date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2018/06/06
| 434
| 1,971
|
<issue_start>username_0: What I have understood till date is that abstract summarizes the work done in the research article (Journal + Conference), and so does the conclusion section.
However, the conclusion section not only summarizes the work (like abstract) but also give a hint of what results were produced?
Can someone best explain what to (and what not to) include in Abstract section? Similarly in the conclusion section<issue_comment>username_1: As for the abstract, it could include the following;
* Minor background motivation
* Short brief into existing limitation and problem
* The objective of the paper
* What questions have you answered
* Approach
* Most significant result(s)
* Limitation.
Some of the above could be left out (such as background etc). However, your abstract should give a beautiful snap-shot of your entire work
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: What exactly goes into the abstract depends on your field / research problem. It is helpful to remember when the abstract/conclusion is read and what purpose it should fulfill.
The abstract is normally read before the actual paper and the reader needs to decide whether or not the paper is interesting to them and if it worth to invest the time reading it. Therefore, it should include
* the problem that was tackled (maybe with a motivation for that problem)
* the methods used
* what makes the paper stand out from similar work
* what kind of results you got
The conclusion is read in the end and should sum up what you want the reader to remember about your work. A motivation is probably not necessary because they took the time to read (most of) your work so it is unlikely they were not interested. The content is similar to the abstract but more focused on the results.
* the problem that was solved
* the methods used
* what makes the paper stand out from similar work
* a more in-depth description of the results
* limitations
* future work
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/06
| 1,768
| 7,825
|
<issue_start>username_0: So the school that I got into for m PhD program offers a simple admission deferral process that I'd like to apply for, for personal reasons (I don't want to use this post to discuss whether or not I *should* defer; assume that the personal reasons are serious enough, because they are). This could defer my admission one year, to fall 2019.
My question is, would it be very unprofessional/unethical to also apply to other schools during my deferral period? It seems silly to throw away my offer, since I would like to take it, but I would also like to see where else I may be able to get in. Would it be better to simply rescind my acceptance, rather than having the department believe that I am certain on my intentions to enroll in a year?
**Edit to clarify:** The decision to defer *is* due to the personal reasons that I mentioned above, and not because I take issue with the program to which I've been admitted. If not for the personal reasons, I would go to school now. But, if I'm going to be deferring at all anyway, it would seem imprudent to not at least try my hand and open up the future by applying elsewhere. Telling the department about the personal issues and leaving out the previous sentence, though, does seem wrong.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it is at minimum rude, and probably unethical.
In deferring, you have still accepted a position. If you use the remaining time to do things other than what you said you were going to do, you are taking advantage of the generosity of the offered deferral (which, I would add, is not a guarantee everywhere - they are generous to offer it).
I can see a couple possible exceptions:
1. If the reason for applying to another school is also related to a serious personal issue (for example: to be near an ill family member, to be near an institution responsible for your own care, because a certain climate is important to your health, for immigration/travel reasons).
2. If there is no offer of funding/support from the school, then in my opinion you are less beholden to them, and they are less impacted by if you are to later withdraw your acceptance. In this case you should almost certainly pursue other offers.
3. If the deferral process really is that simple, where the reason you give doesn't really matter: they are just allowing you to take a year for any reason. I think this sort of thing is more common in undergraduate rather than graduate admissions (especially for a PhD), though I don't have enough personal experience to say. I would still suggest talking to someone at the school before deciding this is the case.
I would also add that I think you could be vastly overestimating the importance of attending a particular school and paying far too much attention to ranking. While I was writing this answer, @JonCuster posted what I think is a very important comment to consider, coming from the perspective of someone who has spent a lot of time here at Academia.SE:
>
> ..."I see too many questions here about changing to get into a ‘better’ school, with little thought given to what makes it ‘better’ - some random ranking does not make it better. You appear to have thought through it a bit more, so keep thinking!"
>
>
>
If you do want to look at other options because you aren't certain about attending this school, I would suggest discussing this with them rather than rescinding your acceptance outright. If I were them, however, I would have much preferred to admit a student this year that actually wants to go to this school rather than waiting a year to take someone who doesn't.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the question is really when do you become committed to a graduate school. Once you understand that, then you can understand how a deferral fits into that picture. Given you mentioned GREs, I am going to assume US based graduate schools.
Generally, no one considers a student as being committed to a graduate school at the time of application. We expect students to apply to lots of schools and compare offers and choose whatever is best for them (including possibly not going to graduate school). This is the driving force behind wait lists.
Once you accept an offer people generally think of you as being committed. That said, some students accept an offer and do not remove themselves from all wait lists and if they get a better offer, break the commitment to the first school. Faculty do not like this, but we tend to have short memories and are fairly forgiving of minor slights.
Once you start attending graduate school you are committed. Transfers once you are a student are rare and tend to piss faculty off unless there is a good reason for it (e.g., your advisor moved, they canceled your specialization, you are being harassed by a faculty member or student, someone dies). While we are forgetful and forgiving, we can also be vengeful.
As a deferred student, you are somewhere between having accepted the offer and having started school. No one has invested time in you, so it is not a huge deal if you back out. That said, the earlier you back out the better. I would no try to break the offer after next years decision deadline. In other words, if you don't get accepted someplace right off the bat, you cannot count on the wait list.
