and results in multiple languages. However, Google Scholar will probably bring up more irrelevant studies than if you search databases. For your search terms, though, I'm not sure that you'll run into as many well-designed (RCT) studies on a novel technical infrastructure that would fall through the cracks like that.
Thus, I think your best bet might be doing your main search via PsycINFO or some other database, plus a dissertation database, and then look at Google Scholar a bit to see if anything was systematically missed.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I won't repeat what cactus\_pardner has already said in their excellent answer (I especially appreciate the abstract-sifting strategy quoted from the Campbell Collaboration), but I will rather focus on the proper (or improper) use of Google Scholar.
Google Scholar is a great resource in general (I consult it regularly myself), but it is not a good primary database for a literature review. For that kind of purpose, searching Google Scholar is similar to doing a regular Web search on regular Google: you will come up with hundreds or thousands of irrelevant articles. Of course, Google is well qualified to build a professional scholarly database, but as far as I understand, in order to allow Google index their articles for free, the publishers place many restrictions on what Google Scholar is allowed to display. For example, Google Scholar is forbidden to display abstracts of articles (which is one of the most crucial capabilities that you need to do a literature review!).
Thus, I recommend that you book an appointment with a librarian to understand the scholarly databases that you have access to (an academic librarian is preferred); a librarian should be able to help you identify the best databases that you have access to that are relevant to your research topic. (And in my experience, librarians can often give you access to special trial databases that are not available to the general public.)
Google Scholar is mainly useful to find non-published grey literature as a supplement to your formal database searches, but as a primary search source, its abundant results of primarily irrelevant results are often overwhelming to the point of being useless.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/17
| 1,579
| 6,700
|
<issue_start>username_0: Setting
-------
I am currently an undergraduate student in chemistry and I have recently started working on an undergraduate research project in a known laboratory in the US. I am very passionate about the topic, however I have problems with my supervisor, who is a PhD student.
Problem description
-------------------
When I came to the lab asking for a topic to work on, the Professor assigned me to one of their students, which appears to be common practice, so I did not question this. However, I found out later that my supervisor (the student) was the only person in the lab working on the topic, and that she herself had only started working on it not long ago. After several days in the lab, my supervisor has not revealed what the eventual goal of my project will be, and from the way she behaves (stressed out, impatient towards me asking questions, which is an additional problem), I suspect that she might not know herself (quote: "we'll figure out along the way"). This is severely frustrating. I am aware that research is an open-ended endeavour that might be changed as new situations arise, but I thought that undergraduate research should be something self-contained, with a clear goal and time-frame, and usually well-thought out by an experienced researcher? I am aware that one possibility to resolve these issues could be to simply *talk* to my supervisor. However, there appear to be some barriers, which leads me to my question.
Question
--------
How can I approach the situation without ruining my standing in the laboratory and appearing like a complicated student, even though I am not? I would love to continue on this or a similar topic in this lab, but the current situation is very unpleasant for me.
I feel like I cannot talk to my supervisor directly as she seems impatient and stressed out, and at the same time inexperienced with supervising undergraduate students. I fear that this could make the experience even worse, with my supervisor getting angry at my criticism.
The other option I can conceive of would be to talk to my supervisor's supervisor, and ask for some kind of intervention from above. But this could also backfire in many ways, possibly making me look complicated and unwanted in the lab altogether.<issue_comment>username_1: You correctly identified (i) that the solution is to communicate, and (ii) that the problem is that the grad student might be inexperienced in advising students, though probably qualified as far as the material is concerned. You've also correctly understood that research is often an endeavor that takes you where the data and insight takes you, and that that might be a different place than originally planned.
You're both adults, and in a sense colleagues because you're still starting researchers. Ask her whether it would be possible to have coffee to talk about your project. Get away from the lab so that both sides set aside 30 or 60 minutes without feeling that every minute spent on talking is a loss of time for something else. Brainstorm about what you're passionate about, what she thinks this could turn into regarding a project, and jointly come up with a timeline. If you want, have a bullet point list of things with you that you think you need to talk about.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I'll be honest with you, remarking that this is only my opinion, by no means I'm right.
>
> Undergrads are a pain to supervise.
>
>
>
Mostly because, in general, undergrads require a lot of "hand-holding" and training (proper research procedure and writing are not usually covered before that), which takes time (even worse if it is a *good* student that challenges you.... rewarding, but takes even more time).
You are right in thinking that undergrad research should be simple, self-contained, and well planned out. Properly planning stuff takes time, professors never have it. And simple means that the research is unlikely to have high impact.
I know several professors that don't accept undergrads simply because they think it is not worth the effort. The ones that do accept, pin them to a Ph.D. student (or a postdoc) and that's it. The Ph.D. students usually are busy, worried about their own things, and do not have the experience to deal with "underlings".
Yes, your project should be well defined, with clear goals and schedule. That never happens. Not as an undergrad, MS, Ph.D., postdoc, or professor. There might be a few unicorns around, but, usually, you have no idea where you are going. Ideally, you could use this opportunity to train the most important trait in a researcher: *independence*.
Instead of expecting to be handed goals and schedule, create them. It will be challenging for you, but you would learn how to do it, and get familiar with the field. Then you could go to the Ph.D. student and ask "Do you think this is a reasonable plan?" instead of "what should I do?". Worst case scenario, that plan can be a starting point for a better one. Bonus points if you include solutions to tangential problems of her research (stuff that would be cool/easy to do, but isn't a priority, so she would never do it herself).
Quoting a far better man, and professor, than myself:
>
> "Be honest, be kind, **be useful**, be responsible, work hard, treat everybody with respect."
>
>
>
I'd advise you to go around the Ph.D. student only as last resort.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I suggest a combination (you may already be doing some or all of these things):
* Try to make yourself useful
* Assert yourself when your direct supervisor is disrespectful
* Ask others in the department for tips
* Do some reading to see if that allows you to propose a direction
* If email is more comfortable than face to face communication, well, try to use email as much as possible
* Collect your questions in a bunch so she can concentrate without a ton of interruptions
* Negotiate regular opportunities for you to ask questions
* Set yourself a time frame for the uncertainty. I can't suggest a specific timeframe because I don't know how long this project is supposed to last. Ask your supervisor for a preview of the time track for this project, i.e. when you should be achieving certain milestones, or how often you should check in with her for performance feedback (this will create an opening for you to slip in some self-evaluation, and by extension, an evaluation of the supervision she's providing). When that time comes, make a list of positives and things you've learned; and a list of specific types of support you need.
If it really doesn't feel like the right fit, let someone higher up know.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/18
| 511
| 2,014
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently posted the above question along with another in the same post and was asked to post this one separately.
I have received a Marie-Curie individual fellowship from the European Commission. As a non-European, this allows me to take up research in a Member State. I know this fellowship is prestigious in Europe, but I'm not sure how it's perceived in other parts of the world like the USA, Canada, Australia...etc. Any idea on this?<issue_comment>username_1: Speaking as a researcher in the USA, I would say that [Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Sk%C5%82odowska-Curie_Actions) are clearly perceived as having significant prestige.
Even not knowing all of the details, one immediately sees:
1. It's an EU-wide program, and those generally have high competition.
2. Curie remains widely famous, and nations and organizations are protective of her name.
Exactly how prestigious it is compared to other prestigious fellowships I wouldn't care to speculate, but it's clearly a noteworthy addition to any researcher's CV.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: While I was in China and Korea between 2014 and 2017, I was fortunate to chair several selection panels for early-career academics. We received applications (not many, maybe half a doze or so) from researchers who'd completed Marie Sklodowska-Curie Fellowships. We rated them about as well as any other internationally competitive postdoctoral fellowship. We certainly ranked them higher than typical national fellowships, but not by much. We were more interested in the candidate's accomplishments as a Marie Sklodowska-Curie Fellow rather than their receiving one in the first place.
I suggest that you make the most of the opportunity by collecting great data, presenting at the top conferences in your field, delivering workshops and classes on your area of expertise and publishing solid research in the peer-reviewed publications in your discipline.
Good luck to you.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/18
| 328
| 1,376
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a student who is very enthusiastic about open access and sharing research. When I worked with my former supervisor, we would write a paper and then post it to a preprint server (e.g., arXiv) *at the same time* as submitting it to a venue. My current supervisor, however, is of the mindset that we should post a preprint *after* receiving confirmation that the paper was accepted to some venue.
Is there a generally-accepted time to post a preprint?<issue_comment>username_1: It makes the most sense to put it on arXiv when the preprint is complete (i.e. when xou submit it to a journal). (Some people even post to arXiv, wait a few days to maybe get interesting comments from other people (comments which improve the paper), and then submit it to a journal.) So the community can use your results before formal publication.
However, if for some reason or another, your supervisor does not want to do this, then their opinion trumps this argument.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: When the venues that you would like to submit to all *allow* preprints to be published.
If it is double blind, you probably can't. That would defeat the concept of double blind reviewing!
If you get rejected and would like to try another venue later, that one also matters... If you post the draft, it limits you choices where you can submit to.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/18
| 888
| 3,757
|
<issue_start>username_0: I tried asking this elsewhere and got answers from people who do not know the difference between a resume and a CV. I figured academics would.
I ask this question because my LinkedIn is pretty detailed. It has a lot of the same content as my CV, except in the terrible organization enforced by LinkedIn. I figure it might be more effective to use my LinkedIn more like a resume with the highlights, pointing to my CV (which is linked) for extra details. But I'm not sure how to go about it.
For context, I am an undergraduate applying to graduate school. I have many research presentations, awards, and experiences so it is a lot of content to shove on a LinkedIn. I only included content relevant to my research or related technical experience, but it is still a lot to read.<issue_comment>username_1: Academics don't use LinkedIn, so it doesn't really matter what you've put there.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: While I understand that LinkedIn is currently on the decline amongst the research community, I think it's still fairly well used. I graduated from my PhD 2 years ago, and many of people graduating in the same year use LinkedIn as one of their professional profiles, as do some of the "seniors" I know. Things are shifting to websites (like ResearchGate or similar) specifically targeting academics which mostly show to list and organize publications.
That said, I keep *everything* in my LinkedIn profile. I never took anything out - stuff like presenting my faculty at the University day in my BSc. is still there. And I don't provide a link to it with my applications - my name, plus basic info from my CV (current/last position) is always enough to find and correctly identify me on LinkedIn if anybody wants to look it up.
In the *CV*, the things I would typically include:
* past education and experience
* technologies / tools used or learned per project / study programme / job
* publications (+ best paper awards)
* student exchanges/internships
* grants
* languages
If you are applying to a graduate school, and in general in early career, I'd include the list of all of the above, exhaustively. As a rule of thumb, it should not be longer than 2 letter pages (so if even printed, fits on one sheet of paper) and have just pure "facts" (a short statement of purpose of 2-4 sentences is lately encouraged).
As you grow more senior you remove things (my BSc and MSc internships will go soon, PhD internships a bit later, any pre-PhD honors and awards are gone, a selected publication list instead of a full one happens as you publish more), while still keeping it at 2-3 pages long at most.
The one document I would expect to find with an application that you don't seem to mention is a *cover letter* (referred to in some languages as literally "motivation letter"). This is the place to:
* elaborate on the points of your CV especially relevant to your application
* draw conclusions and connections between your experience, research and the position you are applying for
* state your motivations, why you think you will be a good fit and why you think the institution / position will be a good fit for you
* mention any cool things that can not go on a formal CV, e.g. ongoing collaborations
*So to summarize*: think of a CV and cover letter as a unit. One does facts in a concise list or bullet point form, and the other one relates those facts to your experiences and makes them relevant to the application. LinkedIn is just an additional, professional profile, which people can find you based on your name and where they can look up more detailed info if they like, like links to and summaries of past projects and publications which are too clunky for a CV.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/18
| 2,459
| 9,926
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student who works in theory. Too many times, I have to defend my ideas or claims in front of my supervisor. I have failed to do so in the past and it worries me.
Please note that I am only interested in defending correct ideas, not wrong ones.
Some of the things I have tried are:
* Doubt every line which I read.
* Try to prove each term clearly in front of him.
* Go over the material at least two times.
These kind of things are not working.
My research supervisor has told me that I need to defend my ideas and claims. There have been many times where he asked me to change something about the idea; I did it; and then he asked me why I changed it.
Question: How to defend your correct ideas or claims in front of your supervisor?
Edit : Many times I have tried to defend a wrong idea and there were some times in which I have changed my right idea ( based upon his feedback) and after I changed my idea he told me "your original idea was right, why did you change it?". How to deal with this situation also?<issue_comment>username_1: Ultimately, the supervisor is saying that your idea is not clear. Since we are assuming your idea is correct (premise of the question), then the problem boils down to how to be a good teacher. It sounds like you already know the material well (you are going over it multiple times in advance of your meeting and proving it step by step) -- now you just have to work on your explanatory skills.
This is also something I struggled with. Ultimately, getting more experience teaching and presenting helped me because I was able to begin to think of my meetings as opportunities to *teach* my advisor about my claims and ideas.
When teaching your advisor about your claims or ideas, you want to be able to explain the same concept multiple ways. I learned that my supervisor really grasped ideas more readily when I could give a real-life example for him to mentally grasp onto. Another method was drawing diagrams to support my ideas. This especially helped with multi-step processes.
The final trick is to make sure that your tone comes off as neutral, rather than arrogant. I find that phrases like "As you know..." and "You probably already see that..." can be used liberally while reminding the advisor of fundamental facts without talking down to him.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> How to defend your correct ideas or claims in front of supervisor?
>
>
>
If your advisor is anything like me, they care much less about right or wrong in these meetings, but they want to hear what your thought process is and which angles you have covered. Suggestions to try something else should not usually be understood as *"you did something wrong, do this other thing instead"* but more like a probe whether you have also investigated this other angle, and if you have not chosen it, how you justify not doing that.
**As such, the central element in "defending" your idea is to, briefly but clearly, outline why you have done what you have done, and not done what you have not done.** Proving stuff in front of your advisor *should* help, as long as you do it correctly and clearly. If it doesn't, you are either not being as clear as you think you are, your advisor isn't competent in your topic, or you have a much deeper problem (e.g., you and your advisor are not on the same page about what problem is to be solved). However, note that even an objectively "correct" approach is not immune to questioning - maybe there are other approaches that are easier, faster, or preferable in some other way? You need to have an argument at the ready for why you have not chosen them.
If looked at in that light, situations where they suggest approach A in the first meeting and then probe you on your usage of A in the second start making more sense - they have not suggested A because of some secret advisor-tech that makes them know the right answer in advance, and telling in the second meeting that they suggested the idea is not a convincing enough reason to go forward with it by itself. Even if they suggested it, you *still* need to explain why A was better than other approaches.
>
> Too many times, I have to defend my ideas or claims in front of my supervisor.
>
>
>
Frankly, I can hardly imagine a supervisor who questions your ideas "too much". As long as they are respectful and helpful, questioning your work and suggesting alternatives is pretty much all that good advisors do. It's kind of the job description.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Bibliography. Newton once said he stood "on the shoulders of giants", and this applies perfectly here. Besides the "approach" thing @username_2 said on his response, having scientific evidence produced by respected peers on your community should help. I wish I could write more about the subject, but I think that, alongside others' responses covers it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I wonder whether your problem lies in having trouble coming up with justifications on the fly.
If so, I have a few suggestions you might want to try:
1. Let's say your advisor suggests a significant change in direction during your meeting. You could say, for example,
>
> Let me think about that and send you some thoughts about it in a couple days.
>
>
>
or
>
> That's an interesting idea. I'll work on that this week and tell you where I got in our next meeting. Meanwhile, for now, I'd like to finish explaining what I worked on this past week.
>
>
>
2. Have you participated in any study groups, and do you have one at this time? Working out problems with one or more fellow students can give you practice explaining your ideas to others, and can help you build your self-confidence.
3. You wrote, "I am only interested in defending correct ideas, not wrong ones." Now, this attitude can get you so tied up in knots that you can't function. How about if you try taking a different approach? Try thinking this way: "Okay, let's suppose for a moment such-and-so. Where does that lead me? Now, let's set that aside for a bit, and try this other assumption (or method). Where does that get us?" Do you see, it's no longer about *you* being right or wrong, or *your ideas* being right or wrong. It's about exploring, and constructing a chain of reasoning.
Question: how comfortable are you with writing proofs for exercises in the courses you've taken/are taking? Is this an area you think needs strengthening? If so, perhaps you could talk with your advisor about how to go about this.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: If you are working in theory, then you are presumably writing proofs. If you write them in [Coq](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coq), they will be unassailable.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: Don't worry primarily about convincing your advisor -- worry first and foremost about convincing *yourself*. If you make yourself your own harshest critic, your advisor will be easy by comparison.
A useful idea in programming which has wider application is [rubber duck debugging](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_duck_debugging). This is where a programmer debugs their code by taking a rubber duck and explaining their code, line-by-line, to the duck. You don't need a literal rubber duck (though, why not?). Place the rubber duck (real or imaginary) in the front row of an otherwise empty class room, stand at the chalkboard, and explain your ideas in detail to the duck. Imagine that the duck is hard to satisfy. If nothing else, this could be practice for sessions with your advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> My research supervisor has told me that I need to defend my ideas and claims. There have been many times where he asked me to change something about the idea; I did it; and then he asked me why I changed it.
>
>
>
My initial reaction to this is that it sounds like you are trying to please your supervisor (and others) when defending your own ideas. This is wrong.
Either you believe in the ideas you state (whether you change them or not) or you don't.
Your supervisor's job is to probe for failure of logic, but also to probe for failures to defend and shifts in position based not on logic, but on a desire to please or confusion.
>
> Question: How to defend your correct ideas or claims in front of your supervisor?
>
>
>
Explain the logic and answer the questions. Either the logic holds or it does not. It's simply a matter of being open to your "correct" ideas being flawed *or* imperfectly explained (i.e. the idea can be correct but you can fail to properly justify it).
>
> Edit : Many times I have tried to defend a wrong idea
>
>
>
... which will never work. I cannot think of any reason to do this.
>
> and there were some times in which I have changed my right idea ( based upon his feedback) and after I changed my idea he told me "your original idea was right, why did you change it?". How to deal with this situation also?
>
>
>
That's precisely the point.
Why did *you* accept a change ?
If you accept a change you should be able to justify that change.
This suggests you are simply saying "yes" to your supervisor instead of thinking about what they say more deeply and deciding if it's really true or not. Your immediate reaction is to try and please your supervisor (wrong !) instead of considering their questions and ideas properly.
Changes should be things *you* believe in, not things *they* say.
It's *your* thesis, not *theirs*.
Nothing you say should be something you do not understand and believe.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_8: Is this guy approachable? If so, shout him a beer, hit a tennis ball at him or chew your cheeks off. But you have to be comfortable chilling out and getting in tune... it takes a few outings.
Then do what that other guy said: ask him how you're getting. it. so. Bloody. wrong.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/18
| 314
| 1,325
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wrote some texts related to mathematical logic:
<http://www.mathematics21.org/formulas.html>
How to check if my ideas are novel? Where and who to ask?
The problem is that I am not even nearly a professional logician.<issue_comment>username_1: The best way of finding out if your ideas are novel is to do a literature search.
A good place to start would be arxiv.org, which is a well-known pre-print repository (i.e. place where papers get uploaded before they are published) that has plenty of mathematical papers.
See what research has been done in the same area as you and you will get an idea of whether or not your research is novel, as well as the standard your work needs to reach if you intend to publish it in the future.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no way except to put in the study necessary to have the knowledge of a professional logician. (This can easily take several years.)
Here is the fundamental problem. It is very possible that your ideas would look novel to a layperson, even a layperson who has read the relevant literature, but any professional logician would know that your ideas are really some old (possibly a century old) idea recast into new language by a standard well known trick that has already been used many times in the past.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/18
| 1,430
| 6,256
|
<issue_start>username_0: My PhD advisor is someone who values workplace/personal life boundaries. Sometimes I feel that he gets mad at me for accidentally crossing those boundaries in small ways. The problem is that he doesn't explain when he is mad at me, and this can cause problems in our working relationship - for example, he tries to avoid me online and in real life, probably in order to avoid confrontation.
I confronted him recently about why he was acting mad at me, and it surfaced that he expected me to figure out why he was angry. This is a waste of my time and energy. How can I manage my relationship with him; in particular, what are some steps that we can take so that we understand clearly what the boundaries are in our relationship? How can I encourage him to communicate his boundaries to me, without such a question seeming overly personal?
Has anyone been in a similar situation? What insights or advice do you have to offer?
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: We all initially learned boundaries as children by testing them individually and then receiving feedback when we crossed some imaginary line. You can learn your advisor's boundaries the same way - by generalizing rules based on specific interactions. Every time something comes up where it seems that your advisor is angry, ask him directly if x behavior of yours was a problem, apologize if necessary, and ask if he would prefer you not to do it again. As you do this over time you'll get a more solid map of what is and isn't acceptable to him. You already have the beginnings of one based on what you already know about him and the advice given in the comments, so you are off to a good start.
(I'm assuming here that you've already tried multiple times to have a general discussion with your advisor about boundaries and it didn't go well. Depending on the situation, you might be able to arrange a meeting with your advisor to talk about the problem the way you would with a manager. Because he's your advisor, it would be best to frame it as you humbly seeking counsel from him on how he would like you to behave, rather than as a mutual problem for both of you to solve.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I assume, that discussing about boundaries crosses boundaries for your professor ;-). So in my opinion, your negotiation phase aleardy ended (and I think you came to this point but you don't like the result):
No personal communication, no settings which could be considered "private" (like having lunch ect.).
The reasons for such a behaviour can be manifold (from thinking that a professor "should behave like this", fear that a personal communication could reduce level of respect, fear of beeing accused for harassment, fear, that other might think soneone is preferred over others, sociopathic nature of the professor, ...
In fact the reasons don't matter much, you can just decide for yourself to respect whatever reason there might be, or to look for an other position. You can not change someone. You made a very good step by asking for explanations and guidelines (if you would not have done this, this would have been my first advice), but the reaction shows that it would be inappropriate to dig into this issue any further.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Many times people communicate boundaries in subtle ways. Often they also expect that certain boundaries commonly accepted by the society or general group you both belong to will be respected without any need for even subtle communication.
Having to repeatedly clarify my boundaries to each and every or even just one person would take a lot of my time and energy and it would definitely gnaw on my nerves.
There already was some communication about boundaries, as you are certain that they value their boundaries.
What you now need is **empathy**. And that seems to be a little lacking on your part, to be honest. I will try and go through the three examples you gave in your comment:
>
> For example, I might sit in and listen to his meeting with his other students and ask some questions.
>
>
>
This is not only about your professor establishing their own boundaries, it is also about the other student's boundaries and potentially your supervisor protecting those. There is an advisor-student relationship and if it is good there is quite a bit of trust and value in it.
Did the students agree that you can participate? One-on-one time with an advisor is a precious good that many cannot afford to pass on. Did your supervisor agree that you listen? He might need to discuss issues with the other students that are none of your concern. Even if they agreed that you stay and listen, they might not have the time to explain and discuss everything with you. It is them working on their project. Meetings can be lengthy and hard and if you want to avoid that you need to be effective. An outsider actively joining is often disruptive to that effort.
>
> Or I tried to invite him to lunch and have some casual discussion with him.
>
>
>
As every person, they have a right to not want to go to lunch with you. As your supervisor and someone who is going to grade you somehow in the future, with all the friendliness that can be involved it is more common in a group setting. Going for lunch alone with one of your students can lead to talking behind their back for them. And you won't profit from that either. In life there is a general guideline that in a friendship between people in different levels of the same hierarchy, the higher up should make the next step. They will know how far they can acceptably go and how far they want to take it. Or they might decide to only do this after the supervisor-student relationship as such has ended.
>
> From time to time I will also try to share my snacks with him as I do to all of my friends.
>
>
>
As long as you offer them to everybody else in the room/group/lab as well?
Giving out snacks or treats to a specific person can look like bribery. Not everybody would think so, but the few who do are enough to start gossip. But I would rather again offer to share in a group setting. Definitely not walk up to them specifically unless you are also walking up to everyone else who is around.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/19
| 295
| 1,171
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are three things written on the journal’s home page: EIC (editor-in-chief), AE (associate editor) and ADM (administrator). The EIC is assigned, whereas the AE and ADM are not. The status is "Under review". In this situation, what can I expect? Has the EIC invited the reviewers or it is not under review?<issue_comment>username_1: If it says "under review", it's under review.
My guess is that the EiC decided to handle the paper himself / herself, hence nobody else was assigned.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I tend to disagree with @username_1. I have been an EIC, and I'm an associate editor of several IEEE and ACM journals. The manuscript was submitted only 3 weeks ago. It is possible that the EIC just hasn't gotten to it yet, or is having trouble finding the right associate editor to handle it. I think the system will say "under review" as long as it has been submitted and not yet accepted or rejected.
It is possible that the EIC is trying to decide *whether* to assign the paper or reject it immediately, but I think that's not the conclusion I'd jump to.
OP should simply be patient.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/19
| 416
| 1,740
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wonder if anyone has any answers to this? I am quite worried! I submitted my manuscript to a top international relations journal and it went through the usual admin checks and one day went to 'awaiting referee selection'. The next day it went to 'awaiting decision'!
I wonder if they made an error and decided to now make an editorial decision instead of sending it out for review? It seems to have skipped 'awaiting referee assignment' -> 'awaiting referee scores'.
Any info would be most helpful! Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: It means nothing. These status should not be taken seriously. Just give it some time; either you will get a decision or it will go for the review process.
It it is desk reject, then reviewer means the editor herself. If it is not a desk reject, then it will surely go to the external peer-reviewers for review.
Further, if you are thinking of sending an email to them, then I would say, don't. Wait! It is not late yet. Just ignore your paper for few months (of course, depends on your fields.).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It means the editor is making a decision without inviting reviewers. This is not a good sign. The most likely result is a desk rejection. The next most likely result is a revise decision because something's wrong with your submission, e.g. you forgot to submit a crucial figure, the paper's English is poor, and so on.
This is not likely to be an error. The editorial management systems I'm familiar with don't easily let you make decisions unless a review has been received. If it is an error, it'll be reversed soon enough, since the editor-in-chief is likely to want to glance at the reviews before making a final decision.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/19
| 528
| 2,005
|
<issue_start>username_0: A postdoc has published some works that I am interested in. I have some questions about the work, and I would like to share some idea about the topic.
Is it considered polite to send the email to the postdoc and CC his PI? If I email the PI only, I might have to wait for a long time. However, the postdoc could not even be in the city. So I am not sure what is the best and politest practice.<issue_comment>username_1: If the paper lists a corresponding author, then that is the person to try.
Otherwise, I would just email all the authors and let them decide which one will respond. I don't think it's impolite and I'd rather email too many than too few authors (and risk getting no response).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, it's not entirely clear to me that the PI is listed as an author on the paper. (I assume the PI probably is, but if not, then it would odd to email the PI for this.)
If you have had prior contact with either the postdoc or the PI, such that they might recognize your name in their inbox, then that might be a reason to start the contact there first. If your name is familiar to them, they are more likely to see your email and remember to deal with it.
With those caveats, I agree with username_1's advice to contact the corresponding author (if any) or all authors at once.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Who should I send the email to?
>
>
>
Is the PI is listed as an author?
* Yes: Write them both, as 'To' addressees.
* No: Post-Doc as 'To', and 'CC' the PI if s/he will want to be aware of the interaction with you.
Also, if somebody else is the corresponding author, they should be a 'To' addressee as well.
>
> Is it considered polite to send the email to the postdoc and CC his PI?
>
>
>
Not if the PI is listed as an author. Better to mail them both and let them sort out who wants to answer you. ... that is, assuming PI and the postdoc are on good terms with each other.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/19
| 499
| 2,177
|
<issue_start>username_0: I read an article in the past - I forget the source now, but I believe it was credible - about how American STEM PhD programs (and master's programs) admit a lot of qualified international students, e.g. from China and India, in order to help fill the skills gaps in the U.S., but an interesting phenomenon was that American medical schools don't act in the same way, effectively not admitting international students and preserving the acceptance slots for American students. If this is indeed true, why is that the case? Doesn't the United States have a skills gap in medicine and a shortage of medical doctors?<issue_comment>username_1: This may have changed but we studied cartels in college and the American Medical Association (AMA) was called a cartel by my professor.
In the US the AMA not only sanctions the medical schools but puts a count on how many students can be accepted. Since there are a limited number of slots competition is more fierce.
There is no external body limiting STEM or other graduate school departments.
STEM and other PhD can get grants as they are producing a product (thesis) that can be (and often is) sponsored.
In medical school the only product is medical training for the student. There is little to no incentive to sponsor a medical degree.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: An important difference between graduate education in the arts and sciences (and engineering) and graduate education in professional schools (fields such as medicine, law, and business) in the US is that most graduate students in science and engineering are financially supported by teaching or research assistantships that cover tuition and pay a stipend for living expenses, while most students in the professional fields pay tuition (as much as $100,000 per year for medical school.)
Very few international students can afford to pay tuition for these professional programs.
Most of the US citizens in these programs take on substantial student loan debt with the expectation that they'll earn enough after graduation to pay off their debt. For students in medicine and business, this has worked fairly well.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/19
| 319
| 1,358
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished my PhD in natural sciences in 2015. At some point during my PhD studies I did some measurements for some other scientists.
Now they are about to submit a paper containing my data, and I am listed as a coauthor.
I barely remember the experiments. I did not read the paper (yet).
Do I have to read that paper? Do I have to read it often enough to fully understand it? Should I disagree being listed as a coauthor?<issue_comment>username_1: As previously stated, they are acknowledging your participation in the data gathering and making you co-author. I would accept it. When possible read the paper and if not certain all that it's about; ask someone that would know and it doesn't have to be the author.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Although doing a "service" by providing measurement data does not usually warrant co-authorship, some groups still decide to do so to show appreciation.
Many people in academia would accept this as it boosts their CV, and if anything wrong was found in the research after publication, the corresponding author has the highest authority.
I would give it a read and accept it if you are happy with the paper. If you are really worried, you can ask the authors to remove your name and explain you feel you did not provide a significant contribution.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/19
| 1,307
| 5,556
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a difficult situation about limit of absences during classes in my university.
The teacher of one subject made a rule that 3 absences with disrespectful reason during the course leads to **fail grade**. I've exceeded this limit because of my part-time job, which I need to perform in order to pay for my education.
One (and almost the only) respectful reason for absence is illness. Illness must be proven using a medical certificate from a doctor. The teacher asked me to show a certificate. Obviously I don't have it.
However, I did all the tasks and presented them.
Now I have a dilemma:
Try to forge the document about illness OR try to explain my situation about work.
Each option is a risk. The risk of forgery is obvious. And the risk of trying to explain my situation is that the teacher can say that he doesn't care about that, and then forgery will be impossible, and so I will automatically fail the course.
What should I do in this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: Take initiative about this, and be honest. By doing so, you can help your professor see you as a busy student who made a mistake, rather than a suspicious student who doesn't seem to care about the class (and who maybe gets caught in a lie).
Ask to meet with your professor in private. At that meeting:
* Honestly explain that you have missed class three times because of your job. Even though you respect the professor and care about the course, your job has interfered several times, and you are dependent on that money for your living expenses.
* Apologize, sincerely. This is for missing class, for conveying disrespect through your actions (it seems like that is part of the professor's insistence on attendance), and for [other effects of your absence on the class or the professor]. What did you lose out on, and how have you tried to make up for that?
* Acknowledge that it is reasonable for the professor to fail you under this policy.
+ You now know that the professor has this class policy, and you understand that work is not a qualifying reason for missing class, and that three absences is an automatic reason for failure.
+ Because you were absent for the class when this professor explained the absence policy, you did not know right away, but it was your responsibility to find out what you missed during that class and learn about the policy in that way.
* Ask if there is any way that you can make up for those absences. You would like to successfully complete this class if possible. If you can sincerely do so, tell the professor what you've already learned from the class, why you're interested in the material, and what you hope to do with your degree.
* Calmly let the professor know that this is a big deal for you, but do not literally beg or (try to) emotionally manipulate the professor.
* Recognize that the professor can say no. And that "no" is helpful to you: if there is no way for you to successfully complete the class this term, knowing this will allow you to focus on your other classes, research, and work.
**Integrity is critical to schooling**, whether you're on an academic or professional path. Professors will respect someone who acknowledges breaking the rules and apologizes. That respect might allow you to stay in the class, or it might mean they give you a fair chance when you retake the class. On the other hand, someone who evades responsibility and is willing to lie about one thing may be more willing to take improper shortcuts, cheat, or lie about other things. For your career, you do not want anyone to question your integrity, whether you plan to conduct research or enter a profession.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Incidentally, a student approached me recently on an issue that sounds extremely similar.
My policy on absences is that if you miss three sessions, you fail the course (it's actually a university-wide policy over which I have no discretion). Exceptions are made only for proven medical exigencies. Some of the introductory sessions are taught by a colleague. The student in question said s/he was ill-informed about the policy and expected (and planned for) three work-related absences. However, the policy is stated clearly in the syllabus.
I told the student that the policy is what it is and that I can't make exceptions. (I can appreciate that it's hard to study and earn a living, but I work in a country that offers support for students from low-income households, and thus any jobs should work around university and not vice versa. If you want to study part-time, that's your choice, and you need to select courses according to your work constraints.)
If the student were suddenly to hand in a doctor's note for the third absence, I would be *very* suspicious. If there were obvious signs for it being forged, I would not let it pass. This could become very unpleasant. Apart from normative concerns regarding integrity and breaking the law, I therefore *strongly* advise against this, purely to protect your own best interests.
However, if the student made a very good case why s/he needs to finish this particular course at this point in time, and that her employer is indeed inflexible (i.e. the student can't take a vacation day), I would offer the student to submit an extra assignment to compensate for the missed session.
To the OP, I suggest to approach the lecturer (again), explain the reasons as above, and *actively* ask for an extra assignment. Again, I strongly advise against any foul play.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/20
| 1,149
| 4,856
|
<issue_start>username_0: My school's comprehensive qualifying procedure has thee parts.
1. A paper that is a synthesis and analysis of the literature on my topic,
2. A written exam that lasts 5 days, and
3. An oral exam on my topic.
This question refers to the second portion.
After reading your paper, each committee member writes a question for you to answer (total of 4). You have from 9 am Monday to 5 pm Friday to write a 2,500- to 3,000-word response to each question (not including bib). This isn't necessarily something you can study for.
I am historically not the fastest writer. I also have a tendency to not always be clear in my writing (it is clear in my head, but not always on paper).
My question is: How can I prepare to successfully pass? I need to write a large amount of high-quality work in a short amount of time with no time to prep for questions ahead of time.
Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: Step one, plan your writing. The most efficient way to work is to write an outline before you start. However, in this case, where you have five days, you might need to alternate activities -- researching, trying out ideas, outlining and writing up parts you feel pretty sure about. So you might find that after a couple of days of this, you've written a large part of your submission, without having gone strictly step by step (outline, then write from the outline). In this case, you may have to produce an outline from your written paragraphs. You might need to do this more than once. Definitely do work with an outline, though, even if it's a bit of a pain to analyze your existing paragraphs and then describe them with an outline.
Why? Because this will help you find places where you're being repetitive, or where you make a leap of faith and omit to explain how you got from Point A to Point B, or where some reordering would make things hang together better.
If you need to consider a major restructuring, it can help to print it all out and cut it up into pieces according to sub-topic, and then try laying out the pieces in a few different orders on the floor or a large table.
Ideally, though, after having written an outline, you would then churn out reams of words and sentences and paragraphs, using your outline as your guide.
Revision: Let some time go by -- half a day, or overnight, before proceeding to the revision stage. Ideas for finding errors and places that aren't clear: Read it out loud. Display it in a different font or different size, or on a different screen. Print a hard copy. Have the computer read it to you out loud. These things will make it easier for you to find problems.
If you're allowed to, ask a friend to read a draft and circle anything that seems unclear or possibly having a spelling, punctuation or grammar mistake.
(The best way of all to prepare for writing is to pre-write with an interested live human being, who asks you, "What is your essay going to be about?")
Get lots of exercise and sleep between now and then, of course. Make sure you have a reliable set-up with all the resources and tools and groceries and peace and quiet you will need, including headphones or ear plugs if noise bothers you. Alert friends and acquaintances that you will be on the dark side of the moon for five days.
Use version control. Save a new, numbered version every couple of hours. Make sure your computer does an autorecover save when it crashes.
Practice makes perfect, and this is especially true with writing -- and revising. So, you may wish to warm up your writing and revising skills between now and then.
Remember that they won't be grading only on the quality of the writing, and that lots of students find writing challenging, but somehow many of them graduated.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Adding to the above answers,
You need to be thorough with your work first , you need to be aware of every aspect of it from top to bottom to answer questions on it , this is very important , then comes the writing.
Most often , if it is clear in your head , you can phrase it into sentences , refine and rearrange them into answers .
BUT , if you don't know or aren't familiar with parts of your work very well then you cannot answer specific questions on it.
Make sure there aren't any blindspots.
In the days before the exam , look out for probable questions from each area and think of how you would answer each of them.
If you have a clear idea and know which way you are going to proceed towards the answer , take your time and write it down and devise your answer into paragraphs , once you start writing you will get the hang of it and just go with the flow.
After writing the answer , read the question a couple more times and review your answer too and make sure it is clear , understandable and to the point.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/20
| 420
| 1,809
|
<issue_start>username_0: Alice is teaching a class and one student is clearly not understanding the material very well. Should she approach the student (e.g. ask to meet after class, write an email, or during class itself if it's not a lecture) and offer to help?
The argument for "yes" is that although the student might not ask for help, he or she wants to pass the course, so the teacher's intervention is appropriate. Some students also come from conservative cultures, are afraid to be seen as a fool, or are simply shy.
The argument for "no" is that it's possible the student wants to puzzle it out himself/herself. Instead, Alice should just make herself available for consultation. If the student does not make use of all the resources at his or her disposal, it's not her fault.
Is there any evidence that one style of teaching or the other is preferable?<issue_comment>username_1: When I am teaching excel, I often find when walking around that I can see an error in the student's spreadsheet and I just say quietly as I walk by "You should check cell A3".
What happens next is either they sort it themselves or they then ask for help...
As I am available in that workshop, some students will ask before I walk by, others as above and some keep quiet either because they get it or just don't want to ask...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Part of teaching is figuring out if what you want to teach is actually understood. This is something you should be doing continuously. As part of that you automatically find the students that struggle more than others, and that typically offers natural moments in which you can discuss what that student can do to improve things. So I don't see how someone can teach effectively without answering "yes" to your question.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/20
| 2,967
| 12,092
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently finished taking an undergraduate class and I enjoyed it. I was thinking of emailing the prof and saying this, but I don't know if it's appropriate or not, for a few reasons:
1. I would have already said this in the class evaluations, which the prof will read.
2. More importantly, I recently received my final grade and it was good. If I email now, it might come off as an implied "thank you" for giving me a good mark, even though I mean nothing of the sort.
My question is whether or not such an email would be appropriate.<issue_comment>username_1: As my experience of being a TA for multiple courses with various profs, such personal gestures of appreciation are welcomed by the professors. I have actually heard professors refer to the email as something that "made their day". As long as you don't refer to your grades, I don't see a reason why someone would misjudge your intentions, especially after the course has finished.
Upvotes: 9 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Email the professor**, they are human too, they like hearing that you enjoyed their class.
>
> 1) I...said this in the class evaluations, which the prof will read.
>
>
>
Class evaluations are presumably anonymous, an email from you is more personal.
>
> 2) More importantly, I recently received my final grade and it was good...If I email now, it might come off as an implied "thank you" for giving me a good mark...
>
>
>
You've done well because of your hard work, the professor hasn't done you any favours. (Regardless, if the class is sufficiently large, then the professor won't remember your grade and is surely unlikely to go to the trouble of looking it up.)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: First, yes, I think you should email them. If you enjoyed their class so much, then it is likely that quite an ammount of work, and effort went in preparing them.
Learning that it was enjoyed, and that this work and effort did not go to waste is probably going to make them happy.
If you want to avoid any misjudging on your intentions, you should specify a few thing you really enjoyed in his class.
>
> Hello professor X
>
>
> I'm Emailing you to let you know that I found your classes particularly enjoyable. I especially enjoyed your lessons on X and Y, and I learned quite a bit during the lesson on Z.
>
>
>
Telling them about specifics parts of what you enjoyed will show that you are honest, and, more importantly, that their classes stuck with you.
All in all, definitely email them, everyone likes having their work aknowledged from time to time.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Of course, this will probably make your teacher's day :) However, if you're going to do this, don't go overboard and bombard them with cheesy compliments. If you're going to do this, ensure you make yourself come across as genuine.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Also consider including your future plans in brief so that he knows where you're heading , he might shed some light into what you can do to enhance your career path. Its always good to know professors right from the start , he might be a source of LOR's in the future !