In my opinion, breaking the commitment prior to admissions decisions being sent out is not a huge deal. Breaking the commitment after admissions decisions are sent out, but before wait lists are being used is pushing the envelop of what I think is acceptable. Breaking the commitment after the decision deadline is too late.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The main reason why people say exploring other options is rude or unethical is that **you are wasting a precious spot that could have been offered to someone else**. However, this assumption is quite questionable for a few reasons:
1. If this assumption alone makes such exploration unethical, then transferring to a more suitable program or dropping out to explore other career options should be considered unethical as well (but they are not). In fact, these are probably more "unethical" in the sense that you have already taken up resources from the school / program. The dropout rate is >=20% even for top programs (statistic taken from a top 10 CS PhD program).
2. As username_2 pointed out, breaking the offer before next year's decision deadline would open up the spot for someone else - this is the entire point of the waitlist. Or, who knows, maybe the program have already accepted someone else this year, after knowing your decision to defer.
3. The Council of Graduate Schools April 15 agreement clearly states that "Starting in Fall 2020, applicants are no longer required to obtain a formal release from the program whose offer they accepted, either before or after the April 15 deadline." If the school you are deferring is a member institution, then they would abide by this, since deferral is a form of acceptance.
Of course, it is definitely much easier for the school / program if all deferees actually attend. However, I wonder whether such administrative convenience is all we should take into account, especially when school choice has a much bigger impact on the student compared to the program itself.
Also, from a practical stand point, schools don't systematically share information on applicants (it's a privacy thing!), so such exploration should be fine, given that you are considerate enough to actually break the old offer before next years decision deadline.
Finally, a student is allowed to drop out any time from their PhD program, including during the deferral period, for any reason. Of course, the student should be considerate with his/her actions, but most issues have nothing to do with ethics.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/06
| 485
| 2,072
|
<issue_start>username_0: Long story short, I could never attend higher education, and now, later in life, I would love to be with people 100x smarter than me that take a scientific approach to discussions. Professors seem like good candidates. My girlfriend recently finished her PhD(albeit in a different field than I'm interested in) and interacting with her professors and advisors felt like such a stimulating environment. I would absolutely love to find myself in such an environment.
My question is: I want to contact professors, perhaps attend lectures, and I'd REALLY like to eventually try and develop some sort of mentorship, but I'm completely outside academia. Is this absolutely impossible? Studying is a bit complicated, as my level of the local language is A2, and I need B2 to enrol in a bachelor's, so I'd only be able to attend lectures from Master's level and upwards, which are taught in English.
The topics are psychology/political science/philosophy/neuroscience.
Any tips?<issue_comment>username_1: This might mean different things at different schools. The department might not have a lot of time to give you but there's nothing wrong with making an appointment to ask some questions. You can pitch yourself as a potential student but you can also position yourself as wanting to volunteer some time...or both! The more you're around -- and don't be a pest! -- the more you're on their mind. If you can sit in on a few classes or open lectures (or even give one yourself!) you can get a taste of what it might be like to be a student. I can't see any school having a problem with that, but if the one you have in mind does consider looking around for alternatives.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You could try to select a precise topic, collect related scientific articles on Google Scholar from universities located in the country or city you live in, see if their authors have social media accounts (Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn), add, follow or connect (to) them, read the articles and start asking questions to the authors.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/06
| 1,096
| 4,401
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have kind of an interesting scenario that I would like to get advice on. I apologize if this is a bit lengthy, but I want to get all the facts out there.
A bit about me first: I have just finished my first year of grad school in an applied math program at a top 40 program in the US. I have undergraduate degrees in both pure and applied math, so I really have a love for both topics, although I lean more towards applied.
I have spent about 9 months doing some investigatory research with a distinguished professor at my school. Let's call him Dr. G. I have really enjoyed this research and I feel like it is a no-brainer to pick Dr. G as an adviser. He is very active in research, he has plenty of grant money, etc. He is also one of the top people in the world on the work that he does. On top of that, he is very supportive, great to work with, and willing to be my adviser.
So I thought I had definitely found my advisor.
Here is where my doubt comes in. There is another professor, Dr. T, who recently spent 3 hours helping me with preparing for my qualifying exams (this was way above and beyond what I thought he would do). I had so much fun talking about the math with Dr. T. He was so patient and helpful. We talked briefly about my research with Dr. G as well. He told me that sometimes people struggle with working with Dr. G because Dr. G is so busy traveling and such. This kind of made me doubt my decision a little. Dr. G is very busy, but we meet almost weekly, although not for very long. Dr. G has also told me that he is a very hands off adviser.... and I think a more hands on adviser might be better for me.
With all this said, I was considering doing a reading course with Dr. T **IF** he was interested in having me as a student. I don't currently know if he is accepting students or not. My thought was that if Dr. T was willing to spend 3 hours with me working out problems together, that he might be much more involved in helping me when I am working on a thesis than Dr. G could be.
I don't know if I have a misconception on this or not, but those 3 hours that I spent with Dr. T talking about the math problems was what I really pictured an advisor doing for me. Maybe not 3 hours worth, but enough time to really talk and ponder the problem at hand. Maybe someone could comment on the truth of this idea for me... **Is it true that some advisers actively work on the problem with you, or do they just check in with you on the work that you have done?**
A couple further notes: Dr. G has had about 5 students graduate and Dr. T has had 2 (only 1 recently). I also don't know about the level of research that Dr. T is doing; however, the quantity is definitely much less than Dr. G.