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I will just throw in my personal experience about this subject. Three years ago I was taking an undergraduate course with a great professor. I was at a point where I didn't want to continue studying (I won't go deep in this subject), and he changed my mind just by the way he was teaching. He always gave more than he needed to, always pushed us forward and had a great way of teaching.
Half way through the semester, I asked for a meeting with him during the office hours to ask about a subject in his course. He answered all my questions and gave me more than he had to.
At the end of the semester, and after getting all my grades I decided to email him because I wanted to thank him for such a nice semester I had with him and for all the push he gave me to continue my studies.
He was so happy that I shared all the information with him because he didn't really know the impact he had on me. He invited me to his office and we had some discussions not regarding the studies. He even asked me to stay in touch (we're still in touch).
---
A professor might not always know the effect he had on his students, and he would like to get all the feedback possible (Class evaluations are not enough IMO). It's always good to give a push and a "Keep going" sign for a good person.
Bottom line:
Yes, it is appropriate to thank a human being for their effort, being it a professor, a doctor, a stranger you met on the road. It's just a nice and good gesture of you and it will surely make them happy. Believe it or not, it will.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: Do it! It's useful as more specific feedback (I've known very few lecturers/professors who actually read all the feedback).
Also, it allows the professor to know that you are interested in the subject area - and coupled with your good grades - may lead to further work/study in that field.
You could always ask for extra reading since the course is now over. That's sometimes a nice way to email.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: As TA myself and as someone who has done that. I would say yes, it is certainly welcomed. As an aside, whenever I come across an academic article that I really liked - I would email the author(s) to let her know I really enjoyed it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: One of the joys I had when teaching was a student acknowledging the course was "useful". The level above was a course described as "interesting", "great", etc.
I remember two specific cases:
* one student coming personally to thank for the course. It was the last of their years, and after marking, so the "thank you " was genuine. It was not even a great student (he got something like 14/20 which is a so-so mark)
* one other student coming to say the the course was interesting, that she learned a lot and that if she was to ask one thing for the future students, it would be for me to speak slower (the course was in English in France). That was a fantastic feedback: a nice one and constructive on top.
**So definitely yes - tell him/her you enjoyed the course without overthinking.**
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: You're overthinking this. It's almost always appropriate to thank somebody if you appreciate the work they've done. In this case, where the professor has made a specific effort to help you personally, thanking them would be absolutely appropriate.
Note: "appropriate" not "mandatory". It would also be appropriate to not thank them, since they were "just doing their job". It's completely up to you, though it sounds like you want to thank them, and if you want to, you should.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_11: The only reason to add my answer to the long list of "yes" answers is to note that as a professor I sometimes get that kind of thank you years later. It always makes my day.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_12: If you feel like sending such a note — then definitely send it! There's absolutely nothing inappropriate about doing that.
So I agree with all the answers above, which made a number of great points. But let me add my five cents anyway. As a college teacher myself, I've received a number of such emails (and even postcards) from my students — and I enjoyed every one of them, and each one made my day! Each such message made me feel happy and appreciated, and as humans we all need that.
Look, ours is not an easy job. It has its perks and its moments, as well as a fair share of its challenges. Whatever we do, we can't predict the outcomes of our work and our efforts — because we're working with people, our students, not with inanimate objects. So feedback is extremely important to us. Maybe it's just me, but I feel that we get more than enough negative feedback, sometimes deserved, sometimes not. We certainly need your positive feedback too!
>
> I would have already said this in the class evaluations, which the prof will read.
>
>
>
That's not the same thing. Your feedback, because of being unsolicited, but rather something that you felt compelled to do as a sign of appreciation, is much more valuable than the officially requested student evaluations. Besides, the tone in evaluations is typically different — students tell the school **about** the instructor, as opposed to your writing directly **to** the instructor. Not to mention that evaluations are anonymous (which can be a good thing and a bad thing), and that your comment there is just one in a pile of all the other comments, which often paint a mixed picture.
>
> More importantly, I recently received my final grade and it was good (A to A+). If I email now, it might come off as an implied "thank you" for giving me a good mark, even though I mean nothing of the sort.
>
>
>
It sounds like your professor is a good one, so I bet he knows that your success belongs to you and your own hard work. So don't worry, he won't misinterpret your message. But he will be happy to know that he assisted you in it, and that you know that too.
One more thing. In fact, by sending such a message, you will be doing a tangible favor to him — which, judging by what you said, the professor deserved, so nothing's wrong with that. When we're evaluated by the school's administration for the purposes of promotions, contract renewal, tenure, and such, for a teaching faculty his/her teaching portfolio must include students' perception of his/her work. I save all these emails, and I always include them in my portfolio. And I know from informal conversations with administrators that, while not decisive, they do play a tangible positive role.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_13: This is a very interesting question and it has received some very good answers. Therefore, I intend to provide my personal experience and draw a conclusion from it.
Theory of Complex Functions was one of the courses that was dreaded by most of students in our department during my undergraduate studies. It was not because the course was too difficult (though it was not any piece of cake) but because it was taught by one of the most stern professors of the department. The course was one of the most unpopular ones but when I took it, I found that not only I enjoyed the course very much, I found the teaching method of the professor and also his manners and the meticulous attentions that he gave to mathematical concepts of the course very constructive for me. The professor's teaching method was unorthodox in the context of our department but there was nothing inherently wrong or unreasonable about it. For the course I received a very good score and when the semester finished (and I graduated), I went to his office. When I entered, he gave me the same stern and distant look as always. I briefly explained to him why I enjoyed his course and teaching method and then sincerely thanked him for it. The reaction of the professor was very interesting. He smiled genuinely and became warm and friendly, thanked me for my gratitude, asked a few friendly questions about me, my career and future plans and gave a few advice regarding them. At the end of our session, he shook my hand warmly and walked with me to his office door.
In general, I believe professors are humans and like any human being, they enjoy and appreciate any form of sincere gratitude. This is something that good professors need and deserve so that they can know that their efforts are noticed and valued by their students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_14: We live for this. Please, please do.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_15: There's no harm in saying you enjoyed the course. And I'm sure the teacher would be glad to hear it. Therefore, by all means, say that you enjoyed the course. A wider issue, of course, is whether students should email their lecturers at all. This never used to happen, when there was no internet. Why not say thank you in person?
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/20
| 1,802
| 7,556
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m 17 and will be joining a UG physics program soon. I’ve done a lot of DIY projects over the years, ranging from electric arc speakers to air-quality and climate-control systems. Most of my projects involved Arduinos.
I’ve been thinking of conducting a five-year study on air quality and climate change using ten sensors (gas, dust, temperature, and humidity) and an Arduino. I will collect data for five years and then conclude my findings.
* Can I publish such research anywhere?
* Do these type of projects have any value or are they a waste of time?<issue_comment>username_1: It is great that you have worked on such projects at such an early age and I wish you all the best for your physics degree.
**You want to know whether there's value in your projects.**
First, you need to consider what you want, perhaps in terms of commercialisation, impact, or ... That is, you need to establish what "value" means to you. Then you can establish (perhaps with our help) whether you should start "a 5 year study on Air quality & climate change using 10 arduino sensors (gas , dust , temp & humidity) and an arduino."
Secondly, you need to establish how you can achieve what you want. You've mentioned that you'll have breaks during your physics degree. (That detail has been edited out, see [the archived version](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/108394/1).) But, those breaks are short and you'll need longer to conduct your five-year study.
I think these points need further thought before you can decide whether results can be published and whether it is worth your time.
***Can I publish such research anywhere?***
I think it is better to consider whether you should publish, rather than whether you can publish. This has been [dealt with elsewhere](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/81975/a-published-paper-stole-my-unpublished-results-from-a-science-fair/82020#82020) (it was written for mathematics, but it applies to physics too):
>
> I would advise almost any junior high school student not to think about publishing their mathematical work. Note that I did not say to stop or slow down in the learning and doing of mathematics in any way. In fact, the point is that the publication process is something that is done by professionals largely for reasons of professional exigency and not because it is pleasant or educational in its own right. When I work with PhD students to try to get their first paper published, there comes a point where they realize that the amount of effort to do so (even after all the theorems are proven) is something like 2-10 times as much as they expected...Moreover, undergraduates who do summer math research are now being much more pressured to write up their results -- even when they are not really significant, and even when they were largely put up to the results by their faculty mentors -- and this is very worrisome.
>
>
>
The OP is significantly older, but I think the point holds.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You are asking whether you will be able to publish these data and use it as an edge. It all depends, as [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/108397/41843) mentions, on the value that your work has. Specifically, you have to come up with a valid and important *research question* that you work will answer. For example,
* the 5-year or even 10-year array of data for a number of sensors staying in your basement are useless
* the online tool to monitor the dust quantity in the air in your neighbourhood is useful as a community project, is likely to be useful to your neighbours / town administration, and can be commercialized, but is unlikely to turn into a scientific article. I know of such a service in my city, and you can take some inspiration from it: [Tion CityAir](https://cityair.ru/moscow/).
* monitoring gas release and dust particle concentration next to a nearby industry plant or landfill is useful. It can become particularly useful if the administration of the plant / landfill is about to introduce some environmental safety measures and is seeking to quantify their efficiency. In this case, your research will be answering a well-defined question: "Are *enter new safety measures here* improving the air quality?". This is valuable and publishable. In this case, 5-year arrays of data are not required; most important is to monitor the air quality some time before the planned safety upgrade and some time after; I'd suggest at least three months before and after.
Bottom line: starting a 5-year data flow is easy. Coming up with a valid design of experiment is harder.
Specific points to account when planning an air quality monitoring experiment:
* Are your gas sensors able to monitor the exact gases you are interested in? If you are targeting plant monitoring, ammonia and sulfur oxides come to mind, but there might be so much more.
* What particular dust particles you are able to quantify? For the environmental safety applications, [PM2.5 particles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates#Size,_shape_and_solubility_matter) are often the most risk-inducing.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The other answers for this question are good, but I'm going to follow a different path.
Besides the raw data you gather, whether relevant to others or not, you should document your process, including any hardware and software solutions you use or create.
If you get good data for yourself, others may want to gather that same type of data for themselves, after reading your blog (or whatever). You will gain experience in building, designing, and maintaining your equipment, which can be invaluable to others who may want to avoid all the trial and error you already have done.
You may be able to provide schematics/diagrams, parts lists, or even kits to these like minded people. Given enough time, effort, and interest, you may even find people who want to add to your project, growing it into a larger study.
With more people come more data points. What you are doing now might not be a research paper, but it could be if you have 1000 people/devices spread across a (large) section of geography. Given that they would be using the same designs (procedures, equipment, and software), it could be fairly easy to correlate the data into a something that actually means something to more than just your neighbors.
Even if that doesn't go anywhere, you might have a nice side business with selling the kits.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Other answers have adequately addressed the question of whether your proposed project is publishable and, indeed, whether you should publish it at all. This one focuses on addressing whether it is valuable.
In this regard, I think it really depends on what you expect to get out of it. I would argue that this sort of personal project is definitely valuable in that it is a way to practice the collection and analysis of data. It could be a talking point going forward and, though it may not be useful as a research credit, it would do a good job of demonstrating your work ethic. There are many soft and hard skills involved in this sort of project that are useful independent of whether the data produced is valuable.
If you want to do it and you think it won't cost you much in time or resources, then go for it. If you're worried about the commitment, plan for a smaller data gathering period. You'll get something out of the project, if only by proving that you can do the project.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/20
| 1,093
| 4,452
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to submit two separate works to two different conferences in CS field. The conference deadlines differ only by 3 weeks and one of them would be held in November while the other in September.
The problem is that i designed an algorithm and used that in both of the works. This algorithm is not the essential part of these papers, so i can introduce it completely in paper **A** as a novel method and just cite and use it in paper **B**; or vice versa!
But the problem is that at the time of submission, both of them are just submitted works, and i'm not sure if citing a submitted work is acceptable? Especially because if i only cite and use it in paper **B**, the reviewers cannot read paper **A** to see the complete proofs.
And even i'm not sure which paper may be accepted/rejected!
Also if i introduce the method in both papers as a novel method, then if both of them get accepted they will consider it plagiarism!<issue_comment>username_1: Publish the algorithm on arXiv (or similar), e.g., by releasing a preprint of paper A. Paper B can now cite results on arXiv. This addresses your concern that reviewers of paper B "cannot read paper A."
Do not release the algorithm as a novel contribution of both papers A and B, that's problematic, as noted in the question.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I had done something similar during my PhD (upon advice by my supervisors). I'll explain my situation as it seems similar to yours (though you only told us about the similarities but not the differences between the content you have for your two papers).
I've developed a novel technique as well, and had quite a bit of results, though not quite enough for a journal submission. We submitted two conference papers:
* The first one was targeting a smaller, very specialized conference, specifically in the subfield focused on the theory used in my technique; here we submitted a paper dissecting the theory behind my new technique and offering an exhaustive test of parameters and similar.
* The second one in a much wider-topic conference, focusing on the performance of the method on the datasets of wide interest and comparison to other state of the art.
The **theory was discussed at length in the theoretical paper**. However, as there was no guarantee either of the papers would be published, we also introduced the theory **in the other paper** in a much denser and shorter, but still complete (i.e. **containing everything necessary to make my experiments repeatable**) manner. We then referred to the theory paper in the performance paper.
For cross-citation of such papers:
* upload them both to preprint services (arXiv is fine but occasionally there is institutional services which are much less demanding to use)
* cite them as *(submitted)* or *(submitted to X)* or *(under review)* and update it through the submission process (if you pass the first round of reviews)
* some conferences allow/require to send a copy of any relevant but unpublished materials, so you can also send the second manuscript as supporting material with the submission (especially if, for any reason, you did not manage to use a pre-print service).
* make sure there is no "significant overlap" between the papers (which would constitute auto-plagiarism) and that you are not re-using your own text
Most importantly though, if you can, **talk to your supervisor**. They will likely have experience and will be able to advise you best since they know your work.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: [Publish or Perish (3)–Fraud and ethics, 2000](http://www.iuss.org/files/3._fraud_and_ethics.pdf) has on page 3 a short description of the phenomena of “dual publication”. It happens quite often and is seldom punished. Another source see self-plagiarism mixed:
>
> “Self-plagiarism refers to the practice of an author using portions of
> their previous writings on the same topic in another of their
> publications, without specifically citing it formally in quotes.“
> [Tips from the Editor,
> 2000](http://gooa.las.ac.cn/external/download/1010968/3412342/7669110877679351369.pdf)
>
>
>
He comes to the conclusion, that self-plagiarsm is probably not a scientific misconduct, but it violates the copyright of the publisher. To prevent any kind of plagiarism the editor of the journal / conference should be informed and the plagiarist should be asked for an explanation.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/04/20
| 676
| 2,929
|
<issue_start>username_0: First and second year students are unlikely to get selected for major internships (right?). Given this, what can students do after freshman and sophomore years that will be useful later on. I thought of learning MATLAB, but not sure if this is a good idea or if there are better options.<issue_comment>username_1: Students can work -- as interns, or something else -- during semester breaks, so employment is one thing that students can do. They could also seek to improve skills that aren't taught as part of their degree, e.g., writing skills, business skills, ...
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The summer after sophomore year should be late enough to start doing research. There are lots of questions / tutorials about how to start research; best to just talk to your professors and/or apply to research programs such as the REU. This is also a good time to start studying for your physics GRE.
For the summer after freshman year, it's probably too early to do the above (though it's worth asking your professors about research options). I recommend working on soft skills -- writing, people skills, presentation skills, and programming all come to mind.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Programming sounds like a perfect summer project that could be somewhat self-directed. You could tie this in with numerical methods.
Check the offerings at your local community college.
You could also focus on *community outreach*. You might be able to latch onto an existing program in the target area, or volunteer at an observatory or science museum. Or you could create a hands-on program at your public library as a volunteer.
Another possibility would be to volunteer at a recycling facility that safely dismantles dead electronics, or that teaches basic computer use and repair skills to teens and adults.
You could design and teach a self-contained enrichment course at a senior citizens center.
Depending on where you live, you might be able to volunteer to assist with the high school physics classes (there are often one to three sections -- so this would be part-time).
You could study a new foreign language.
Those are just a couple ideas to get you started thinking.
Don't forget to check for REU opportunities.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: The summer project I did, which later turned out to be the most useful, was sitting down and learn C++ from scratch, using Stroustrup's own introductory book. Learning a programming language like it was intended, and not like a tool to use for a specific thing (like what is taught in most courses) has over and over again proven valuable.
I suppose one would maybe rather learn Python today, but once you know how to write code, you can swap one language for another with only minimal pain. This is often not the case if you have only learned to use the functionality needed for a given course.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/20
| 362
| 1,595
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a postdoc in computer science. Last year I completed my PhD. I have published one research paper during my PhD with my research supervisor. I am trying to work on that paper. I mean I have got something and I think it is going to be an incremental result of the previous research paper.
Question: Do I need to get permission from my past supervisor to publish a paper that builds on our previous co-authored paper?<issue_comment>username_1: If your past supervisor made a significant intellectual contribution to the new paper, then he should be a coauthor. And then, yes, you need his permission to publish the paper, because publication requires the consent of all coauthors.
If your past supervisor did not make a significant intellectual contribution to the new paper, then he should not be a coauthor. And then no, you don't need his permission to publish the paper, because he is not a coauthor.
In short: The fact that he is your former supervisor is utterly irrelevant. (This would also be true if he were your *current* supervisor.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If he contributed, you have to ask him for his permission, if not, then not.
However, even if not, it would probably (depending on your relation) -- if this work is closely related to his -- be nice to tell him. I know people, who extended their PhD work after graduation and thus, unknowingly, studied the same problem the supervisor gave his new students (and thus scooped them). Your supervisor may also be able to give you valuable feedback on your draft.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/20
| 2,086
| 8,620
|
<issue_start>username_0: How are professors able to multitask seemingly well?
I see some professors are able to work on their laptops in seminar or other presentations, sometimes talk to the person next to them, and then still come up with a suggestion or question at the end of it which bemuses me.<issue_comment>username_1: As in many situations, more novelty creates greater cognitive load, while non-novelty creates essentially no load. A teensy bit of interesting novelty is little cognitive load, but/and can be quite provocative, depending.
Since relatively experienced people have ... experienced many things... few seminar talks would present much that is radically new, even if it is new to novices. So, even if it is not somehow made explicit by the speaker or by the senior members of the audience, 90% or more of any talk will be a recapitulation of known things... Yes, it is understood that this is mostly necessary, to set a common context for discussion, and that there is not any genuine novelty there.
Also, there is a self-referential aspect to the premises of the question. Namely, the people one sees multi-tasking happily are the ones who can do it. Those who prefer mono-tasking will not be seen multi-tasking. So there's a "selection bias", as well.
And, for me, as for many relatively senior people, I/we have seen many things, and even superficially novel aspects of a seminar presentation may be echoes of things we thought about 30 years ago, etc. Not that there's not progress, but that there are questions that have been pending for decades, and preying on our minds, so (hoping that our minds are still working well) it is not *burdensome* to hear contemporary progress, but, rather, a happy event. But, in contrast, novices of course have no reference to related technicalities they reflected upon 30 years ago, etc.
And, apart from a greater accumulated experience of ideas and facts, I imagine that a vastly greater experience of *coping* with novelty and confusion gives a great advantage. E.g., if a smart kid has never in their life before been seriously confused, it is a disturbing experience. And this is a serious issue for very-smart kids in most environments. Similarly for very-smart kids in most undergrad environments. Even up to a point in graduate programs... but/and all the worse to soooo belatedly (after establishing habits that cannot accommodate for this) discover that high-level science (etc.) involves a constant rain of confusion and exceeding-parameters. (For me, this is entertaining, yes, but for those who think that people can control/understand everything easily, and not be confused, it is often deeply disquieting, I gather.)
Practice makes perfect.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The main issue of multitasking is what <NAME> described: being familiar with what is going on.
One important thing about multitasking is it is not doing something simultaneously, but sequentially, very fast, while skipping things that are not important. Human brain can't focus on several things at one time, but it can switch between an array of tasks in milliseconds, given enough practice. Professors usually become professors by doing a certain set of tasks for many years and getting very good and very fast at it so it may seem like they are almost doing multiple tasks simultaneously.
For many it is just a routine one follows subconsciously: a student starts speaking - pay attention; what they are saying is familiar - switch to the laptop until they finish because you already know what they will say next; someone walking, sitting down, standing up - 5 seconds to do something else; you spaced out thinking about something important (e.g. lunch) - pull out a universal question or a joke from up a very long sleeve.
It is also similar to reading: how to humans read and recognize so many letters almost instantly? Look at the first letter, the last, skip everything in the middle, repeat for a few words, guess the rest.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'd like to offer a different interpretation of what you are seeing, along the line of Nate's comment:
The speaker says something that sparks the listener's interest, either because it sounds wrong, or because it relates to something they've been thinking about recently, or...
This triggers a new thought. They pull out their laptop to check with other things they've read before, or do some calculations, or ... generally do some research.
After a while, they come to some conclusion, either positive or negative, and talk to a neighbour as a sanity check.
In question time, they ask about the point they have been thinking about.
Overall, no multi-tasking needs to have taken place at all.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A greater component in the example you give is 90% familiarity and 10% preparation.
If I am in a conference about a field of my expertise, I might have already some questions beforehand, which may or not be handled by the presentation.
As any other kind of meeting, it also helps doing some previous preparation and write down some possible questions I would like to see answered.
Being also with the laptop can mean many things. As for me:
1. it can mean I have loads of work or urgent matters, and would not be there otherwise, and I am mostly in listening-mode only;
2. I can be there just checking facts or related data in the Internet (done mostly with the phone nowadays);
3. or it can just mean that particular talk does not really interest me, and I will be taking advantage of time, drifting into mode 1)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I am not a professor yet, but let me answer a tangent question: "How to *get* good at multitasking?"
*Caveat:* I am talking less on "talk to a colleague while still catching on a talk" and more on "managing 3 grant applications, 4 PhD candidates, and 5 lectures all at the same time." For more on the previous, see the bottom part of my answer.
Mono task
=========
There are some typical situations, such as the beginning of a new job or the start of a PhD, when you have only one task. You don't have to teach, you have this one project only, no follow-ups or returning papers or research collaborations.
So, at the start, you do only one task and learn to do it well. Then everything changes as more tasks appear.
Switching
=========
I learned the switching by necessity. At that point I had a day job in programming and night-and-weekends PhD pursuit. Well, not so bad, day job was part-time, 50%. Naturally, I focused on the job during the job days. The next morning of the weekend, having rested and sort of *purposely pushed the job away*, I focused on PhD stuff.
This should not necessary be day job and moonlighting. Teaching and research, project A and project B, it's all the same.
Context switch
==============
So, there is some kind of a mental switch between the two tasks. You do only one task at a time, but switch between them. (If you have a CS background, that's what basically OS did before SMP era and in a sense are still doing now.)
Of course, if you do your first switches, you notice that you need a lot of time to become productive again. You need to read up the background you have forgotten, for example. Taking a nap as a part of switch also helps.
After doing such switches every week for a year, I noticed that they become easier and faster. After one more year I got really good. (And also got funding, so I could ditch the day job, even though I learned there a lot, too.)
Nowadays (around 11 years after first attempts at multitasking), I can switch from my lecture mode to answering a surprise research question from a very different area in the matter of seconds.
Byline
======
Being in the academia for years, and worse, decades, especially in the setting where you have to manage teaching, research, meetings, proposal writing, and what not, conditions you into becoming better and better with multitasking. In other words, the time you need to switch contest reduces with the experience gained.
As in many other soft skills, the more you do it, the better you become. And yes, it's a valuable skill in my opinion.
---
As for the conference stuff, I remember a quote from a biography novelisation of a world-class mathematician--an anecdotical evidence. In his later years he slept in in the talks, but he could allow himself this, because he grasped the idea of a talk much faster than the presenter could unfold it. So he slept until the applauses and still could ask meaningful questions after that.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/21
| 1,010
| 4,343
|
<issue_start>username_0: Within one week I shall leave my present institution, where I felt severely mistreated around salary payment and work conditions for 2 years, as a postdoctoral fellow.
The PI who signed my contract (theoretically my supervisor) has played passive-aggressive "not-here" all my stay while consistently demanding honorary, corresponding authorship status in any piece I happen to publish, from any source. In fact I had never heard of this person prior to signing my contract from abroad, over which I was dealing with another local professor. They had made some kind of agreement.
Soon I will leave, at the official end of my contract. I am wondering whether I should give this person a symbolic departure gift, especially in front of the other lab mates. I am not culturally hierarchy-oriented but displaying respect to hierarchy is seen as a strong moral virtue, where I am, in China.
Relevant: I am not staying in China, but I might keep in touch with one or two current lab mates after I leave. I am afraid that an act of offering him a gift will communicate a wish to continue "guanxi" which is his understanding probably means I will forever offer him credit over my work, favors.
Please, what do others suggest?
**\* UPDATE \*** 02/04/2018
I have finally departed and left a bottle of fairly good French wine behind, sitting on my desk among the student's office, with a note clearly stating it was for the Professor. With a "Thank You for the opportunity, and provided unforgettable experience to share".
As mentioned, my main objective was to displaying respect for other labmates by thanking the professor in the local hierarchy and presenting a gift.
I had, however, no direct dialogue with this person upon my departure. The final days were particularly tense, where finally the supervisor openly failed to pay for a long-delayed amount of 1k USD of salary agreement. The details of this conflict are described in another question in SE Academia.
Thanks to all for suggestions; I believe this was the best I could do.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know much about Chinese culture, so take this answer with as many grains of salt as necessary, but it seems like the best thing to do here is find out what is the minimum socially acceptable gift you could give the advisor without it burning bridges with your lab and the other people you work with, and then give that. If you can get away without giving anything, so much the better.
If you do find yourself socially obligated to give some kind of gift, when you give it perhaps you could emphasize to the advisor how much you're looking forward to doing your own, independent work as a polite way to discourage any further involvement.
Even if this person demands honorary authorship over your work after you leave, it will be much easier to tell them no when you're not working in their lab. The worst they could directly do to retaliate is refuse to give you a reference or letter of recommendation to future employers, and someone who gets their authorships by abusing their students and not doing any actual work is unlikely to be able to do much damage to your reputation anyways.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I once had a supervisor that I didn't really see eye to eye with. Definitely nothing as serious as you are noting, I just felt like we didn't really understand each other.
So as a parting gift, I gave him some music that I very much cared for and that I knew he would not like or understand. I never explained to him why I gave him that music. It gave me some satisfaction then and it still gives me some satisfaction to this day.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would not give a gift - symbolic or otherwise. It seems from your response that you will not (nor value) the contact of this particular supervisor much so there is no need to do so. I would not deliberately demean him - sending a nasty email or attempting some sort of sardonic gift for him but I would not present a gift. That said, if you do decide to give something - I think your fears that this represent some sort of desire to extend the relationship is overblown.
P.S. I am familiar with the Chinese culture but, of course, that should not be taken as being somehow more authoritative than other answers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/21
| 2,866
| 11,558
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a computer science PhD student who works mostly in theory. I always have multiple ideas in my mind about the research problem I am working on and also on problems which are related to my research. Many times my ideas were vague and not important, and many of my ideas have led to algorithms which are not in themselves enough for a paper. In the last couple of years I have given many ideas to my labmates and others. My colleagues say that some of these were very good, but so far, I have not able to find anything so big that it becomes a paper. Is there any way to makes my ideas more valuable and more significant?
Question: How to make your small ideas into research paper?<issue_comment>username_1: One of my biggest regrets is not writing down small ideas. There were waiting for a better time. But usually this time never came - either because I didn't find a good way to expand on the project, or because new projects left little time.
In [There are no projects like side projects](http://crastina.se/theres-no-projects-like-side-projects/) (which I wrote after finishing my PhD) there is:
>
> If you have a great project, do moonlight. Don’t wait for better times, because they won’t come. Maybe you overstate the need of money, institutional support or social confirmation?
>
>
>
Depending on the project, it can be a small draft (e.g. with a theorem and some comments on possible approaches to prove it) or a GitHub repository with code and some description.
Once something is shared, there are two main benefits:
* you can talk about it / send it to your colleagues,
* you made some progress, even if it is a small step, it's strictly more than nothing.
Occasionally, during the writing phase you may:
* see how to expand on it,
* or realise that actually you already did a lot,
* or discover that it is flawed (e.g. your proof is trivial or incorrect).
Additionally, if a few years later someone ask you - you will be able to recover it quickly, along with its core content (formulae, citations, etc).
Sharing means that you can share it with your future self.
Is it just a one-page LaTeX note? Just write it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: While I agree with username_1's advice about writing down your discoveries, even small ones, I don't think it directly answers the OP's question.
In my opinion, you should be clear on two things:
* First, generally you will have more ideas/questions than you have time to seriously work on.
* Second, while (rough) ideas are easy to come by, well-thought out plans for doing something serious and novel generally take a lot of work.
So when you have an idea you like, sit down and take the time to think about it thoroughly. See how far you can push it. Sometimes it will lead to a nice nontrivial result you can publish (directly or indirectly) but often it won't go anywhere. Or maybe it will go somewhere when you come back to it years down the road. That's the nature of research.
Also, sometimes when you have a little result, sometimes it's hard to decide whether you should try to publish it. It really depends on the situation. But try telling some people about it, and maybe they'll provide feedback or suggest possibilities to do something further with it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you have an interesting idea, but it is not yet enough for a publishable research paper, write it up anyway, in whatever form you can, and then you have a *partial research paper* sitting there ready for expansion whenever some new insight or aspect of the problem reveals itself. These partial papers might sit in your folders for months, or years, and some of them will come to fruition and become valuable papers, and some will just remain interesting ideas that you never developed fully. If you make the effort to write them up partially when they are just a half-developed idea, you will have a useful reference document to record your thoughts (and remind you of what you were thinking), and something to add to when you get flashes of inspiration.
Here are some suggestions for how to (eventually) turn your small ideas into research papers:
* **Write up your "small idea" as if it were a full paper:** This requires you to formalise your idea, put it into the language of your discipline, explain its context, etc., and situate it in the context of literature on some broader problem. Once you have written up your idea, this gives you a useful reference so that you can understand the problem and its context, and remind yourself of your idea and the progress you have already made.
* **Look for applications of your "small idea" to concrete problems:** Keep your idea in mind and look for concrete problems where it can be deployed to add value. If your idea requires some variation/adaptation to a new problem, think about what changes are required and whether this leads to a broader idea or methodology.
* **Look for generalisations of your "small idea":** Small ideas often lead to larger ideas about problems that are more general than the initial problem for in which the idea was formed. Be on the look-out for other situations where your small idea is applicable, and see if this leads you to a general class of problems where your idea is applicable.
* **Bounce your idea off a colleague who finds it interesting:** This can potentially start a collaboration, or give you some additional information that might tell you where to look for more material, or give you some additional lines of thinking for how to pursue your idea.
* **Re-read your partially written papers periodically:** When you are bored and want a change of subject, pull up your directories of old half-written papers and read a few of them to jog your memory of all your past ideas, and see if any of the pique your interest. You may find that since you last read these you have accumulated some relevant knowledge that adds to the idea, and this can spur some further work that adds to your idea.
* **Let your sub-conscious take over:** Once you have written up your idea to whatever partially-completed state you can get it to, and you have thought yourself to a dead-end, stop thinking about it and let your subconscious take over. Allow yourself to work on other problems, but come back to it periodically to see if there is anything more you can add.
Your problem reminded me of a passage from the physicist <NAME>, where he talks about the importance of "playing" with your subject matter, even if this has no obvious importance. Here is [Feynman (1985)](https://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~kilcup/262/feynman.html) describing how an interest in a silly little toy problem led to him receiving the Nobel prize in physics:
>
> Then I had another thought: Physics disgusts me a little bit now, but
> I used to *enjoy* doing physics. Why did I enjoy it? I used to
> *play* with it. I used to do whatever I felt like doing - it didn't have to do with whether it was important for the development of
> nuclear physics, but whether it was interesting and amusing for me to
> play with. When I was in high school, I'd see water running out of a
> faucet growing narrower, and wonder if I could figure out what
> determines that curve. I found it was rather easy to do. I didn't
> *have* to do it; it wasn't important for the future of science; somebody else had already done it. That didn't make any difference.
> I'd invent things and play with things for my own entertainment.
>
>
> So I got this new attitude. Now that I *am* burned out and I'll never
> accomplish anything, I've got this nice position at the university
> teaching classes which I rather enjoy, and just like I read the
> *Arabian Nights* for pleasure, I'm going to *play* with physics, whenever I want to, without worrying about any importance whatsoever.
>
>
> Within a week I was in the cafeteria and some guy, fooling around,
> throws a plate in the air. As the plate went up in the air I saw it
> wobble, and I noticed the red medallion of Cornell on the plate going
> around. It was pretty obvious to me that the medallion went around
> faster than the wobbling. I had nothing to do, so I start to figure
> out the motion of the rotating plate. I discover that when the angle
> is very slight, the medallion rotates twice as fast as the wobble rate
> --- two to one. It came out of a complicated equation! Then I thought, "Is there some way I can see in a more fundamental way, by
> looking at the forces or the dynamics, why it's two to one?"
>
>
> I don't remember how I did it, but I ultimately worked out what the
> motion of the mass particles is, and how all the accelerations balance
> to make it come out two to one. I still remember going to Hans Bethe
> and saying, "Hey, Hans! I noticed something interesting. Here the
> plate goes around so, and the reason it's two to one is ..." and I
> showed him the accelerations. He says, "Feynman, that's pretty
> interesting, but what's the importance of it? Why are you doing it?"
> "Hah!" I say. "There's no importance whatsoever. I'm just doing it
> for the fun of it." His reaction didn't discourage me; I had made up
> my mind I was going to enjoy physics and do whatever I liked.
>
>
> I went on to work out equations of wobbles. Then I thought about how
> electron orbits start to move in relativity. Then there's the Dirac
> Equation in electrodynamics. And then quantum electrodynamics. And
> before I knew it (it was a very short time) I was "playing" - working,
> really - with the same old problem that I loved so much, that I had
> stopped working on when I went to Los Alamos: my thesis-type problems;
> all those old-fashioned, wonderful things.
>
>
> It was effortless. It was easy to play with these things. It was
> like uncorking a bottle: Everything flowed out effortlessly. I almost
> tried to resist it! There was no importance to what I was doing, but
> ultimately there was. The diagrams and the whole business that I got
> the Nobel Prize for came from that piddling around with the wobbling
> plate.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I am not very knowledgeable about the sciences, but I am an M.A. Student who has done several research-projects (nothing worth writing home about).However, as someone majoring in TESOL, and as someone working on my Teaching of Composition Certificate, I have studied a fair amount of theory. Combining my theory with my experience, I would suggest that you formulate your research questions, even if they don't seem significant, and begin writing your paper. Initially, just worry about getting your ideas down, and do not worry about grammar, style, or formatting. Many studies of writing indicate, as does my own experience, that as you write you will stimulate thought and new knowledge will emerge. The writing process, itself, should help you formulate more and better ideas as long as you are willing to abandon some of your initial ideas, assuming they no longer apply as you progress. The very act of writing the paper will often help clarify and expand your thinking in a way which hopefully will inspire you to find some really exciting research questions. If necessary, walk away from it for a day or more and come back to it for a fresh perspective. Once you find the question or questions that you are interested in, like the old adage--A problem well defined is a problem half solved. I hope this is helpful, and I wish you the best of luck on your project!
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/21
| 679
| 2,750
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have at the moment a visa for my PhD valid until 30.06.2018, but my defense will be in the end of July or middle of August. This week I have received a job offer (full-time) and I would like to change my present visa to a working permit Visa in order to start working and also wait for my defense. Is it possible? Does somebody know which documents are necessary for that?
Thanks a lot for the help and attention.
SOLVED:
As I always expect, I like to see final answers to questions I look for in the Internet. At first I would suggest you to look the answers for my question, they helped me a lot. Finally I needed, the bachelor diplom translated to german, the form of the blue card filled, the working contract, a form written by the employer which describes what work will be done and a photo.
I went to the KVR on a Tuesday and in this day I could not solve much because It was necessary a permission from the Bundesagentur für Arbeit (<https://www.arbeitsagentur.de/privatpersonen>). This permission was requested on Tuesday and I received an answer on Thursday evening. Friday I went back with these documents again and could finally receive the Bluecard.
An important tip: check if your institution is in the Anabin database (<https://www.arbeitsagentur.de/privatpersonen>). If it is not, it means that Germany does not know this institution and you will need to do some additional bureaucracy. For further questions, ask here and I will answer asap. =)<issue_comment>username_1: Since your occupation is in need, you should be able to to switch your residence permit to a working one.
I know people who were in the similar situation, that is waiting for the Master's thesis defense to complete, with a job offer in hand. Their applications for a Blue Card were approved, based on the undergraduate degree.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Under certain circumstances, it is possible to change one visa type for another. However, immigration law is tricky, so the first thing you should do is check with your local *Ausländeramt*, who will be able to tell you what is allowed and will have a list of the necessary documentation to apply for a visa, but at a minimum you should expect to need everything you had to provide to apply for the student visa, plus a copy of the job offer. You may need to get a "certificate of good conduct" from your *Bürgeramt*, but I'm not certain about this.
One of the things to keep in mind is that there is sort of a catch-22 involved in the visa process: technically, the visa isn't valid until you get the job, and you can't get the job until you have the visa. So the job offer is the "promise" that the employer will hire you if the visa is granted.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/21
| 577
| 2,538
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my article, I have cited a preprint version (arXiv) of one references. After my article has been published in the final form, I received a request from the author of the preprint article asking me to make Corrigendum that tells the readers about the journal version of his cited article. I am new in the publication field and I want to know whether I should obey to his demand and make the corrigendum or leave the citation as it is.
I might mention that the contents of both preprint and journal versions are similar and the version that I have read and referred to in my manuscript is the preprint as the journal version was not available at the time I wrote the paper.
Thank you for your advise.<issue_comment>username_1: Is there a major difference (a grave mistake or something) in the journal version? Apparently not.
Is there a grave mistake in *your* paper that you cite a preprint? I don't think so.
You also cite the version you were working with, which is Ok and a right thing to do.
I'd correct the reference in my database for the future use (and obtain the journal version, of course), but I won't bother with corrigenda. They are for bigger mistakes than just a wrong version of a reference.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First of all, papers reference other preprints all the time, especially in my field where the submission to publication time is quite long. It would be ridiculous if everyone published a corrigendum every time a preprint you referenced gets published, especially because this is not an mistake. If for some reason journals allowed this, there would probably be more corrigenda than research articles. So, no.
That said, when you go through the final proofs stage for an accepted manuscript you should check the preprints you reference to see if publication data is available for any of them before your work gets published. (I can't tell from the question whether the other paper was published before you could make changes or not.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: No way you should have to bother about such bookkeeping. And it is not even clear that citing the journal version is the right thing to do, now or in the future, if you read and used the preprint version.
Nevertheless it is clear why your correspondent wants you to make the change: for bibliometric robots that ignore preprints, your article will not be considered as citing his. One more case of the publishing system asking scientists to do pointless work.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/21
| 748
| 2,781
|
<issue_start>username_0: If someone majors in political science or international relations or history, what do they end up actually doing as a career?
I've found numerous sites that give the obvious answers what they *can* do, but to date no site that says what they actual do.
It's all fine and dandy thinking that an International Studies degree will prepare you for a career as a diplomat, but if 95% of graduates end up selling life insurance, or filling out form 2773A-11 for some bureaucracy, I may want to make a different set of choices.<issue_comment>username_1: Although a specific job path for a humanities graduate can be wildly different from person to person. Many jobs in policy, research or marketing are good choices for a well-rounded humanities grad. The degree program is meant to help you learn how to communicate clearly, think critically and make reasoned choices -- skills that can be beneficial for just about any career. Here are a few of the possible job choices for humanities majors:
Craft and Fine Artists ,
Social and Human Service Assistants ,
Community Health Workers ,
Advertising and sales agents ... etc.
Teaching, art historian at a museum , archeologist and so on might be a better option
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The reason certain courses (engineering, law, medicine) are referred to as 'professional courses' is that they prepare one for a particular profession, and that is the primary goal of the course.
In any other course, it is a good idea to assume that you are being taught various skills, but not necessarily being prepared for a career. To expect a career out of a humanities degree may therefore be misguided. Best to look at it as a stepping stone that could lead you in a multitude of directions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm not aware of any large-scale surveys on the topic.