I would really welcome any advice or comments you may have. \*My big question is if I should even ask Dr. T if he is interested in having students or not (I don't think he has any right now). I just feel like that although Dr. T might not be as flashy as an advisor as Dr. G, Dr. T may be way more involved and helpful. **So I am trying to figure out if working with Dr. T is worth looking into, or if I would be unwise to not work with Dr. G.**
Thanks for your time.<issue_comment>username_1: You want the advisor who best fits your needs as a student. This is some combination of research area, advising style, career connections, funding, and interpersonal chemistry, but--and this is the big but--only you are in a position to know exactly what that combination is.
From your description it sounds like T is the frontrunner, but a few hours prepping for quals isn't that much data. Ask T if he is accepting students (or find this out from his current students) and do a reading course to see how it goes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: What are your plans for the future? Are you planning for tenure? Or are you relaxed and think whatever, IT or consulting or whatever I can get later is fine?
If you worry about tenure, then look how many of the former students of Dr T and Dr G are either on tenure track or received tenure already and at what university.
Of course you want to pick the advisor with which you can be most productive, but if staying in academia is really important to you, then placing ones former students at prestigious places is a quality in an advisor which is often independent to all other qualities.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/07
| 1,225
| 4,602
|
<issue_start>username_0: Now, say authors A and B are writing their second paper. Which is more appropriate, or which sounds better. Referring to their previous work as "we researched/we surveyed" or "the authors researched/surveyed". This warrants a question because, in the first case, it may sound like they are "broadcasting" their presence, while in the second case, it seems like they are "hiding" their identity.
Although, the following questions [[1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97768/how-to-avoid-using-i-in-a-research-paper-in-case-of-referring-to-my-previous-w)](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97768/how-to-avoid-using-i-in-a-research-paper-in-case-of-referring-to-my-previous-w) (which applies for a single author case) and [[2](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5345/referring-to-previous-work-by-the-authors)](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5345/referring-to-previous-work-by-the-authors) (which refers to when there may be many authors but some of them may not share co-authorship in a new publication) are similar, they are quite different from what is intended here. Also question [3](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18707/we-when-i-mean-i-or-should-i-say-the-author) is quite close, but I guess the question applies for use in a thesis.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think it makes much of a difference; both are used widely. Some people like to write their names as well, eg. <NAME> may write, 'Doe et al [22] demonstrated...'.
The last one is important if you're submitting to a double-blind review. Between the first two, it depends on how much attention you want to draw to the previous work- it could be of prime significance, or it may be an offhand, supporting reference. In the first case, you may like to use 'we' to establish your group as an important contributor in the field. Nothing hard and fast, it's quite subjective and a matter of style- most people would consider 'the authors demonstrated' to be a more formal expression.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A problem with "the authors" is that if there is a reference in the preceding sentence, "the authors" is ambiguous. On the other hand, the use of "we" should be avoided (not only because more neutral 3rd person is preferred, but also because "we" is ambiguous as such - example a paper written by an R&D group in a company, is "we" the authors, the R&D group, the R&D Departmnent, or the company?). What they taught me is to write "The Authors" if you refer to yourselves.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **TLDR: Cite is as any other work not done by the authors.**
One advice I was given (I think specifically aimed at double-blind reviews) was to anonymise the citation. The point is that one should focus on the science: this new paper X is an improvement, an extension, or builds upon, an older paper Y. The primary point of references (in my opinion) is *for the reader to be able to track the science* (not the authors). So, I would suggest the following:
>
> This work builds upon a study surveying the most common citation practices in academic literature [1].
>
>
>
If you want to mention the author's names, that can also be done in this neutral style:
>
> This work builds upon a study by Abdulhameed et al. [1] surveying the most common citation practices in academic literature.
>
>
>
Both of these styles lend themselves to a double-blind review: upon submission, if author names are anonymised (e.g. removed from title page), nothing in either of the above examples screams *"We are the authors of [1]!"* but still allows the reader or the reviewer to *follow the science*.
While I agree with you that drawing attention to the fact that the work you are building upon was in fact authored by the same researchers comes across as "broadcasting" (and I consider it bad taste personally), I have seen such a citation style as well, and not infrequently, e.g.:
>
> This work builds upon our previous work *(the previous work by the authors / the previous work from this research group / previous results from our project X)* [1], which surveys the most common citation practices in academic literature.
>
>
>
I **would not** recommend using the last citation style, since, as mentioned, I consider it bad taste, but additionally also since *I have in the past seen official style recommendations and guidelines arguing in favour of the first two approaches and discouraging the last approach* (from conferences and journals with a double-blind review practice).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/07
| 859
| 3,275
|
<issue_start>username_0: My questions regards the format of citation.
For the context: I am a student, presenting my work (with slides) and referring to the publications in which I am co-author (never in the first three authors).
It would be nice for my name to explicitely appear, as I also refer to other publications in which I did not take part.However I do not want to list all the authors (more than 10 for some papers).
Should I use (recommendeed by my advisor):
>
> A.Smith, **M.Myself** *et al*. "Marvelous publication"
>
>
>
Or
>
> A.Smith *et al*. (including **M.Myself**), "Marvelous publication"
>
>
>
My concern is not to appear as being the second author, which would feel like a lie, while keeping a compact formatting.
Is there a common way of doing this ?
Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: I was recently facing the same struggle. For the purpose of a resume, I decided to write the full list of authors.
A presentation is a bit different matter: it does not give you so much space for text, but you can *say* a lot more. In this case, I would refer to the papers on the slides the usual way:
>
> First Author *et al.*, 2015: Marvelous publication,
>
>
>
potentially **mentioning in the spoken narrative that you are one of the co-authors** (since your question gives a hint that this is a part of the message you want to deliver), and possibly including a slide with the full reference list to the end of the presentation (which you won't use during the actual talk but is handy for anyone looking at the slides later).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: For a presentation I would use @username_1's answer. Say in the presentation "This work was published in our 2015 paper".
For a resume you've four options as I see it:
* List all the authors (put yourself in bold).
* List the first x authors (where 10 is a common value of x) then put *et al* (several journals/funding bodies use this format). Choose x so your name always appears
* List all the authors up to and including your name, and then put *et al*.
* List just the first author. As the papers will probably appear in a publications section on your resume, its fairly clear that you are going to be an author.
Which ever you choose, it might be worth including a very short sentence that described your role in the work.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Another option is to omit the authors between the first author and your position:
>
> First Author, [...], **Your Name**, *et al.*, 2015: Marvelous publication`
>
>
>
But I would only recommend this in scenarios where it is important to highlight your participation to these publications, e.g. reports for your PhD progress or similar.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I just put 'co-author' of. Sometimes people care about which co-author, such as "Second co-author' of. This is for a non-academic job, and when the employer just wants to know you published. However, if they actually would probably care about the published work, cite it as a reference, just like the answers above.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I sticked to the Smith et al. scheme but used a different text color for papers I co-authored together with an explanatory sentence at the beginning.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/06/07
| 589
| 2,532
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am going to present my research on a conference in the near future. This conference is in the field of engineering and CS. It has several sessions in parallel and a total of more than 100 papers.
When I had a look at the program, I noticed that I (and another person) have been assigned the role of the session chair of the session where I am also presenting.
However, nobody has informed me of this, yet, neither have I been asked if a want to take this over.
I had a look at the other sessions, it's similar there: Two presenters in each session have been selected to be session chairs.
So far, I have never experienced something like that.
All in all I am not complaining at all (to be honest, I am looking forward to taking over this task!), however, I am still a bit surprised.
Is it common in other fields or other conferences that presenters are managing their own sessions and are not asked whether they are willing to do so?
---
UPDATE: I was at the conference and some other chairs and attendees told me that this is indeed common there: They just assign the session chair role to people and sometimes miss to tell them beforehand. Nevertheless, everything went well and as expected this was an interesting experience.<issue_comment>username_1: I can only speak for my field (biology), and I can say that I have seen this happen. Most of the time, I think the session chair were informed of their role before.
It is a small task, but you could enquire if they have specific rules to follow or if someone else will be there as a support (technical support for example).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's pretty common to assign a chair arbitrarily from among the speakers of a session. After all, those are the people who are most likely to want to attend that session anyway. If they assigned someone else, it might prevent that person from attending a different session at the same time, that would interest them more.
It would have been more courteous if they'd asked you privately if you were willing, before putting it in the program. But being chair isn't usually seen as being a big deal, so they may have thought it wasn't worth the bother. Or they may be planning to ask you before the actual conference, but they put some names in the program tentatively, and it was published before they had a chance to contact you.
Of course, if there is some reason why it's not convenient for you to be chair, you can always write to them and decline.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/07
| 437
| 1,865
|
<issue_start>username_0: So in my mathematics master's thesis I am mainly following a certain paper, trying to understand it and present it's results in my own way. Now for a few chapters in my thesis I am basing them off of chapters in the paper and I'm unsure on how and what I need to cite. I generally start of these chapters saying something like *"this chapter looks at ...blah blah blah....following (cite source)"*. Also for remarks and analysis I've taken from the paper I also cite those. But what about Propositions or proofs I've taken from the paper? (Stuff which is not'common knowledge').
As these are generally interspersed throughout the chapter, writing things like *"this result taken from (cite source)...* nearby each of the results seems clumsy and breaks the flow of my writing, so I would prefer not to do something like this if it is necessary to cite each of them.<issue_comment>username_1: As long as you make it clear where your information comes from everything is fine. Just take care not to quote any text literally, except of course equations or important definitions.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Including propositions from elsewhere with just a generic remark at the start of the chapter is risky, and I would strongly advise against it.
In particular when it comes to proofs this makes it very difficult to see what is going on: Are you providing your own proofs for statements deemed to be "obvious" in the paper? Are you expanding a proof from the source? Are you merely paraphrasing?
For propositions, a rather elegant way that does not impact the writing flow would be:
\begin{proposition}[\cite[Proposition XX]{source}]
...