However, many universities conduct regular surveys on their alumni, to understand where they end up working. You can find them on [Google](https://www.google.at/search?q=political+science+employment+survey). Here is one [example](https://www.statsvet.su.se/english/education/study-information/2.29527) from the University of Stockholm on political science alumni:
>
> Public administration, state level (44 percent)
>
>
> Public administration, local and regional level (14 percent)
>
>
> Private companies (14 percent)
>
>
> NGO's (5 percent)
>
>
> Universities and university colleges (5 percent)
>
>
> Political party/party organisation (4 percent)
>
>
> Think tanks (4 percent)
>
>
> International organisations (EU, UN, etc.) (3 percent)
>
>
> Media (2 percent).
>
>
>
As you can see, in this particular University, the outcome is indeed what one would expect.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/21
| 318
| 1,356
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have written this paper and I would like to ask, via email, from some professors in other universities to give me feedback. How is the best way to write such a request? First, what should I write in the email subject box? Then, how do I write the body of email?<issue_comment>username_1: Professors are busy people. If you send a random professor with whom you've never had any contact a paper and ask him or her to review it and provide feedback, odds are that you will never hear back from them, because they will ignore the request.
If you want a better response, you will need to cultivate a relationship with the faculty members over a period of time.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are new in research career and hasn't had enough relationship to be welcomed to ask for feedback, then your manuscript will likely be perceived to have low quality by busy people. In my experience you should ask it on a forum (Stack Exchange or Reddit), because your level is perfectly suited to ask there. In general, a quality post is not a wall-length post with a question "what do you think", but a post **clearly** explains an **entanglement** you found, because who can see that are indeed serious with it.
In my observation, Stack Exchange is best to ask for solution, Reddit is best for giving solution.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/21
| 1,748
| 7,192
|
<issue_start>username_0: I don't get paid much as a TA. I wanted to go to conferences but all of them operate on a reimbursement system. Between flights, shuttles, hotels, etc. it can be up to like $1000 not including food. They offer funding but with reimbursement. I don't have $1000 in my bank account to pay with in the first place. Most other TAs I know are in a similar position.
Why do programs use a reimbursement system? I went to one conference where they reimbursed the flight and paid for the hotel. That was a month ago and I think my reimbursement check is still a ways away. Why does it take so long? Why not just buy me a ticket? How am I supposed to go to conferences?<issue_comment>username_1: This is an unfortunate reality of life. I think at one point in grad school I had $5,000 in outstanding reimbursements because it took so long to process them. Many grad students don't have the liquidity to handle that.
You can, and should, ask whoever will reimburse you whether (i) they can book for you, (ii) let you use their payment card to book, or (iii) pay you in advance. It's often possible and there's no harm in asking. The situation is common enough that they will be used to such requests. For example, people traveling for academic job interviews will rack up a lot of travel expenses in a short time and will sometimes ask to have costs paid directly.
Unfortunately, some places have rigid bureaucracies that insist on operating through reimbursements or some other arbitrary policy. (I recently had a trip where they insisted that they book the flight for me, that I get the hotel reimbursed, and they gave me a per diem for food. Three different policies from one bureaucracy for one trip!) Ultimately, there is little that can be done about it if that's the case.
In the long term, the best solution is to save up a buffer to cover expenses like this. Alternatively, you could get a credit card or other loan to pay for it. However, that is more of a question for <https://money.stackexchange.com/>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Adding to what's already been said: since often there is no way getting around a reimbursement system, I would also suggest focusing on finding ways to be as frugal as possible where conferences are concerned, since you do have to cover your expenses initially.
My suggestions:
* Not sure what field you're in and if there are many different conference options for you, but given the choice, opt for the nearby ones when possible. Choosing between attending a conference I'd have to fly to vs one I can just drive to, I always pick the latter.
* Skip the student conferences – they won't count for much on your CV and probably not worth the cost.
* If you're presenting at these conferences, try to double dip and squeeze in multiple presentations if it's allowed (in my field, the common rule is you're allowed only one single author submission, but 1-2 additional submissions as a co-author) – that way you can get a couple of presentations done at the cost of just one trip.
* If you know anyone going to the same conference as you, see about sharing the costs (driving together, sharing a hotel room).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: One quick way to get around this is to look for zero balance transfers or zero interest purchase credit card. *A word of warning though: if you're not good in managing your money; do not try this as it could clock up more debt for you in the end.*
This way, you can use the credit card's ability to pay off your immediate expenses (and maybe accrue some points before they reimburse you). I know it may be difficult to apply for credit card given your limited financial constraints but it is possible (depending on your country and specific circumstances) to apply for a basic credit card that has some promotional interest free period.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Since asking doesn't hurt, just try to ask for an advance. At least at my university's reimbursement department, this possibility exists. You can submit a provisional travel plan (of course well sourced with some printouts of hotel& airfare prices and ideally signed of by your boss) and after the usual complaints they will advance you some or all of the money. After the trip you then submit the actual receipts and settle the difference.
Most of the times, people try to avoid this. After all, it is double the amount of bureaucracy and if you owe them money back in the end, they tend to want it ASAP. However for more expensive trips, this can be quite useful.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I have been a teaching assistant in the past so I feel your pain. There were many conferences I wanted to attend and at that time, they wanted money up front and would only reimburse if you were an adjunct or faculty member. Fast forward to now; I have known several TAs join a group of teachers going to a conference and the University covered the cost. I know if you find a conference is coming, if you sign up early you get a discount. Some IT conferences that I attended, I was able to skype into it and pay approx. $100~$500 to stream video to my home laptop. I try to find conferences that are nearby - NYC for instance where I could drive and get my parking validated at a nearby hotel. Try checking prices for hotels near the conference though not where they take place, they may be able to offer you a discount, they know you have a choice. Best Western for instance usually offers a free breakfast and may offer a free shuttle to a nearby point near the conference location. Naturally, save all receipts - they could be used to reduce taxes owed as IRS recognizes them as professional development. If there is a conference that runs every year and you want to go, try finding a weekend temp job and working it only until you get the extra funds then giving notice and stay on their contact list if they need someone again, its a chance for extra money.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Apparente made an excellent suggestion in the comments about using a credit card or personal loan for up-front costs. I went to a conference with 3 friends in Boston by using my credit card with a $5,000 limit. We spent $2,200 for the flights, AirBnb, and food for 4 days. I was able to pay off my credit card before the due date, because I was reimbursed within 3 weeks.
The cool part is that I received about $30 in rewards points from the whole experience, so when we got back to Michigan I bought everyone a round at the bar.
In my eyes, as long as you submit your reimbursement paperwork on time and your department is reasonably quick in processing it, you should have no problem (or risk) in using a credit card. The very same logic applies to personal loans (or lines of credit at a credit union). If you’re making a graduate student stipend/salary, you should have no problem obtaining credit around $2,000, which in my experience is enough for *you individually* for even a week-long conference.
PS - this unfortunately doesn’t work in a lot of European locales, e.g. France, where credit cards aren’t common and loans are usually for big purchases (houses and cars).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/21
| 526
| 2,253
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a sponsor to do my PhD but the problem with supervisors. I keep sending emails to them and no one replies to my email.
Could you let me know how can I encourage them to look at my email? for example what title is appropriate for my email in this case? and what should I include in my email?<issue_comment>username_1: Professors/faculty receive **many** emails asking for internships, PhD student positions, etc. I even receive such requests as a postdoc -- I am not even able to offer such positions!
Almost all of these emails are low-quality. Namely, they are not specific to the professor's research and have the appearance of being mass emails sent to hundreds of recipients without much thought. Replying to them is a waste of time.
As a result, professors are accustomed to ignoring such emails. It is quite possible that your email was treated as spam.
Here are a few suggestions to avoid your email being ignored:
1. Ensure that your email is relevant to the recipient. If you are asking them to be your PhD supervisor, explain why. What about *their* research interests you? (At the very very least, get their name right!)
2. Have a professor you know introduce you. The email will be more credible if it comes from someone the recipient has heard of. In essence, this serves as a recommendation.
3. Make sure your email includes enough information about you. Briefly introduce yourself (i.e. your qualifications) and you could even attach a CV or link to a website with more information about yourself.
4. Get to the point. Academics get so much email they may not read past the subject line before ignoring your email. Keep it short and make sure the subject and first sentence/paragraph of your email are clear, concise, and to the point. If you have a sponsor already, don't leave that until halfway through your long email.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The very first thing they will see is your email title, so be sure it is descriptive. If your sponsor is providing all the funding you need(?), then make sure that is clear, and that it is clear that you are personalizing it. For instance:
Have Fancy Foundation Scholarship, hope to work with you in fall at Awesome University
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/21
| 1,560
| 6,274
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a PhD student in a multidisciplinary subject, I am grouped with a postdoc by my supervisor. In our lab, the usual rule is student do the theory and coding, and postdoc do the experiment.
My collaborator postdoc is highly unmotivated: he badly performed the experimental tasks that I told him to do (most of the time, the experiments was unqualified), and delayed our project progress.
I am much younger than him, and he refused to follow my instructions, and instead fed me with unreliable “ideas” and asked me to do his job... My supervisor knows the situation, but does nothing and just watches. Each weekly meeting I am the only guy having progress.
At end I had to do the experimental part myself. It was tough but finally the project was accepted to a top journal. I have done 95%+ works, but have to add the postdoc as a coauthor (he didn’t even take part in writing the paper)
I anticipate similar course of action in future projects. I can’t change the group.
How can I properly motivate my postdoc to get him work for me?
**Edits**:
The question has been revived and let me summarize some of comments. It helps to clarify some statements:
* "get him work for me" simply means "do his duty as a collaborator".
* The postdoc received authorship; but I am actually the guy doing all the works.
* The whole story is, I gave up pushing on him, did the bio training myself, and finished the data acquisition myself.
* In this question I am humbly asking how to avoid similar situations from happening again.
* I am not being harsh from the very first beginning. I was polite to the postdoc, even after wasting months.
* Technician is not a negative word. If you are familar with bio labs, you will know most postdocs are no more than a "technician", most of them cannot get a decent faculty position (e.g. top 100 US universities). I am a technician too, but just in coding. The only scientist is the professor.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> How can I properly motivate my postdoc to get him work for me?
>
>
>
You don't. Changing anyone's behavior is difficult; changing your "superior's" behavior will be even less successful and will lead to conflict.
I would start by trying to figure out how long the post-doc is planning to be around. It may be that he is on his way out; this would explain both his lack of focus and the professor's apathy.
In any case, I agree with the discussion in the comments -- the situation as you describe it is inexcusable. But as a PhD student, your options are very limited. I would suggest asking the professor for a private meeting. In the meeting, I suggest making the following points.
* You successfully published a paper in a top journal
* The post-doc contributed virtually nothing to this work, and in fact delayed progress
* You feel it "may have been inappropriate" to even list the post-doc as an author of the paper
* Based on this experience, you think it would be more fruitful to work independently from the post-doc on future efforts.
The professor will likely not be receptive to this, and will make some vague promise about speaking to the post-doc. So, the real question you should be asking (yourself) is:
>
> Should I finish my PhD with this advisor or find another group?
>
>
>
If you are willing to leave (and you are sure!), you can mention this to your advisor if his initial reaction is not satisfactory. This may change the calculation for him -- or he may be more candid with you (e.g., telling you that he is about to fire the post-doc). Or he may let you go.
If you are close to graduation, then it's probably worth sticking this out. Adding people as authors when they didn't contribute much does not really rise to the level of serious academic misconduct, so I would simply avoid relying on the post-doc as much as possible.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: What's in it for this postdoc?
I would suggest that you sit in on some courses where you would learn what you need to know to be able to take the data comfortably, without stress, more autonomously.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: To motivate someone, or at least not demotivate them, you should make them feel valued and taken seriously. Everything you are saying points in the direction of that not happening.
For example, your postdoc isn't working *for* you; he is working *with* you. Or at least, that's how the situation should be if you want him to be motivated. You are also saying he has to follow your instructions, and do experiments you tell him to do. You describe him as a technician. If I were the experimentator in such a collaboration I'd be very unwilling to put in any effort.
Obviously, making someone feel valued and taken seriously will not turn them into a better experimentator. So in some collaborations being respectful towards your collaborator will be very effective, and in some collaborations it won't be. But the way I see it, you have nothing to lose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As a postdoc who is often unmotivated, I will try to help you out.
Clearly you are not in ideal academic ambiance for high-quality intellectual output. Your supervisor looks parasitic in relying on others to work on their own albeit in his behalf, and this postdoc is relying on you to do the hard work. Providing the worst quality results for a demanding mate is the oldest recipe for not being asked to do anything. (Like breaking some expensive piece when pushed to wash the dishes).
In that case you're stuck and I don't see anyway around it. However parasites have a lot to lose, in fact more than their host.
I suggest you be bold and do the unexpected: tell your postdoc and boss you're fed up and leaving. My guess is that they'll make concessions to keep you. Do not expect them to change this game: you will just get something this time, for a while. In any case, should you leave anyway, I don't think you will be doing a bad business.
In most cases dropping a bad PhD is way better that swallowing it whole, and still much better than not having had the experience. Reconsider this logic if you must return funding/salary (see your contract conditions).
Shake these mites off you and get on with your life.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/21
| 1,111
| 4,372
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a sophomore in undergraduate college who is just recently became a business administration major and I was undeclared for my freshman year and part of my sophomore year. Once my old advisor signed my paperwork about changing majors, I asked him when I would be graduating since I was genuinely curious and to reaffirm a fact that he said in an earlier appointment that I would graduate in the winter semester. However, he stated that I would need a fifth year and proceeded to harshly demand why I took classes in CJA, education, and had taken other gen ed's. When I reminded him that he did say I would graduate in the winter semester, he did not believe me and told me to give up on graduating in the spring with my other fellow classmates. I explained to my former advisor my reasons why I took said classes, because I was undeclared, yet he refused to believe me. To be honest, I was caught off guard by his behavior since in my last appointment with him, he was cordial and polite towards me. After my appointment with him, I began to lose self confidence in my choice for this major and I was confused by his harsh attitude towards me. After that harsh exchange, I transferred to a new advisor who is helpful and keeps me motivated but I am still bothered because I do not know why did my former advisor decide to say those harsh words to me. Any ideas behind my former advisor's behavior?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Any ideas behind my former advisor's behavior?
>
>
>
Maybe he is a bozo. Maybe he had a bad day. Maybe he misunderstood the situation. What does it matter? You have found a new advisor and moved on with your life.
I would have just voted to close ("help me guess what he was thinking" questions are off-topic here), but I think there is a real issue in your post, and I think it's this line:
>
> I asked him when I would be graduating since I was genuinely curious
>
>
>
You should not be "asking" this question! As you've discovered, advisors make mistakes all the time -- it's very common for undergraduate students to stay longer than they expected (and pay extra) because their advisor made a mistake. Instead, you should look up all the classes you need for your major (including gen eds) and make a plan for when you will take each of them. Your advisor (the good one) can help you with this, but any mistakes will hurt you, not your advisor, so it's on you to get this right.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I can think of ONE reason, no TWO reasons for this kind of behavior. Business administration is a DEGREE PROGRAM, NOT A MAJOR,. is the first reason. You are going to HAVE to declare a major OFFICIALLY in B.B.A degree program at some point.
Maybe he honestly forgot he told you that you would graduate in the "winter' semester. but there really is NO SUCH THING as winter semester on semester academic calendar. there are winter QUARTERS.. There are Fall spring and simmer semesters. Not ALL colleges have commencement (graduation) ceremonies for all semesters or quarters.I graduated from graduate school on July 29. i WALKED commencement in MAY because i had successfully orally defended my master's thesis. but i did NOT graduate until i handed in the library copies of my master's thesis into the graduate college.
IF you changed your ENTIRE DEGREE PROGRAM. you need to ask THAT academic adviser when you can graduate. and you also need to ask WHEN and how to officially DECLARE a major, management accounting, m, finance or information systems in that degree program.
Business administration IS NOT A MAJOR.
YOU are the one who is responsible for seeing that you take ALL the courses for your DEGREE PROGRAM and WHEN you take those courses to determine WHEN you can graduate, Your academic adviser or advisers is NOT responsible for this.
Academic advisers are human beings too. You have NO IDEA what they go home too. most families have at least ONE dysfunctional family member and sometimes MORE than one. There can be handicapped children or grand children as well. I should know, because i was a university faculty dependent, and iv'e been type 1 diabetic since I was 2 years old. SOME faculty are homeless.
Talk to your current academic adviser as soon as possible and ask when and how to officially declare a major.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/22
| 2,740
| 11,822
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm going to be applying to grad school (a combination of direct PhD and research thesis masters programs) this fall, and I cannot make up my mind between two different fields - machine learning (essentially artificial intelligence) and computer architecture (essentially processor design). They would fall under either the Computer Science or Electrical/Computer Engineering departments.
I obviously need reference letters to apply and I'm going to be asking professors I've done research with in the past. However, I'm worried that asking for reference letters for two very different fields reflects poorly on me; it makes it look like I'm not entirely dedicated towards either.
I'm afraid that the letters I get from the professors will be a lot weaker than if I only applied to one field, because in that case it would look like I'm extremely passionate about it, compared to now where it looks like I'm not entirely sure what I want to do.
I'm wondering if this is a valid concern, and if so, how I should best address it. I could obviously pick one field now, but I'd prefer to put it off till after I get offers, so I have more time to make up my mind.
Just for context, out of the three professors I'm going to ask, one of the professors worked with me on a machine learning project, one on a computer architecture project and the last one on a signal processing project (not directly related to machine learning or computer architecture).<issue_comment>username_1: No not necessarily. Data, information and knowledge is NOT divided up into mutually exclusive "boxes."
Did you know some universities now offer double master's master's degree programs.. I seriously considered doing this for awhile at the University of Oklahoma, I already have have B.s. in with a major in geography and concentration in physical, not cultural geography and M.S. in geology from OU. I also have B.A. with major in American history and honors in history of science and B.S. in earth sciences/geology from Tulane University. i did not double major.
I would like to earn a master of library and information science from OU, but I want to create or manage digital databases,. I have NO desire to mage OTHER people's lives in in any way, I've walked away from an MBA and MIS degree programs because they were the wrong degree programs FOR ME.. I did enough research and found that first i had to take 18 credit hours of courses for one master's degree before I could start taking courses for th other master's degree , then i found out I could take 9 credit hours of courses outside library science courses. in the MLIS degree program. that meant I , for me, getting an M.S. in computer science through the engineering college probably not necessary. now my only problem is my AGE 9 65 and a lack of physical stamina, which i CAN do something about, , but I am not sure at 65 years old and counting, if i want to invest another 3 years of time of time into getting a second master's degree and be unemployable because of my age.. Age discrimination DOES exist for common sense reasons. I MIGHT end up in assisted living before i could graduate. That's why i gave up on going law school. No o lawyer or law firm would hire someone as old as i am as law clerk or intern uless it was a "pity" hire.
maybe you can find someone who is willing to advise you on interdisciplinary masters AND Ph.D.. The one thing i would warn you about is getting "caught" between departments or school and department like I did.. ALL graduate students are pawns in the multilevel mental chess game that is college and university politics.. My thesis adviser for the M.S was facing retirement in 6 years. i was his last graduate student.I specialized in geological remote sensing and GIS. I created a digital database as my master's thesis.. The one thing my adviser asked me when i first met him was did i have articular study area in mind.. my answer was "no". He is an expert in the petrology of the Wichita Mountains. He was VERY understanding that the amount and type of field work I could do was somewhat limited because i have been type 1 diabetic since i was 2 years old.
Everyone "customizes" their master's and Ph.D. degree programs to
a certain extent, but the REAL question is usually WHOSE research are are you doing, Your thesis dissertation chairperson's research or YOUR research or the TYPE of research YOU want to do.
I apologize for any typos i have not caught and fixed in this answer. I've just signed up and this is my first answer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Based on the title of your question, I thought you were going to apply for two *really* different fields like French Poetry and Algebraic Topology! So, while I appreciate the difference between software design and hardware design, I certainly would not characterise machine learning and computer architecture as "very different fields". Both involve understanding and using computers, and I'm sure there are many people with an interest in both fields. If anything, your interest in both fields reflects a holistic interest in the field of computer science and would probably be interpreted as a positive.
Regardless of how similar or different these fields are perceived to be, I cannot imagine that it would reflect badly on you to have an interest in both, and to be willing to pursue either field at graduate level. While academia tends to push professors to become hyper-specialised, it is not expected that we will have worn you down to this point before even entering grad school!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I did exactly this. When I applied to graduate school, i applied to multiple schools for both computer science and computational biology. My reasoning was that, while I loved CS and was interested in theory, my background was more oriented in biology, specifically neuroscience. Computational biology to some degree was the more logical step.