\end{proposition}
For proofs, you can just put a sentence outlining the extent of your contribution at the start, where it also does not break the flow.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/07
| 1,988
| 8,054
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm at a top university in Europe in chemistry. My PhD advisor and I have not gotten along due to problems with funding and management issues, and as a result, I am finishing extremely early. I was going to leave with or without a PhD, but I have passed my defense although the degree is not officially conferred.
The problem is that I can't get any positions or jobs. I've been told that the circumstances of my degree (i.e. duration) are specifically a concern. My resume is good for my age, but not necessarily for recent graduates. I don't have a problem with my references.
I'm at the point where I'm considering asking for a masters degree instead and applying to another top PhD program where I can do it properly. The reason is that I've heard that some schools prohibit doing a second PhD and it would look odd on a resume anyway. Is this a bad idea? The alternative is cutting my losses and finding a job outside of science.<issue_comment>username_1: You are fighting on two fronts: first, in the academia, and second, on the job market.
**About the job market:**
In the eyes of the job market, you are now a beginner on the job market with a chemistry BSc.
First, employers are interested mainly only in the papers what you can show, and about a "real", ready degree.
"I've nearly made a Phd" may be more than nothing, but not too much.
The reason, why have you a hard time now, is that the degree are often an "nothing or everything" game: until you don't have your real Phd in your hands, you have nothing. It is in inherent unfairness or the world, however this world is also on the continuous, massive "assault" of the fake papers, and low-value papers which were produced by zero-to-little work behind, and so on.
But, the most important to know: the main reason of your hard time on the job market is not this. *The real reason is that you are a beginner.* To get employed to your first job is always hard, often very, very hard. I would suggest, to get your first job, you are simply not in the position where you could select between the offers.
There is also the option to switch to IT world. The sad truth is that in most countries, there is far lesser jobs as scientist, as many people get their science degree, particularly if it is not a high-value one. To get a work as a chemist is not easy even with a Phd from chemistry.
In the IT, the situation is significantly different: many people is working in the IT world with no or low-value degrees. Furthermore, the IT is working so that hardcore math and your University doesn't help very much to solve practical problems.
**About the academia:**
As you said, you have no very long-term goals in this world, your original plan was to get the Phd and then work in the industry. You can see your options in the job market now, this is what could determine, what you do in the academia.
Young people typically tend to over-estimate the worth of some "lost" years, in practice, 20 years later (from which you wasted 5...15 on crap jobs), you will see that with different eyes. It depends on your current age and financial options.
**If you have the potential to get to a Phd, do it on all the costs. Years, risks, hard fights, hard work, these all don't matter, you want the Phd and you will get it.** This is the only possible attitude on the way to your so wanted degree.
If you don't, then this is not an option. Most likely you won't be able to work as scientist with a BSc (here are large differences between the countries, so you may have luck).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Congratulations on defending your dissertation. I am guessing that because you progressed so quickly through your PhD you don't have as many papers as you otherwise might. You will need to find an employer for whom the papers you actually have completed are a good fit or who will take a chance on your less-than-lengthy publication record.
I would encourage you to continue applying for post-doc and entry-level positions for those with a PhD. You should not underestimate the importance of your job documents (especially if you have a short publication record) in this process. Have them looked over by others at your university, including any career services offices if you are applying for non-academic positions.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Your question showcases the fact that the goal of enrolling in a PhD program is not really to obtain a PhD. Rather the goals are (i) to receive cutting edge, advanced training that will prepare for you a future academic / professional career and (ii) to use your training, accomplishments and connections to secure the kind of academic / professional job that will kindle that career.
A good operational definition of a reputable PhD program is: when it confers a PhD on a student, it does right by them with regard to (i) and (ii). (Well, that's the ideal anyway; reality can fall far short, and even the best programs can't guarantee students will get a desirable academic job.) Taking things to the extreme, there are "diploma mills" that confer PhDs for a moderate financial outlay; sadly, the people who receive them often are sincerely ignorant of the fact that the advanced degree alone is absolutely worthless.
You went to a top European university, but it sounds like it has treated you more like a diploma mill.
>
> My PhD advisor and I have not gotten along due to problems with funding and management issues, and as a result, I am finishing extremely early.
>
>
>
The way I read this is that rather than working with you as they would with another PhD student, at a certain point your advisor threw up their hands and said "Okay, we'll just give you a PhD now." So you got shortchanged on (i) the opportunity to learn and apply advanced training, with the unsurprising outcome that (ii) you were not able to secure a desirable postdoc. You don't say *how early* you finished, but if the employers are pointing this out to you, it sounds like you finished several years before you should. In plainer terms, it sounds like you actually did 1/2 or 2/3 of a PhD, but for whatever reasons your committee has decided to call it a full PhD. That's not good.
>
> I'm at the point where I'm considering asking for a masters degree instead and applying to another top PhD program where I can do it properly. The reason is that I've heard that some schools prohibit doing a second PhD and it would look odd on a resume anyway. Is this a bad idea?
>
>
>
You ask if you should consider applying to another PhD program. In general I am against multiple PhDs, but in this case *it sounds like you don't actually have a full PhD yet*, despite the fact that you are a strong and eager student. So my advice is **yes**, try to apply for other top PhD programs.
Should you try to accept a lower degree (master's) than the one you were offered (PhD)? That's a hard one. But if you want to enroll in another PhD program: **yes, that sounds reasonable to me**. I am in charge of graduate admissions for my program, and for a student with your profile, I think I would be happier if you had a master's degree than a PhD. If you do take the PhD then you should write an extremely careful personal statement describing the situation, but honestly -- better not to be in that awkward situation, I think.
Finally:
>
> I don't have a problem with my references.
>
>
>
It seems to me that you do. For every graduating student, the most important letter is the one from their thesis advisor. But your thesis advisor washed their hands of you N years early. That's awkward. How do they justify that in their letter? (How can that be justified?!?) Unfortunately I don't see an obvious remedy for this, but you should be aware that this is a probable weak point in your applications for both postdocs and further graduate study.
**Afterthought**: In the US, it might not be such a big deal to switch to a different advisor in the same department. Is that a possibility for you?
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/07
| 1,613
| 6,552
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am new to this forum and need/want advice. I am 46 years old, hold a CPA license and have a Macc from an AACSB accredited university.
My goal is to obtain a doctoral degree and research/teach at a university...not necessarily a top university, but not a small, liberal arts college either.
It appears that I have almost certainly missed the traditional PhD boat due to my advanced age (though I will still apply to several schools). While no program head would admit it, my understanding is that BUSINESS Phds in the U.S. really don't accept students much older than 30.
I've also researched DBAs/Executive Phds too. And while I don't hate the idea of these, the price tags are usually somewhere around $120,000 before travel expenses (these are hybrid programs).
Further, I have ZERO desire to obtain a Phd from a school like Walden, Capella, Northcentral, etc.
So my question is this: what do you think (you obviously can't know) my prospects would be with an out-of-field Phd? There are a few Phd degrees in the U.S. in fields like Human Resources, etc. that are somewhat related...but are not true business degrees. In other words, they would not be AACSB accredited because that is only available for business schools. There are a handful of these programs throughout the U.S. at reputable schools that are both hybrid and affordable.
I would have a Masters in accountancy, a CPA license, and of course the somewhat out-of-field doctorate.
Any advice is appreciated. Just remember...I am 46...not 22 with tons of options.
Thank you<issue_comment>username_1: **Age >40 not a problem**
I am a faculty member at a top-50 business school. We would definitely consider candidates who are your age. In fact, your age is something of an advantage in that you would certainly have substantial real-world experience.
**... but we train researchers**
Your stated primary goal of teaching would definitely be a strike against you. Top PhD programs are primarily in the business of training people who have research as a primary goal. The training we offer is primarily how to create new knowledge, as well as socialization into the institutions of academic research.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is pretty difficult to provide a specific advice because you probably have pretty tight constraints in terms of time, family, location, etc. My advice would be to spend a lot of time exploring opportunities and weighing different options. PhD at 46 is definitely a good idea if you like teaching. It takes only 3-5 years to get it and it will make you employable long past the retirement age.
My personal opinion is that you should give a lot of weight to a location of the university so you don't have to spend too much time/money traveling as your opportunity costs must be pretty high now.
Also you should analyze the skills that you have and see what kind of research you can apply it to. Being an experienced accountant, you probably have quite a few valuable skills that you can apply to many fields. Going out of field is quite alright as long as you are interested in it and apply the skills you are strong at. For example, my masters was in finance and I ended up doing PhD studying risks in agricultural business. Worked out just fine and of course I went into another field after I got the PhD, applying my new set of skills. Come to think about it, progress is pretty fast so I'll probably end up working on a field that doesn't yet exist later in my career.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I can identify since I went for a "PhD-and-academic-career" after 25 years of a professional career in the private sector (Finance & Administration Director kind of stuff). Although countries are rather different (mine is Greece), we are both in the "western civilization" chunk of humanity so maybe some similarities apply.
What the persons interviewing me for the PhD wanted *really* to be convinced about, was that I was *really* serious about pursuing an academic career. In other words "I am doing the PhD for the love of science" (translation in the ears of third parties: I am bored with my life / I have a mid-life crisis /I failed in my current profession etc), wouldn't have cut it. "I want to change course because I very much like scientific research, and I like teaching too), and generally I like engaging in new things" was the correct approach.
And then, even though I had completed a full-time 2-year Master of Science when young, they had me doing it all over again, in order to qualify for the PhD.
I am not sure though about not exploiting your past education and professional experience.
From my economist's point of view (I am a certified accountant also), there is abundant space for important research in linking/bringing together the Accounting and Economics points-of-view on researching the workings of the private sector in the economy.
Or, embarking on a research project combining Management Science and Accounting with a quantitative approach, appears also to be an open field.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> want to earn reputable doctorate - need advice
>
>
>
Your desire is misplaced. That is, **an academic degree is not a goal in itself, it is a recognition of work done.** A university "awarding" the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, or Master of Arts, or whatever, means that its academic bodies recognize your academic work - studies and/or research as the case may be - at the institution makes you worthy of that recognition.
So don't think about what degree you want to achieve, think about what kind of research you're interested in doing. If there isn't a specific question you want to study in depth, then you should not enter a doctoral problem. Or at least - if there isn't a narrow field which you want get into in great depths, don't enter such a program.