I got into good programs in both fields, so *I don’t think the seemingly disparate fields shaped my recommendations in any negative way*. Why? While it certainly helps to have a clear idea of what you want to do with your degree, I don’t think it’s always required. Sure, if you’re planning on being funded by a specific lab for doing specific research, you should definitely have a developed interest. But for a self-funded MS or a PhD with a more flexible funding structure, there will be a degree of exploration — and it’s part of the journey.
I ended up pursuing an M.S. in computational biology and doing research on the analytics pipelines used for genomic variant detection in cancer. Now I’m in a PhD program pursuing research in a very different direction, more akin to theoretical computer science and the impacts of computational complexity on certain problems in biology.
Ideally, your recommenders should not just know you in terms of your academic performance. They should know you personally and be able to speak to who you are as an individual as well. If this is the case, regardless of what programs you apply for, they will be strong advocates.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As others have pointed out, the fields that you've mentioned are in fact quite similar, and it is completely acceptable to apply for different fields. I applied to 4 different departments (actually even two different departments in the same grad school in some cases), as different as Biology and Informatics! I think it all comes down to how you handle your applications and recommendation letters.
If you're applying to grad schools in the US, this might be easier, as you can even address the fact that you're interested in both ML and Computer Architecture in your SOP, if the department has faculty with research in both of these fields (not necessarily the same professor; I mean it has professors working on ML, and professors working on Architecture). But you should handle this well. It is ok (at least in the US) not to be completely sure about what field you're going to end up doing your thesis on, since in Academia, interests are quite fluid and in fact the committee always knows that your interest might completely change and end up not working on any of these two as it is not uncommon at all (but that does not mean that what your write in your SOP does not matter, it just means they may not be as strict as you think about you being dedicated to your current field of interest). I can't tell you what is a good way to address both of your interests in your SOP, but I'm sure your professors could be a great help if you can go and ask them (and if not, you can ask this as a separate question and ask for advice from the community here in StackExchange).
If you are not applying to US schools, in many other countries (such as most EU countries), they expect you to have a relatively clear idea of what you are going to do before you start your Ph.D. In those cases, you may want to separate your applications into two disjoint groups and even if you want to mention both of your interests, you should use a language that puts more weight on one (I'd recommend you ask for a others' opinion about this case, as I know very little about it). You can also do this for the US schools if you are applying to a certain school and you know which field you'll be pursuing in that school.
The reason you may want to mention both of your interests even if one is not directly relevant to the program you're applying to is just for your SOP to match the recommendation letters you get. If you can't get 6 letters (to divide them into two groups, one for ML and one for Computer Architecture), then you should handle the language you use in your SOP carefully so your SOP matches both what your professors write in their LOR and your the field of research of the faculty at the department you're applying to and in particular your faculty of interest.
In any case, I think it is important that you show a draft of your SOP to the professors who are writing your LOR before they write it. You should also explain your interests to them (I think they should be fine with the fact that you are interested in two different fields, but I think it's better if you get the opinion of a professor here about that). That enables them to write a letter that leaves room for some flexibility for you in writing your SOP.
PS: I applied to departments in four different fields, and I got offers from 3, but I had only one offer from two of them, and all my other offers and even interview invitations were from the other one. I think that was because my SOPs (and probably also the LORs) ended up having a biased language in favor of the field I studied my undergrad in. Even though that field was (and is) also my preference for grad school, but I did not intend to write a biased SOP. So you would want to be careful in writing your SOPs and perhaps ask someone else to read your SOPs and give their opinion on whether you sound the way you intend to sound or not.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Are you kidding me? These fields are closely related, so much so that you have a bunch of machine learning talks in any hardware conference, and in some of them (like the GPU Technology Conference) it's, like, a quarter or a third of the whole conference!
I thought you were going to say "Computer Architecture" and "Medieval Heraldic Artwork" or something.
Even if the fields were further apart - the main points to be consider would be:
* Can you find an appropriate research subject?
* Can you find a good academic supervisor (and get him/her to take you on)?
* Can you find funding?
* Will you be able to leverage your results and/or your efforts later on, once you're done?
If the answers are mostly yes, then - go for it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/22
| 965
| 3,824
|
<issue_start>username_0: I published my first article a while ago, nothing special, just rigorous formalization of some well-known facts.
Now I got a mail writing
>
> We have read about your published precious paper in FORMALIZED MATHEMATICS titled About Quotient Orders and Ordering Sequences, and the topic of the paper has impressed us a lot.
> The paper has attracted attention from researchers and scholars specializing in quotient order; ordered finite sequences.
>
>
>
Especially the last part looks manufactured, that are just the keywords extracted.
>
> On behalf of the Editorial Board of the journal, we sincerely invite you to join our team as the editorial board member or reviewer of \*\*\*\*\*\*. Taking your academic background and rich experience in this field into account, the Board believe that you are quite qualified for this position. We believe that your position as the editorial board member or reviewer will shine a light on your research in related fields.
>
>
>
"academic background and rich experience" Yeah, but no. Really, really no, at this point in time.
So the email is clearly generated automatically, but the links seem to work and the journal does have entries in Google Scholar and an archive on their website, it is not a scam per se. It is an Open Access and Peer reviewed journal, but it is obvious I was just some entry and no one looked at my paper (or my academic background) seriously.
**How serious can such an invitation be?** Since it's a peer reviewed journal, are they just frantically looking for reviewers? Would they even consider a positive reaction of me, due to my academic short comings which start with me not even having a M.Sc. yet?
I'm specifically not asking for career advice. I'm not in the league of publication for too long, I don't really know how things like becoming a reviewer work, if this would be payed for anyhow, etc. **If this mail constitutes a bad practice I would like to know because I will likely get more of these in the future.**<issue_comment>username_1: It is spam. Don't pay any attention to it. No genuine "publishing" source works this way.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't waste your time with it. You were smart to catch how the mail might have been generated (keywords etc). These mails are often sent out by journals that turn out to be [predatory](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17379/what-are-fake-shady-and-or-predatory-journals)\*; you wouldn't like to be associated with it.
If you accept, you may find your name being used here and there, in an attempt to increase the journal's scientific credibility. It is likely that their editorial board etc. is fluffed up in this manner (you could take a look at that if they've put up one, and see if there are any known researchers on their board). You are right — this is likely to happen repeatedly; ignore any requests that:
1. mention a specific paper of yours and extend editorial board invitations — it's a sign of auto-generated content.
2. appear in [predatory journal lists](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/83764/with-bealls-list-gone-how-can-i-tell-if-a-journal-is-spam).
3. have extremely general scope (eg. STEM) and no matching editorial board.
---
EDITS:
(1)\* Predatory journals, in a nutshell, charge authors exorbitant fees to publish articles with little or no peer review, with very low visibility or scientific credibility. In the most extreme cases, the article may not even be published. In this manner, they are 'preying' on unsuspecting authors who submit their hard work. The linked question contains a detailed description.
(2) It would be a good idea not to respond to such mails at all, and to mark them as spam. Over time, it ll get easier to spot them right away.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/22
| 1,422
| 5,685
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was recently accepted into a graduate biophysics program and have a couple questions about what I should expect going into my first semester. While I'm going into a physics PhD, I'd like general advice from any field. I have two specific questions, but welcome any advice that you are willing to share.
What is the biggest thing to overcome/accomplish during your first semester and a graduate student? Looking back, what is something you wish you would have done differently?<issue_comment>username_1: This may be closed as "primarily opinion based" (especially the second part), but I'll take a whack at it.
>
> What is the biggest thing to overcome/accomplish during your first semester [as] a graduate student?
>
>
>
Your first 1-2 years is likely taking classes. So, the biggest thing is passing those classes. This should be achievable (though a lot of work), so I'll list also two secondary goals: making friends, and finding an advisor (though this may be a bit early to line up an advisor; every university has a different process).
>
> Looking back, what is something you wish you would have done differently?
>
>
>
Stayed in my office more. I tended to work on my own at home; while I learned a lot, grad school would have been more fun if I had made more friends and done some of the work collaboratively.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: CULTURE SHOCK especially if you are transitioning from one state to another state and from one university to another university. Even if you grew up in two locations in two different states like i did. if you are setting up new "home' in a THIRD location,THERE WIL BE CULTURE SHOCK. The new university and even the new department college will have DIFFERENT sub cultures, so it may take MORE than one semester or quarter to adjust.
Your cumulative GPA, weighted or unweighted, MEANS NOTHING. You are in an entirely DIFFERENT degree program. if you DO NOT maintain 3.000000 or higher GPA on 4.0000000 scale, you will be put on academic probation, and possibly not be eligible to have teaching or research assistant ship. You are competing with graduate students who have been there longer than you have. You are also at some point competing with FACULTY members for professional recognition.You HAVE to able to WORK with cooperate with OTHER pwoplw no matter how much you like or dilike individual people. Graduate school is TOUGH. Your ego is going to take a beating. You WILL be gossiped about, no matter WHAT you do..
You also HAVE to be able communicate well in Writing, in Academic English , which often is like foreign language to many people who did NOT grow up with parents who graduate college degrees who were both teachers like i did. If you do NOT know how to use a library and resources a library has, i suggest you go to library orientation in the first weeks of classes.You HAVE to do YOU OWN RESEARCH now and know HOW to use a search engine. NO ONE is going to do your homework for you OR spoon feed you links and hyperlinks.
If ALL you have right now is self esteem with no self respect, you may NOT survive graduate school. Low esteem is survivable. No self respect may NOT be survivable.I dropped out of graduate school for 7 years, but I DID go back to college and i went back to graduate school. i DID graduate. I SURVIVED graduate school, but only because i was stubborn and i REFUSED to give up on myself.
I started graduate school in Spring 1981. i graduated from graduate school on July 29, 2000. that was 20 YEARS of my life. My mother died while i was working on My FIRST bachelor's degree. My father died while i was working on my master's degree.. I have THREE bachelor's degrees. The third one had reason that made sense to me and it took only 2 years to get.
College staff can be GOLD mines of information about faculty members, staff, College and university services, like tutoring,and what is available in the local area like medical doctors, dentists, grocery stores, restaurants, bars, whether a county or town /city is "wet" or "dry", drugstores, pharmacies, and WHERE things are.
Congratulations and good luck. Remember how nervous and scared you were when you started college? Th is Act 2. LIFE ins continuing education process and it NEVER STOPS. You will make mistakes and you will have failures, small and big. Learn from your mistakes, Take responsibility for your actions and consequences of your actions, because you do not get do-overs in graduate school. You either learn, adapt and SURVIVE, or you don't.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Some time during your undergraduate degree, you hopefully moved from the 'repeat back information' paradigm of high school, into the 'integrate information from many sources, analyse it, form your own opinion and defend it' paradigm of university. However, this is not always true for mathematics, physics and similar subjects where there is a right answer that can be constructed.
If you have not made this paradigm shift, this will be a big difference. Because you are now in a research environment. The answer is not necessarily known. What is important is bringing together different types of evidence and working out what is going on.
It may also be true that you have not written an essay during your undergraduate degree (I did only one in my maths degree). This may also be a big transition.
I found my later social sciences undergraduate degree (particularly philosophy courses) to be invaluable in developing good writing skills. A short essay (eg 2000 words) forces you to be articulate arguments really clearly, which is great for research writing.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/22
| 571
| 2,374
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am so tired of contacting potential supervisors and submitting applications only to get rejected! Is the problem in my qualifications?
I graduated university with a GPA of 4.94 out of 5 (A Saudi Arabian University), and then I got my masters from Warwick University with a Merit but a distinction on the dissertation. I scored 7.5 in the IELTS exam as well.
Additional details: I am considered as an overseas student, and I have a sponsorship. My field is in digital marketing but my Bachelors was in Management Information Systems, and my masters was in e-Business Management. The research proposal I wrote discussed the bad and good behaviour of customers in the financial services industry, and its implications on the companies' ecosystems.
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: Getting an offer for a PhD program can be difficult, and if you are receiving repeated rejections it may be worth seeking some feedback on your applications.
Given that your undergraduate degree is from a non-English speaking country, if you are applying for PhD candidature in England or the US (or some other English-speaking country), you will need to make sure your writing is clear and grammatically polished. That is a major aspect of what professors are looking for when seeking research candidates.
Without wishing to be unnecessarily critical, I note that in your three-sentence question in this post I can see two obvious spelling errors and at least one major grammatical error. This might just be because you are writing while upset, or it might be indicative of a low standard of written English. If the latter, I would suggest you engage in some practice writing essays and other papers in English and getting feedback on your work until you have improved your writing. This may assist you in future applications. Good luck.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the answer to the first question is "Yes, a Merit is acceptable".
As the second question, I doubt if many UK academics have a sufficiently detailed understanding of the Saudi Arabian system to know whether a Warwick MSc (Merit) is better or worse than a Saudi GPA of 4.94.
However UK academics will know that a Warwick MSc(Merit) is not as good as a Warwick MSc(Distinction) and it is very likely that many of your competitors for the PhD places have Distinctions.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/22
| 618
| 2,517
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working on my second paper (as phd projects) which is an extension of my first paper. For my first paper, I will send it to a journal very soon. As I know acceptance of a paper by a journal is not an easy journey. Therefore, may I need to submit my paper for different journals (not at the same time) until it can find a place. My question is, how can I cite my first paper in my second one. I need to submit them at a very close time. For example, if I submit my first paper in this week (for example) then I may send the second one into two weeks (two weeks after the first one is submitted).
Any help, please?<issue_comment>username_1: You can submit the first paper to a pre-print sever such as [arxiv](https://arxiv.org/). Once, it appears in arxiv as a pre-print, you will get a citation information, which can then be used in the second paper.
I don't see any other way of doing it unless it appears somewhere as a pre-print or a published article.
Further, if you are citing a small portion (such as a method or a result) of first paper, you can replicate the same thing in the second paper with a note saying
>
> *The initial approach of this method is to appear in the article entitled 'ABC Approach for ZYZ Analysis [draft]'.*
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If the journal you've chosen doesn't accept papers previously published on preprint servers then you need to find a different journal. You can't have everything in this situation. If it's that crucial to submit everything in a short period of time then you've messed up your time management (trust me, I know that feeling). If you need to cite a lot of the work included in your first paper you have no other choice other than using a preprint server or waiting for it being greenlit and published – which probably is something between half a year to a year.
You can't cite unpublished work.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Journals in some fields do not accept preprints;such journals often allow you to include 'unpublished manuscript' in the reference. You should have the author list and title though. You may need to supply this unpublished work upon request. Sometimes, the journal may recommend that you include it as supplementary material.
There is an entire page dedicated to this [here](http://linguistics.byu.edu/faculty/henrichsen/APA/APA14.html), do have a look.
In any case, take all your options to your supervisor and let him/her guide you into the decision.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/22
| 1,693
| 7,450
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a Ph.D. student. My supervisor frequently tells me if you want to do a review for journals, login into my account and perform the review. He never reviews any paper. He is very lazy and I have to do all of the submission of my articles into journal system myself using his account.
A while ago, I wanted to check a journal and I saw a pending invitation for review from a famous researcher, which I love his works very much, as associate editor of that journal. I accepted review and downloaded manuscript. I read the manuscript and wrote a detailed review of it, six pages long!. I recommended a major revision. It takes a lot of my time to read the references and perform the review. In my review, I suggested a set of improvements to the authors which I think will help them improve their work.
Today, I wanted to submit the review using my supervisor account. I suddenly noticed that my supervisor submitted a review. I am very upset as it took much of my time to perform this task. I read his review, a very short note to reject the manuscript, less than half a page long. Other anonymous reviewers recommended a minor revision.
What should I do? Is there any way to make the best use of my review? not to waste my time.
Disclaimer:
Please don't be so judgmental. Assume someone in such a situation.
He didn't know it is unethical not even a bit until asked this question. He even guesses his supervisor himself not knows this. Since there was never any evil intention by any of them.
Here we want to ask questions and consult/educate ourselves from members; not judging people. He just worked hard to help some other researchers and nothing else. Not a first-year Ph.D. student.<issue_comment>username_1: Talk to your supervisor. If he doesn't mind (and I don't see why he would object) he can write to the editor saying his student also wrote a review for the article. The editor can then register you and invite you to review the article using your own account.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I understand that this proxy review may be a cultural norm where you are. Nevertheless, it is considered malpractice in many places, and admitting to doing this can land you in trouble. Keep that in mind, because a publisher like Elsevier is massively cross-cultural, so they may take umbrage to something like this if it is reported.
Now, coming to what you get out of it. Your learning has happened anyway; I'm sure you expanded your understanding by reading all the references etc. At no point were you getting any credit for it - certainly not from journal, probably not from supervisor (I understand this particular review was not done with his knowledge). So there's no reason to be upset. I would suggest conserving your energies. If anything, you could show your supervisor your review, just so he knows how hard you worked. But if he is as lazy and uninterested as the question makes him sound, he may dismiss it.
Bottom line is, don't be upset. You volunteered to do the review by proxy and didn't inform supervisor what you were doing - so it's hard to find fault with anyone else. Learn from this incident and move on.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I have a serious problem with the professor's *modus operandi*. He should not be allowing/asking students to submit reviews from his account over his signature, whether or not the publisher is OK with this.
A graduate student (in fact, anyone) deserves credit and recognition for the work he or she does. The professor should ask the editor if he can pass the review request along to a graduate student to be submitted directly by the student. That's a good public endorsement of the student.
That said, it's hard to know what the OP should do with this particular professor if/when the next review opportunity comes up.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Talk to your supervisor about your review. Fortunately, you failed to actually submit it, so it's just a matter for discussion between the two of you. Consider yourself lucky.
There are two completely separate issues that have become muddled in the question and in the comments: submission of "articles" (also called "manuscripts" or "papers") on one hand, and submission of "reviews" on the other hand. Just to be clear, an article is original work intended for publication under the OP's name (evidently with the supervisor as corresponding author and possibly with other coauthors). Meanwhile, a review like the OP describes in the question will not be published; it is a pre-publication assessment of another person's article, that is communicated via the journal's editor directly to that other person. This is also called "refereeing" or ["peer review"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review#Scholarly).
Just to confuse things a little, it's also possible to *publish* a "review" — particularly in journals (e.g., Mathematical Reviews) that specialize in such things. These are reviews of works (books, papers, etc.) that are already public and — where relevant — have already gone through peer review. The OP mentions that the other reviewer "reject[ed] the manuscript", which means that this isn't the type of review under consideration. So the question is really asking about refereeing / peer review.
I'm not too surprised that the supervisor asks his students to submit articles (articles that he presumably has some familiarity with and generally approved of) using his account, but I am in utter disbelief that he might have suggested that students independently write and submit a review of another article using his account without his input. Those are two *wildly* different actions. The first is not entirely proper but is not unheard of, while the second is enormously unethical and inappropriate for so many reasons I can't list them. You and your professor could get a minor slap on the wrist for the first, but you could both get into serious trouble for actually doing the second — ranging from public shaming that could harm your professional trajectory, to formal punishment and loss of funding, to outright firing, possible loss of government funding for your university, and even legal repercussions if the journal or the authors whose work you were trying to review chose to make an issue of it. Misrepresentations like these are fraud and may even cross the line into crimes, with real harm being done to the journal and the authors whose work you reviewed.
For these reasons, I suspect that your supervisor did not actually intend for you to do this review yourself and try to upload it. I really hope you misunderstood what he told you. On the other hand, if your supervisor really did tell you that you could do this, *don't*. Just do your work to finish your Ph.D., and get away from him as quickly as possible so that you can establish an independent career before he drags you down with him. If you feel that you are being pressured to do something you shouldn't, talk to someone else in a position of authority at your university.
This is not an issue of cultural differences; it is an issue of basic standards in academic publishing. I've worked closely with colleagues from all around the world, and have never heard of anything remotely like this except in the context of professors who have lost their positions because of misconduct. Don't take up your supervisor's patterns of misconduct.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/22
| 646
| 2,774
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my field (economics), I see lots of scholars (some of them are famous in their field) putting their papers with the information (R&R at Journal X.).
I understand the fact that they try to transfer the signal that the paper in question has an academic quality but what happens if the paper gets a rejection after the third round of revision? Can it be worse for the reputation? So, what are the pros and cons to give the information like R&R or "conditionally accepted" for a paper in publication process?<issue_comment>username_1: In economics, the publication process takes a long time. The slow review process largely results form a slow review and a slow resubmission process. Because editors know that reviews are slow, they only send items to review or give an R&R if they think they have a good shot of being published in the journal. The fact that a paper was sent for review or given an R&R a particular journal means that it passes some bar of quality. This signal is important on a junior researcher’s CV. Noting a paper is under review also allows the CV reader to understand that the paper is fully written ( although of course there are other ways to note this).