I realize that I'm saying "If you're not a researcher then you don't get to teach" - and that's partially the point in much of the academic system: That [Humboldtian](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_von_Humboldt) principle, the marriage of the expansion of knowledge by research and the dissemination of knowledge by teaching. There are colleges, and peripheral domains within universities, when non-researchers teach. Sometimes this creeps into the core programs too. In those cases, **a wealth of practical experience can work in your favor** looking for a teaching position. I would consider that non-research-based route as well.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/07
| 1,491
| 6,198
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been searching for an answer, to no avail. I would like to apply for a grant for preconference funding. I know NSF has awarded such grants in the past, but I don't know if they will award a grant to a postdoc. My advisor would not be involved in this application, but other faculty at other institutions would be involved. So another option would be to write the grant myself and have someone who is faculty be the PI and I would be the co-I. But I want to know if that's necessary. Yet another option could be to have a faculty as the co-I and me as the PI, which may be more strategic than me doing it alone, but again, not sure if this is even possible.I have tried to reach out to the program officer but she has been unresponsive. I know they are busy but I wrote a very concise message with an informative subject line and she seemed to just assume I was looking for postdoc funding and sent a link for that. :(<issue_comment>username_1: I work in theoretical mathematics. I have known several postdocs who have received individual NSF research grants. In fact, I am co-PI on a NSF Research Training Grant which has supported several postdocs, and we have *required* these postdocs to apply for individual grant support in every year of the job.
Having said that: all NSF grants are of course (i) a lot of work to apply for and (ii) quite competitive to receive, so before taking the time to apply for one I would want to get additional reassurance that not only is it *legal* for postdocs to apply for your particular kind of NSF grant (as it almost certainly is) but moreover that those who are reviewing the grants view it as reasonable that a postdoc might get such a grant, or -- better -- that some postdocs in your field *have actually gotten* such grants.
My advice for this is twofold:
>
> Do some research on this yourself.
>
>
>
Who gets what NSF grant is public information. Whether the grantholder is a postdoc is something you will probably have to do further web research to find out, but it should be doable. Try it!
>
> Ask followup questions to your program officer.
>
>
>
As you describe it, you sent *one* message to your program officer and got a response, but the response was based on a bit of misunderstanding of your situation. Okay, then try again. In your second (and third..., if necessary) try, you can ask additional questions based on what I wrote above: i.e., not just whether it's legal, but how does it work out in practice? By the way, it is (a big part of) the job of NSF program officers to answer such questions. As long as you are polite and respectful, you can ask her as many questions as you have...and I encourage you to do so.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To add to Pete’s excellent answer, you should also ask for help from your department - much more senior tenure track or tenured faculty often have just as much difficulty as you making sense of the many rules and regulations associated with grants. So talk to your department’s grants officer/coordinator and ask them to help you get the answers you need - that is precisely their job. You will also likely need their help in preparing the proposal if you decide to apply. Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I recommend that do some research on your own first, then contact the NSF program manager again. In particular:
1. Check the solicitation that you would be applying to. See what rules it has on eligibility. Usually the rules for eligibility will be stated. The solicitations are publicly available and listed on the NSF website.
2. Check the NSF policies to see what rules for eligibility they have. They might require PI status at your institution. These manuals are available on the NSF website and not hard to understand; see, for instance, the [Grant Policy Manual](https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/manuals/gpm05_131/index.jsp).
3. Check your university's rules. Typically, submissions will need to go through and be approved by a sponsored projects office or the equivalent at your institution. See what rules they have. Do they require you to have PI status at the university? If so, what rules do they have for how to obtain PI status?
4. Talk to your grant administrator/coordinator at your department. Usually, the department will have someone who is responsible for that. Typically, they are responsible for knowing the rules and helping with grant submissions. They might not know; but they might just have helpful tips.
5. Do a little research on what prior awards have been given. All awards that NSF makes are public, and they have a [publicly available search engine](https://nsf.gov/awardsearch/) for searching through all past awards. You can see whether any awards have been given to postdocs in your field.
Then, armed with this information, contact the NSF program manager again. It's their job to answer questions. You can tell them, oh, sorry, I must not have explained myself very well, actually my question is such-and-such. Hopefully they will be able to give you some indication.
These are useful skills. Even if it turns out you can't apply, if you continue in academia, it will help you to know how the system works, so your time won't be wasted. Good luck with your grant application!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: The reason you can't find an answer is that this question doesn't have an answer. Remember, the NSF awards grants not to individuals (with a few exceptions), but to organizations (most often, universities). Outside of specific criteria listed in solicitations, you are eligible to apply to an NSF grant if and only if your university's office of sponsored program will submit a grant with you listed as PI. At some universities, postdocs can do this in their own right, at others they can't. Your program officer cannot answer this question (though, they might be able to give you good information about whether this is realistic; you can be technically eligible but not really qualified for the grant).
>
> You have to talk to someone in your university's office of sponsored programs, or find a colleague who knows its policy.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/08
| 840
| 3,523
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am registering for a conference in Canada but [the payment link](http://meeting.yizhifubj.com.cn/web/main.action?meetingId=188) has a weird name like yizhifubj and the website is Chinese.
Is that normal? Are there any guidelines for determining if a registration website is “safe”?<issue_comment>username_1: Not safe at all.