There are few downsides to the researcher to noting that a paper is under review or has an R&R because It is such an established norm in the field. I would not hesitate to follow this norm if you are preparing your CV.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In essence, they're trying to get "credit" for the paper that's currently in the pipeline, by essentially asserting that in between the time when you read the CV and take action on it (i.e. when they show up if hired, etc.) the paper will be in the published literature.
Especially for things like revise and resubmit, there's a pretty strong chance that that's true.
The pros...should be obvious given that reasoning. You're essentially giving a preview of your upcoming academic productivity, for work that's already been done, but hasn't yet hit the presses. Especially for junior people, this can be very influential - the number of papers and your publication record can change drastically depending on whether or not you include papers currently in the pipeline.
The cons...are primarily rooted in "I don't believe you." For an R&R at *Journal Name* there's a degree of credibility, but occasionally across people who give a journal name for papers that are in *submission*, and often they pick very fancy journals. The fact that you know how to work the submission system for *Nature* doesn't tell me anything, and can put off an aura of either trying to goose your stats in a way that rings false, or just that you're hopelessly naive about the quality of your work and where it belongs.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/22
| 1,736
| 7,010
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got my PhD recently. I applied to many tenure-track positions and got selected for several onsite job interviews. Yay. However I have actually been told in no uncertain terms by several trusted people that this year, my chances are extremely close to zero, considering my short track record.
I cannot help but get my hopes up. How do I deal with this upcoming unavoidable failure and put a good spin for myself on my situation?
It may sound stupid but like many people in academia, so far I have been quite successful and have not had to deal with professional failure much... (Consider this: good in school, good in university, graduated with honors, got accepted to masters, got accepted to PhD, got the PhD - most people in academia follow this kind of path. I hope this does not come across as immodest, I am very aware that I am just a cog in the grand (grant?) scheme of academia. I am good at what I do but not at the rest.) Of course I met failure very often in my private life, but this does not feel the same.<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest dealing with the situation by revising your (misguided, IMO) definition of “failure”. Even if it is, as you say, “ineluctable”, that you will fail to land a tenure-track position this year, you will still be a highly qualified and highly successful person with excellent career prospects. To refer to this as a failure is itself a failure - a failure of the imagination, that is.
I and most other successful academics had to spend multiple years after graduation to get a good tenure-track position. Almost all of us struggled with repeated rejections, job uncertainty, and geographic dislocation before arriving at a good place career-wise. Keep your eyes focused on your long-term goals and on the fun and passion of doing research, and given your description of your situation I predict that you will be fine. Regardless of what happens with your current job search, a “failure” you most certainly are not.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: At some point, someday, everyone fails to meet their highest targets and is disappointed. [Even the most successful people.](https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/olympics/rio-2016-usain-bolt-angry-world-record-200m-gold-medal-a7198746.html) Don't worry. Keep doing your job and setting high targets for yourself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: "I cannot help but get my hopes up. How do I deal with this upcoming unavoidable failure and put a good spin for myself on my situation?"
Part of the difficulty is that the process of applying and interviewing is selling the employer on what a good match you are for them, and how well you will do there. To see and describe that match requires you to spend time imagining your future there, and it would be extremely hard to sell the employer on that future without selling yourself on it and getting your own hopes up.
Perhaps you can deal with managing your expectations by telling yourself, "Wow, I really can imagine working in **a place like this**." There's a whole collection of colleges or universities that will have similar attributes to what you like there, and your interviews this year will help you recognize and appreciate what you're looking for in the future. (You can similarly be excited about the people you meet and like at your interviews. You're lucky to have people like that in your field, and you will hopefully cross paths again.) Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A tenured position is a *senior* one and – as everyone has said – it is not available for new PhDs.
Apply for *junior* positions – "Assistant" Professor/Lecturer or Research Associate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Are you a bigger failure if you do not get it than if you had not applied at all?
No?
Well, then that is really your answer: You gave it a shot with a high risk of failure, and you are not worse off because of it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> I cannot help but get my hopes up. How do I deal with this upcoming unavoidable failure and put a good spin for myself on my situation?
>
>
>
One way to put a good spin on this is to consider these interviews as free practice with no real cost associated. If your chances are basically zero, you have nothing to lose by attending, right? But you have a lot to gain: experience with how such interviews go, what to do and what to avoid, how people respond etc. It's also an opportunity to make all the first-timer errors in a situation where they don't matter much (because they can't really lower your chances).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Don't consider the reject a failure at all.
Careers are built step by step. Accept the fact that you may not get right now the position you look for.
The number of rejects you got may be statistically insignificant. Also, it may be that in your field, tenure track positions are usually given after postdoc. Understand the supply and demand of your field.
Consider alternatives:
* Postdoc, as obvious as it sounds.
* Employment in industry. May pay better than academia and may give you
a fresh perspective. Won't recommend freelancing until you are not
accustomed with the "ways" of industry.
* Own business: have you developed something during the PhD that may be of economic value?
* My assumption is that you are in the US. Other countries may need people like you, and a few years abroad would open up new
perspectives. While abroad, understand the new culture and keep
publishing with the help of the people around you.
No matter what, even if you got underemployed (I'm assuming you have debts and you need to pay your lodging) do not give up, keep researching or at least yourself up-to-date with your field.
I'm doing data mining. Sometimes, we do everything by the book and we figure out we did it wrong. This is good, because by understanding what we did wrong, we have the chance to do it right next iteration.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: There are two possible ways you can approach this.
1. Trust the multiple trusted people, and don't apply to positions that they say are beyond your reach at this stage.
2. Or, you could use the applications as a barometer, a measuring stick. If you get offered a job of the type you would like, then you are one in a million. If you get shortlisted but not hired, then you are pretty close to your goal. If your applications don't resonate with anyone yet, that shows you your next steps to take, to work towards your goal. It's like the elves cutting out the leather for the shoemaker to sew together the boots. Once you have that feedback (the lack of resonance), that gives you the cut of the cloth. You know what to do next. You know how to sew the boots together -- that is, you know how to find topics, do your research, do your writing, submitting, revising.
Focus on those things. Focus on the timeline that you are ineluctably marching along. Focus on *goals* and *work* and *progress*.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/04/22
| 4,164
| 17,409
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is my understanding that academia as a nebulous whole has its own culture and speaks its own language that makes it a very different environment to work in compared to other so-called "industry" jobs.
Indeed, my own supervisor once referred to a former student of his as "having a job", meaning that she now works outside of academia. It's clear that for him, like many other academics, academia (or maybe their own particular field of research) is a vocation or calling, rather than a job.
My question, therefore, is this: why, within the culture of academia, is failure seen or felt to be different from failure in another career? What is special about academia that makes missing out on a postdoc or permanent job so different from missing out on any other industry job?
The question that inspired this one: [How to deal with unavoidable failure?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/108537/how-to-deal-with-ineluctable-failure) which asks how to deal with not being selected for a tenure-track job.<issue_comment>username_1: I think the reason is simply that a lot of people go into academia with the, often unrealistic, goal of becoming a professor. No matter the circumstances, if you don't get to the point where you want to be, well, you can call it a failure, can't you?
This is aggravated by the pyramid structure of academia, where there are fewer positions available for every stage of the career, and most early-career positions are temporary. So you are statistically unlikely to reach your goal in the first place, and if you don't manage to do it during the standard time period, well, going to e.g. industry is your best bet. Outside of academia, on the other hand, if you don't get that managerial promotion or raise this time, maybe there's another chance coming a couple of years down the line. And you can keep working on similar things in the meantime.
So, the 'failure' in industry is likely less permanent, causing less anxiety. On top of that, you have the survivorship bias due to those who got their permanent positions. It affects the academic atmosphere, and can influence what is seen as success and failure. This is also affected by the field: Compare say petroleum engineering and mathematics PhD candidates, and you'll likely see different attitudes about private jobs.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Many other careers are not structured around "success" and "failure" in the same way that academia is, and the jobs that are are acknowledged to be high stress. I agree strongly with what username_1 mentions about the pyramid structure of academia, as well as survivorship bias. username_6 also nicely captures the difference that "In most careers you do not 'fail' you simply cease being promoted." Here are a few other ways that the idea of failure is omnipresent in academia. (This is from a U.S. perspective, and I do not know how widely it pertains elsewhere.)
First, **success or failure is very personalized and visible in academia**. Academics are not very interchangeable: like artists and few other professions, everyone does the job differently and produces creative output. It is often hard to separate yourself from your work (whether being critiqued or praised). Further, on the research side each person is essentially an entrepreneur who is their own publicity, branding, fundraising, management (if there's a lab or students to supervise), R&D, and administrative department. There's a lot of personal investment in this job, and failure cuts deeper into the sense of self than in other jobs.
Second, **in other jobs, most people are rarely evaluated by strangers**, and often the people evaluating them are invested in their success. Performance evaluations in offices are usually with co-workers and they are often two-way. Managers and HR folks often care about improving the workforce they have, rather than going through the hiring process again. In contrast, the entire tenure process seems designed to give people anxiety (which a professor complained to me about when I was a grad student--he was worried another professor was working against his tenure case). **The tenure process is a years-long audition, after which you can be essentially told that you no longer have a job in whatever tiny college town you uprooted yourself to live in.** In most industry or government jobs, there's much more flexibility to move between jobs (not just one big annual switch), less stigma about switching jobs, and often lots of small evaluations rather than a few huge hurdles.
Third, academics need to "hustle," constantly seeking new opportunities for funding, research materials, ideas, and labor. Both **applying for funding and submitting papers are processes with routine failure** built in, and it can be somewhat opaque what is being sought. (Not to mention that the content of research may turn out not to lead anywhere interesting, after all.) However, **many jobs don't have such stark success and failure**. Annual sales income is a continuous number, or the quality of a project is within a range of acceptability. In many occupations you can gain or lose clients, but usually no one client is crucial. In the industries where grants or contracts are key sources of funding, there are large teams devoted to the project, and often a lot of projects in the pipeline. In contrast, **academics are often pretty much alone in their success or failure, and for someone "on the tenure clock," how a particular project turns out--which may have a large random component to it--may change their tenure case substantially.**
Fourth, professors are hired not only for what they can do right now, but an **entire track record of what they have done and how they are likely to adapt over time in the future**. Especially in combination with the large number of people with PhDs competing for a small number of tenure track jobs, this rewards people who have very linear career paths, moving from success to success. Many people worry about deviations from the norm, as well as about failures.
Some of these components are present in other jobs. I mention these other jobs not to compare who has it better, but to point out that things like high-stakes evaluation based on partly random outcomes is not a universal trait of many jobs, while it characterizes investment banking and (I argue) academic research.
* Investment bankers are often individually held responsible for their performance, a lot of which relies on investment markets, which have a large random component.
* Writers face a lot of the same problems with submissions and rejections, but writing is very rarely their main job. (That has its own problems...)
* Salespeople have to deal with a lot of rejection and often work on commission. Their job and their salary are contingent on their success. However, there are low hurdles to switch in and out of sales, and often people can hedge their bets by working part-time at another job. (The precarity that goes with sales and service jobs is also part of what adjunct instructors--aspiring academics--face.)
* Doctors need to pass a lot of hurdles on the way to their profession, and not getting past a hurdle may mean that one is saddled with lots of debt without a lucrative career. Then, depending on which field of medicine, failure may mean a patient dies or has bad complications. These sorts of consequences have a legal and financial complications, on top of the large emotional toll. Doctors may also have to relocate nationally or internationally if/when they switch jobs.
* Founders of start-up businesses will have many of the same pressures as professors (the same people must develop and execute ideas while securing funding, with large personal investment). However, failure is a celebrated part of the culture in, say, Silicon Valley, and the potential financial rewards are tremendous. (The restaurant industry also has serial entrepreneurs, though with less potential payoff.)
While each of those jobs mentioned above has a lot of judgment of and consequences around failure, those descriptions hopefully remind you that these extreme conditions around failure are largely NOT present in many other common jobs (service industry, teacher, programmer, manager, IT person, mechanic, engineer, nurse, technician, counselor, administrator, banker, accountant, office clerk, interpreter...).
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: I think it is not different than many other careers. A couple, both medical doctors, feeling their son (who wants to be a rock musician) is wasting his life. On the other hand, a talented musician who decides to go to medical school, so the other musicians are all saying, "What a waste!" Many of us tend to think our own profession is the most noble, most gratifying, most valuable. But is that not a form of "prejudice" when we consequently feel that others are somehow less?
Ph.D. advisors **should** prepare their charges not only for academic careers, but also for other careers. But they may not always do that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't think anyone will be able to answer this question for certain. Here's my personal guess.
Many academics have never left academia before. Instead, they've gotten where they are by excelling in the traditional school system. They topped their high school class, their undergraduate class, and then their graduate class. At all stages they saw less-competent (for want of a better word) colleagues drop out and do something else. **To fail to become a professor, then, is to acknowledge that one is also "less competent".** For people who've always been the best among their peers, this is [unacceptable](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/87668/how-do-you-come-to-terms-with-the-fact-that-you-might-never-be-among-the-best-in). Hence they feel academic failure is different.
I suspect that people who have left academia before are much less concerned about academic failure. They have already left academia before, and are less afraid of doing it again.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: I suspect that it is not generally true that failure is so different in academia and outside academia and that this depends (at least a little) on the academic system.
Here what I think why **failure in the German academic system** is different from failing in industry jobs (it is just a little exaggerated):
There are three kinds of jobs in the German academic system:
1. Jobs that have a specific education as a goal.
2. Jobs in projects.
3. Permanent positions.
The jobs in category 1 and 2 are always on a time limited contract. The jobs in category 3 are *almost exclusively* professorships. If you **plan to stay in academia permanently in Germany, you have to get a professorship** (with *very* few exceptions). There is no inherent promotion like there is in many other sectors. No matter how great you are doing as a postdoc, the university will never promote you to a professor (it just can't - there are some rare exceptions, which may look and feel like promotions, but in fact are not).
So, there is a bar and it is set quite high. If you can't jump over it, you'll have to leave eventually.
It would be nice to complement this answer by an answer from a country which has some possibilities of promotion and permanent jobs in academia (as far as I know, France and the UK qualify)…
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: **In most careers you do not "fail" you simply cease being promoted.**
What makes the academic career structure different is that the middle part of the career is a mire of temporary contracts in which it is usually not possible to stay. I cannot simply carry on being a Postdoc for the next twenty years, whereas in my previous career as a programmer I could have simply continued working at the same level for the rest of my working life. This effect is worsened because academic careers are not only temporary but also usually require mobility so that you lose not only secure employment but also established roots in an area.
Academia is, of course, not alone in this, and some careers - e.g. acting - have even worse career progressions but it is distinct from, I would say, most careers where relative stasis is possible. It is still possible to fail in these careers by being fired, failing to get into them in the first place, etc. but this is different from the narrowing, insecure, structure of academia.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: Because failure is often unrelated to the skills or effort. If it turns out your research question is badly chosen, that a new approach is worse compared to existing ones, if others publish your idea a couple of months ahead of you, if you cannot do the experiment needed because your advisor started a beef with the head of the lab your experiment is conducted in, if you get no more grant money, etc.
Everybody knows that it could happen and do not judge failed academics that harshly. Usually people starting a PhD are smarter than the average.
The way out of failure is also kind of easy: go to industry or take a job in administration.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: There is no difference between failure per-se, but if you fail to get a follow-up position you are basically 'forced' to leave the academic world and find a job in the industry. Many people choose academia for a reason, and thus, switching to an industry job is basically not what they want, but academic jobs are often more rare than industry jobs.
No matter why a person prefers the academic world over an industry job, if they have to leave, because they cannot find another academic position this is entails a larger personal change than if you have to switch from industry job to industry job, because you did not get the one industry job, you wanted.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Failure in academia - as someone who has worked in academia for over 15 years, I can assure you there is no such thing as failure in academia. The way tenure track positions are given to candidates often lacks any metric scheme or logic for that matter. This has nothing to do with publication records or number of citations. In fact, I would go as far as to say that in 90% of all tenure track positions given, it doesn't go to the strongest candidate, but to the one who poses the least threat (in terms of competition) to the folks in the department. No search committee hires a candidate who is making any of them look bad.
Now, at Harvard, ETH, Cambridge, or schools of this calibre, this is likely to be different. Junior Professors there may have been on "watch lists" for a while and their hiring is almost entirely based on "success", and positions there go to top-notch candidates. This is a reason as to why these top schools are where they are. But to all those who scored a tenure track position at a mediocre Uni I have to say: congrats, you were most likely perceived as the least threat to your new colleagues!
Then, I have seen folks making it to be full Professor with a publication record that is easily topped by many "top-dog" postdocs from those better schools. The problem in academia is that once someone reaches tenure, there is usually no way someone can fail. As one comment above said: "in industry you cease to get promoted", unfortunately, in academia, promotion does not cease and there is also no mechanism to reprimand low performance or to hold an academic accountable for anything really (unless for grabbing a student's butt or so).
I fully agree, working outside of academic is like having a 'real job', because there are consequences to your actions, there are promotions and demotions, or redundancy. None of this applies to tenured academics, so it is not like a real job. It is like the rich kid from next door, who can afford to pursue his/her art career with the backing of their parents' cash.
Academia turns a nightmare for most who attempt and a dream for those who managed to get tenured. Its not a calling, its not a job, its like being fortunate to get well paid (often through pubic funds) to pursue a passion.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: In my field, career success is driven mostly by getting lucky at multiple important points where it is determined if you get promoted or not. These points include:
* Acceptance to top PhD program
* Acceptance by a good advisor, where good is defined by having the ability, time, and interest in training and promoting their student
* Acceptance of early work by conferences or journals
* Acceptance into a high-status tenure-track position upon completion of the PhD
At each step, a good deal of luck is required to get the promotion.
This means many high ability people get rejected at each step, and many low ability people get promoted at each step.
The reason failure is looked on so harshly by the successful is it allows them to ignore the role of luck in their own success. If failures can be dismissed as low ability, it means all the successful must be high ability.
Academics are generally elitists who believe in and promote the myth of meritocracy. Yet most of them want tenure, which by definition is a rejection of meritocracy.
This is a strong example of the fundamental attribution error and self-serving bias, two types of attribution bias.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/23
| 567
| 2,248
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD student. A professor that I collaborate with (not from my university) asked me on two separate occasions to help with grants that were due in a week. In both cases I managed to squeeze out 20 hours to help him, and he paid me out of his own pocket (not using grant funds).
How can I tactfully ask the professor to bring requests to me earlier in the future? I guess one way is to simply decline future requests that I cannot handle. But I want to preserve goodwill when possible - I could quote him an insane hourly rate if he again approaches me at the last minute, but some people might view that as me taking advantage of the situation, even though it's not my fault that he approached me so late. (The rumor mill can always turn white into black.) The best solution, in my opinion, is to successfully persuade him to approach me early.<issue_comment>username_1: Channeling JeffE, just ask him directly, as if he were human.
>
> I was glad to be able to help with the grant proposal. But if something like this comes up again in the future, would it be possible for you to give me a few weeks of advance notice? That will help me arrange my schedule to make space for the work and avoid conflicts with my own teaching / research / dissertation / etc.
>
>
>
However, my guess is that prior to asking you, he thought that he could handle it all by himself and wouldn't need any help from you. He probably found at the last minute that he couldn't, and had to scramble to look for help from anyone who could give it. So if this is how he tends to operate, such a request may not help too much. But at least it will be a nudge in the right direction.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> "I like helping you, but I've got a very busy schedule. It is hard for me to meet the time demands of a grant proposal on such short notice. If I get these last minute requests, I might not be able to make time to help you in the future. If you give me more warning, say a month or so, scheduling shouldn't be an issue."
>
>
>
1) Doesn't blame the professor
2) Makes it clear that only the timing is an issue
3) Puts the problem on you so it doesn't seem like you're blaming him
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/23
| 422
| 1,880
|
<issue_start>username_0: I interviewed for an advertised PhD and got an email thanking me for interviewing but advising that I wasn't successful. They encouraged me to apply for PhDs at other colleges and their college. I have actually already applied to another advertised PhD with the same supervisor (who knows I have applied), but don't know whether they just didn't like me as a candidate or did like me but had another better candidate. If the former, I won't be considered for PhD2 but if the latter I may be.
This was my first PhD interview and I want some feedback, whether it is about my performance at interview (too nervous, talked too much), or other factors affecting my rejection (lack of research experience, average scores in a particular module that required high scores).
How do I politely request this feedback?<issue_comment>username_1: This is the kind of conversation that is important to have for your professional growth, but also difficult to have. This is not something that will be done "on-the-record," for obvious reasons, and the answer may be as simple as "there was another candidate who was more highly qualified." (This is very often the case!)
But if you'd like to ask more details about the interview, email the contact person for the position, and ask if you can talk by phone about how the interview went, and if they can offer you any constructive feedback about how to improve your application for future openings.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is appropriate for the panel to give a feedback after your interview. therefore, it is sensible to ask for a feedback. I also get rejected for my first PhD interview too, even though I received my interview feedback, I also has the feeling the potential supervisor doesn't like me much as she looked quite stern throughout the whole interview compared to other member.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/04/23
| 585
| 2,583
|
<issue_start>username_0: Our manuscript, for which I am the first co-author, got accepted in a journal. However, upon careful review of our manuscript, I noticed that there are errors in one table. The percentages were calculated as: % = (total number of positive samples/total number of samples analyzed) x 100. The value for the total number of samples analyzed was wrong, so we reported the wrong percentages.
I tried to calculate the correct percentages, but they are very much in line with the erroneous percentages we initially reported and they will NOT affect the conclusions in our manuscript.
Does this error warrant a corrigendum? Or should I wait for someone to notice our error and send a letter to the editor?<issue_comment>username_1: Whether or not a corrigendum is issued is usually decided by the editor(s). You should talk about this matter with your coauthor(s) to make sure everyone is on the same page. If they agree an error has been made, you can contact the editor and detail the nature of the error, it's impact on the results or lack thereof, and provide the corrections. If the error significantly altered the results and conclusions of the paper you'd be more in the territory of a retraction, but if as you say the paper remains essentially intact then this shouldn't be a worry.
If the editor rejects the need for a corrigendum, there's not much you can do about that, but you could include a page on your professional site detailing the corrections you felt necessary, or possibly even upload to the arxiv if appropriate.
Making sure coauthors know what you're doing here is important. They will be understandably upset if they are caught unawares by this. Things get complicated if your coauthor(s) disagree with your assessment, however, or otherwise don't want you to pursue the matter. That's a different sort of minefield needing a different question and answer. The short of the matter usually ends up being "is this a hill you're willing to die on or not?"
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You certainly shouldn't "wait for someone to notice our error". The danger of uncorrected errors is precisely the fact that people might rely on them *without noticing that they are errors*. Personally, I would think that reporting wrong numbers in a table requires a corrigendum, even if the correct numbers are close and do not affect the conclusions. I would suggest contacting the journal to arrange a corrigendum, or if this is unavailable you could write a letter to the editor with the corrections yourself.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/04/23
| 3,143
| 13,432
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a computer science student who doesn't find lectures useful. I think self-studying is more useful and I should quit my degree in favour of a distant-learning degree. I've tried to convince my parents that lectures are useless for me and that I'd be better served on a distant-learning degree, but they disagree. They think all students feel the same way as me. Do all computer science students really feel this way?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm a computer science student as well, and I find lectures to be useful for getting a general understanding / "overall feel" of a concept. The prof often poses some question that makes you spend some time thinking about the problem at hand. I also feel that lectures are a good way to *introduce* a new topic to students, because learning some completely new topic from a textbook can be difficult.
However, in order to learn specific syntax and understand the deeper details, I don't find lectures to be that useful (since you need time to slowly learn complicated material). Rather, notes and code samples that my profs post online are much more useful, as I can methodically read them over and then practice writing code myself.
You should remember that a degree isn't all about just learning *how* to do something... rather, it also involves getting a higher understanding of a topic. To this end, attending lectures and trying to learn from the prof's experience can be rewarding. Besides, a degree from a more established institution will probably give better job prospects than a degree from an online university.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I would not quit for a distant-learning degree. In most universities, attending the lectures is optional. So you could basically choose how often you want to go there, but this differs from place to place. In germany, if you are doing a "distand-learning degree" you also have to go there to write your exams, keep that in mind.
I studied CS and got my masters in 2015. I could choose topics which are very interesting to me and the lectures where a good starting point to the topics. People are actually making a decent amount of effort how to present you a certain topic. You should also not underestimate what service you enjoy as a student: you can ask professors during lectures, go to the office hours etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: No, not all students feel that way. For me, attending lectures was by far the easiest way to learn something.
As for other people's feelings, an instructive case study was a class from my third year: the lecturer was pretty terrible, and spent the lecture reading out loud from the lecture notes that we had been given at the beginning of the year. He didn't even bother changing the format, just projected the A4 pages and scrolled through them - and it was pretty clear that the text had been last updated sometime in 1995. (Memorable quotes include "Nowadays, computers have multiple megabytes of RAM.") Fairly quickly, attendance to this class decreased until only 3-5 hardy souls remained. (Despite my preference for lectures, I was not among them.)
Given that this did *not* happen to any other class I attended during, before, or after this semester, I can only assume that most of the time, most people felt they derived at least some benefit from attending the lectures. (But there are always one or two who feel like you do and only bother showing up for exams - either they learn just fine on their own and graduate that way, or they overestimate themselves and fail out.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Do all computer science students really feel this way?
>
>
>
I don't think that the answer of "*do all x students really feel this way*" would be yes. It's always a no. It's a feeling and each one of the students will have his own feeling/opinion.
I've been a CS student myself few years ago, and I actually found it really interesting to have lectures from time to time.
In my opinion, the difference between reading a book to learn and hearing a lecture is the attention you may give for particular section of the book where **you** think you need to give it more than the others, while being in a lecture will let the proffessor attire you to the most important sections.
Should you drop the lectures and be served by distant-learning degree? To me, it's a no again. Having the tutor in front of you giving a lecture and you have the ability to contact him at any time you need (of course not after midnight) is much better than not being able to interact with your professor on daily basis or as much as you do.
At the end, and just as an advice, what I really think is that in this major you will need everything you can to actually improve. Keep going to lectures and alongside lectures make sure to study your book carefully. Practice all what you can and search for all the problems that you might encounter and try to solve them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: This is not just a problem for CS majors; it's an issue in literally every major. It's obviously not true that literally *all* students in any major will feel that way, but it is common.
The reason is that different people have different learning styles, and different lecturers have different lecture styles. For example, I majored (quite successfully) in math and physics at a top-10 university but attended almost no lectures after the first one or two in each course, and literally no office hours ever.\* The only exceptions were lectures by two professors who routinely gave such brilliant lectures that even I found them interesting and informative. Otherwise, I learned almost entirely on my own by reading books (often not the assigned books), studying for the exams, and sometimes even from doing homework.
Many of my classmates were exactly the opposite; they would learn nothing from books, and would only learn during lectures and office hours. Even when doing homework, they mostly needed to work through problems with other people, which was utterly foreign to me. But they were just as successful as I was in college — and frankly many of them have been more successful since then in large part due to their natural social tendencies, which are beneficial in every profession, including such stereotypical lone-wolf fields as theoretical physics.
The point is: we just had different learning styles. There's nothing wrong with that, and it's good that our university allowed for these different styles. I assume yours is similar: you might be required to *attend* lectures, but you're not required to learn from them and only them. And even if you are required to attend, is it really that bad? Can't you sit in the back and read the book or something? (I know that's how I made it through high school.) You should also recognize that it gets better: As you move to higher-level courses, you are less likely to be required to attend, and the lectures typically become more interesting and useful anyway. That's where I found my two brilliant lecturers, for example.
As for whether or not you should switch to a distance-learning option, I'm skeptical. Without knowing more about your situation, your goals, and the type of places you're considering switching from and to, no one here can tell you what your best option is. For example, if you're thinking of switching from Berkeley to the University of Phoenix, and want to go into academia, I would say that is nearly impossible. If you're switching from NoOneEverHeardOfUsU to UF Online, and want a corporate job, then that's entirely reasonable.
Try thinking of this from a problem-solving perspective. You have (or should have) certain goals like
* Enjoying your life
* Enjoying your major
* Learning the material
* Growing as a person
* Coming out of it without crushing debt
* Using your degree afterwards
The problem is achieving these goals with the tools at your disposal — which *might* include changing your situation. Is your current situation making any of them impossible? Could you really achieve *all* of these goals any better by switching to distance-learning? Think especially about the future. I remember very well the constant urgency of youth, but I also know that I shot my future self in the foot many times because of my impetuousness. Parental advice should always be taken with a grain of salt, especially since so many paradigms have changed since they were in college (and *especially* in tech-related fields), but remember that they are looking out for you and that they have a more objective and long-term perspective.
---
\* Looking back I really regret this, especially for subjects that were outside of my major in which I had the most to learn. I chose to spend much of my time on — let's just say — other pursuits, and didn't fully engage intellectually with the extraordinary minds I was paying so much to be around. I could have cut down on the playtime, while having
approximately as much fun, and also learning much more.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Lectures (or reading the text, if you're not an aural learner) are good for learning the theory of Computer Science, which is very important. Exercises and problem statements are great for learning the execution side of it. You need a firm handle on both to be a truly good engineer, analyst, etc.
Now, if you're in like... CSC101 and you're bored listening to the professor explain how printf works... yeah, that lecture/class is probably better spent just doing exercises. If you're taking Discrete Math or Data Structures and Algorithms then you need to sit down and learn the theory behind it. For a lot of people, lectures are a good way to have this information presented to you. For other people, you can learn from a book just as well.
Also, for me, I've found that the structure of the course is just as important as the course itself. If I self-study I tend to bounce all over the place and get bored with a topic and leave it half done. If I have a course laying out the requirements for me and grading me on my progress, I take it way more seriously and focus way better. Just another angle to keep in mind.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: This is probably quite common for CS students, or at least it was the case for me. CS still has a reputation for being an academic or theoretic subject when a large chunk of the skills are in the practical application of your computing/programming knowledge.
Lectures aren't suited for learning practical skills like programming and in my opinion the way CS is currently taught in universities is outdated and really doesn't teach the knowledge required for most jobs in the field. The majority of useful learning you will do will be in your own time solving computing problems through *doing* rather than *studying*.
I think you have to spend the time at college learning in a way that suits you to get the most out of the course, even if it's not the 'recommended' way.
---
I myself was a Comp Sci student who hated the way my college course was taught and felt I was getting nothing out of it. Six months in I took the plunge to drop out and try to get into the industry on a apprenticeship scheme. Now almost 2 years later I am a confident Junior Developer on a decent salary with good future prospects.
The above paragraph is not there to influence your opinion but rather to say it is possible to get into work without a degree and still have a great career to look forward to, **if** you have an alternative plan of action and it's the right choice for you.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: The answer to the explicit question is, obviously, no. It is not the case that all CS students find lectures boring.
The implicit question is more interesting: it seems that you're asking whether your feeling of boredom in lectures is in some way justified or justifiable. I would say, no, in general it is not. A course is not just a way to cram some set of facts into your head, it's a way to get you accustomed to a certain set of tools for reasoning about problems in a certain domain. Lectures serve a couple of purposes in this regard: they are a device for exposing you to the sort of reasoning you need in the subject matter, they are an opportunity for you to rehearse this sort of reasoning, and they're a way for you to test your reasoning against the professor's and your classmates'. If you're not actively engaged in the lecture, following the line of thought that the prof is developing, asking questions where appropriate, then you're not getting much out of the course. Anyone can read a book and pass a test. The point of taking a college-level course is to learn the subject.
If you have one professor whose lectures bore you, the problem may be with their presentation of the material. Talk to your students and other profs in the department to find out what you may be missing, or talk to that professor. If you feel that all of your lectures are boring, the problem is probably with you, and until you change something you'll be wasting your time in that course.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: CS Student. I dislike lectures, I don't go to lectures. I would probably do better if I did go, but I don't enjoy them. However there's no universal rule as to whether lectures are good or bad for any one person, and there's no universal dislike.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/04/23
| 1,028
| 4,169
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my supervisors told me that the language should not be varied, but instead we should use the same technical words (not synonyms) again and again. Is that really true?
**PRE- & POST-EDITED SUBQUESTION (related to accepted answer):**
How should paragraphs and sentences be formatted/structured in technical academic writing such as a master thesis (based on your personal experience/recommendations)?<issue_comment>username_1: As much as possible, you should be consistent in using technical terminology in your field. Usually, specific terms have precise meanings, so substitutions have the effect of changing the significance of what you mean. For instance, a "matrix" and a "tensor" are not interchangeable. Similarly, in history, a "republic" and a "democracy" are not technically the same.
It is understood that repetition of technical terms may be needed. You use the rest of your writing to make your narrative interesting.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I wrote an answer for the question pre-edit, addressing more than just the question of synonyms. Hopefully it can be of wider use, as it provides references to other resources, and an overall principle that helps answer many questions about writing. Here it goes.
I once took a course in technical communication, which was largely based on an excellent textbook by <NAME> called [Technical Communication: A reader-centered approach](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/113330981X). It is perhaps a bit more targeted to technical communication in the private sector than academia, but it has many helpful hints, examples, and rules of thumb. However, the main principle Anderson repeatedly states is reflected already in the title: *focus on the audience*. Before writing a document or preparing a talk, think through what audience you're targeting, and then adapt the order things are presented in, terminology, notation, depth of the introduction etc. based on that.
This also applies on the level of paragraphs. If sentences are put in a logical order, the text flows better and makes more sense. Similar considerations apply also on the microlevel - e.g. using various synonyms for technical terms is likely to confuse the reader more than it helps, so it should be avoided, especially if different synonyms can mean other things in adjacent fields. Also avoid phonetically confusing notation, such as using 'new' as a subscript. Very long sentences can make the text harder to understand, so the author should ideally try to rework them. Other times they are the clearest way of expressing a given idea you can come up with, which is also fine. Now, it is hard to find the perfect balance the first time around, which is where editing comes in. Edit both for correctness, and to iteratively make the text more readable. (If you know programming, this process is a bit like refactoring code.) If possible get feedback from others (maybe you don't know your audience as well as you think!), and edit accordingly.
Since you've been active on the physics stack, I would also like to point you towards <NAME>'s writings on the art of writing. I first read them when I was writing my own masters thesis, and had several 'aha!' moments, including about how to think about equations grammatically. They are also quite enjoyable to read, so I do like sharing them.
* [What's Wrong with this Prose?](https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.2810998) ([non-paywall version](http://qoptics.byu.edu/Physics416/Mermin.pdf))
* [What's Wrong with these Equations?](https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.2811173) ([non-paywall version](http://www.pamitc.org/documents/mermin.pdf))
* [Writing Physics](http://www.lassp.cornell.edu/mermin/KnightLecture.html)
For mathematical writing you'll find further references in [Good books/resource on mathematical writing](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60372/good-books-resource-on-mathematical-writing). Also see [How to improve technical writing](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/731/how-to-improve-technical-writing) and links therein.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/04/23
| 1,322
| 5,292
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have heard that universities tend not to hire people who earned their PhD there for professorships (tenured or not). (I've read this question, but it's about postdocs: [Is it normal that research institutes do not hire their own PhDs for postdoc positions?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/49194/is-it-normal-that-research-institutes-do-not-hire-their-own-phds-for-postdoc-pos))
If one graduated from a university, and then did a few turns as a postdoc or non-tenured professor, would a university/department still be disinclined to hire them 10 years post-graduation?
I know there's a lot of factors that go into hiring professors, as well as many reasons to go to different universities/institutes (addressed in the linked question), so I'm mostly curious about this specific truism I've heard.
Although I live in the U.S., I'm curious about North American and European practices (so as not to invalidate answers already given).<issue_comment>username_1: At my university - or at least in my department - the norm seems to be that they prefer to hire externally for tenure-track jobs (speaking from experience serving on a search committee for a tenure-track position). The line of reasoning is, "if we're the ones who taught/mentored/molded Candidate X, then they're not bringing in anything new in terms of scholarship."
This is less applicable to non-tenure track jobs, as those faculty members are usually teaching lower level classes and don't have any research obligations. There are several PhD faculty members in my department that were hired internally who work as lecturers.
Anecdotal, of course, but I've studied at/worked at a few universities over the years, and this is the pattern I've tended to see. Tenure-track: external. Non-tenure-track: internal OK.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As there is no "US" tag, the German universities have a general and quite strictly enforced policy that no one may be "simply" given a professorship at the same university where they were postdocs. No *[Hausberufung](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hausberufung)*.
The rule is about "promoting" people to professors internally. If you were somewhere else, it's not a problem. If you have a position offer from somewhere else it should not be a problem.
The basic idea is to "validate" people in tenure positions from outside and to prevent folks "growing into" a tenured position from a life-long career at the same place.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: 2nd hand knowledge here, take with a grain of salt:
In the university I'm familiar with, a PhD who wants a career in the same university is required to do several post-docs abroad.
This makes following career paths possible:
* PhD at A, post-doc at A, career at B
* PhD at A, post-doc at B, career at A
* [and more complex]
This seems like a compromise between your original statement, your post-doc link and appointments from within the organisation which could lead to cronyism.
I believe there's deeper rationale at work as well, scientists' responsibility is not only research but also spreading the knowledge and methods. An arrangement like this ensures that both A's progress is shared with B, as well as B's progress is brought into A.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I have heard the same thing by way of rumour (never confirmed by any official policy) in my own *alma mater* in Australia. My understanding is that this aversion comes from a concern that hiring one's own PhD graduates does not yield any outside academic standard bearing on the process. This gives rise to a danger that a university could lose its academic standards over time by failing to test its hires against the standards of other institutions. I would imagine that this concern is obviated if the person holds a position at another university in between their PhD graduation and their later application to the same institution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Adding my two cents worth: in my English university - internal hires are the exception rather than the norms. That said, several that have been shortlisted or hired have had some experience teaching and clocking up publications with a stint elsewhere. So to this question: *If one graduated from a university, and then did a few turns as a postdoc or non-tenured professor, would a university/department still be disinclined to hire them 10 years post-graduation?*
Yes, as they are judged, pari pasu, with other worthy candidates.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm currently working at a Russell Group university in the UK, which apparently goes against this general trend. I've heard that internal candidates are actually preferred. The reasoning is that hiring an internal candidate minimizes the risk, particularly the risk of personality or culture mismatch. There are plenty examples of former PhD students (or even former students since the undergraduate level) who are now Lecturers, Readers, or Professors.
While this preference itself might be a department-specific thing, it's certain that there are no university-wide policies against it. Also, to my knowledge, this is definitely not typical in Europe (source: previous experience in the Swedish academic system).
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/04/24
| 659
| 2,676
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I know a faculty member is up for tenure this year, is it appropriate to ask them for news about the tenure decision? If yes, are there norms around how to ask?
I'm a grad student and still figuring out professional norms. That being said, I hope this question can be a place to discuss the issue more generally than just grad student-faculty relations.<issue_comment>username_1: Getting tenure is a major life event for faculty. So the same rules apply that also apply for questions that revolve around "how is your unborn child doing", "how is your parents' health", "has your spouse recovered from that recent illness": these are kind questions to ask a human, and if the answer is positive, you get all of the credit. But if the answer is negative (tenure denied, parent died, child is born with a disability), it puts a rather serious damper on a conversation.
There is no good way to describe whether the question is appropriate. In the end, these are *personal* questions that relate to family and, in this case, career aspirations. Whether or not you are in a position to ask the question depends on how well you know the person, and whether you have a relationship good enough to have conversations about awkward and difficult topics.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> If I know a faculty member is up for tenure this year, is it appropriate to ask them for news about the tenure decision?
>
>
>
**No**.
It’s completely understandable that you are curious and want to know, and I’m pretty sure your desire to ask is motivated by noble feelings of sympathy and care for a fellow human being you interact with professionally. At the same time, this is a question that for many academics is very fraught and anxiety-producing. We are talking about a single binary bit into which 7-8 years of hard work and emotional self-investment are being channeled. A negative outcome can very possibly have career- and ego-crushing consequences for the person in question. Do you start to see why the value of that bit might be something that some people (especially people who are insecure and/or who have less than full confidence about the outcome) do not wish to discuss or be asked about? As Wolfgang said in his answer, you might get lucky and the discussion will go well, but it’s also possible that it will go disastrously wrong, or, more likely, it will just be a tense and awkward moment.
To summarize: It’s none of your business. Don’t discuss it unless: 1. the faculty member brings it up first, or 2. you heard from a *reliable* source that the person got tenure and wish to congratulate them.
Upvotes: 2
|