1. Http instead of https, never enter any information of any kind into an http site.
2. The mere fact that it's over http is such a huge flag that almost nothing else matters.
3. Wierd name. Weird names are evidence of unsafe sites. They probably keep getting blacklisted so need to create hundreds of sites to keep ahead of people writing reviews of their scams, blocking them from searches, etc.
4. Not a professional page. The layout and overall page design is poor. Real sites hire professional designers.
**The payment gateway itself is over http.** If your bank's ATM deposit drawer was a shelf that anyone could just walk up to and steal from, would you deposit your money via that ATM?
Even if these conference organizers are legit, they are not competent. This conference won't be good. People who are worth meeting won't attend simply because of this website problem. If they can't build a simple registration website, what else have they screwed up?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You will not be able to get a definitive answer on this unless you contact the conference organisers. Certainly the registration mechanism is - by modern western standards - backwards - and **you are right to ring alarm bells and take extreme caution as it could well be a scam**
That said, @GlenPierce answer is not the final word - and there are significant elements which indicate that the site itself is credible - these include
1. The actual payment IS done over HTTPS, and the certificate ties in with the domain name. Of-course, this does not mean much, except that the domain has not been compromised.
2. The domain names associated with the site have been registered many years
3. The site purports to relate to academic.net - and, indeed, when you go to the academic.net website, the payment system does, indeed link to this domain name. It is also relevant that most of conferences they have listed are held in China.
4. If you log onto the site, and change the meeting ID, it lists different headers for different ID's - that means that if the site has been hacked, its been hacked for a while, and there is a "non-trivial" amount of coding behind this - and yet Google have not flagged it as untrustworthy.
My inclination is to believe that this is more a case of incompetence then likely fraud (and this level of competency is not that uncommon in the parts of Asia I've been exposed to) - but I would still not register this site without confirmation from the organizer that it is legit.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Well, I was trying to apply to a Chinese university and this portal showed up. Just like you, I got suspicious over the URL. The URL of the webpage where you require to enter your card details consisted of "https". This made it easier to go forward but I still had some doubts. I needed to apply for the university, whatever it was. The amount was 120USD. I processed and the payment was successful. The university received the amount and the application portal showed the status "Payment Successful". I was relieved. This is for all those people who encounter that weird-looking payment portal.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/08
| 2,466
| 10,278
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’ve just moved to Canada for PhD studies at one of its best universities.
One day during my master studies, I felt that I wanted to live the international student experience and decided to move to Canada which is far away from my home country (at least 16 hours by flight!). But before moving to Canada, I thought I needed to save some money as such I decided to work and save money. I worked at a good and well-known company with very good salary and benefits, my boss really liked me.
I left the job after a year and everyone there was shocked because I was so good at it.
I have to mention that during my work there, I also met my boyfriend whom I love very much!
Despite the fact that I met my significant other, had a great job and stable life, I went on my way and moved to Canada.
After only one month in Canada, I discovered a few things.
1) It feels bad to be away from my family and friends, although I used to live away from my family during the past few years, the increased distance makes it worse.
2) I've been thinking of going back to my home country since I arrived.
3) I miss my boyfriend very badly although we talk everyday.
4) I had a great job with very good salary and now I get less than half of my previous salary.
5) My social life here sucks, I’m working on it but things are moving very very slow!
6) The main concern: I joined a small research group; only 2 PhD students and 2 masters students and no Post docs. The supervisor is very busy (we booked a meeting and he has never showed up in time! In a best case scenario he is late by an hour), he doesn’t show any interest in guiding me or helping me define my PhD project, I thought he might be busy but after taking to the students it seems that he’s always like this. He never seems to have time and I need to chase him down to talk about research and ensure things move forward. Even one of his masters students said that if I wanna have a good PhD, I must find a co-supervisor because he’s not organized!
Besides, it seems that the supervisor does not have available projects as of now and he is currently away for the next two months.
I feel like I’m sinking and made the biggest mistake of my life! I'm no longer sure I want to continue my PhD studies! I only think about going back home. I don’t know what to do. Should I look for job back home? Stay? Ask the previous company to hire me back?
I’m afraid and nervous and have no one to consult!! Please help me cause I feel like I’m wasting time here while being unhappy and very far away from my loved ones :(
?<issue_comment>username_1: It seems (simply said) like everything is bad in Canada and everything is good in your hone country. So you should go back. A PhD is a huge commitment of time and energy, one does it out of passion for research and the field - it does not make sense to do a PhD when you hate it.
It is not a character flaw not to have a PhD.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: First and foremost your mental/physical health is the most important thing. I was in your situation as well, and did my studies away from home. Here are my thoughts hope it can help you:
1. **Temporary break**: It might be the case that you are just exhausted yourself. What about a short break? You could have a honest conversation with your supervisor and take a break.
2. **PhD is not a silver bullet to all of your life problems**: I see in your question that you are suggesting that "you are wasting time" or "bad social life". So is it the PhD or you? Are you organized and keep room for your social interactions? Or the PhD itself is stressing out to a point that you need to stick to your desk. You need to take control of your life, with or without PhD, we all have personal traits that might be good or bad; but this is what is life about. You need to learn and grow and create a life you want to be in.
3. **Supervisor Issue**: Based on your question, I doubt that it is your supervisor, but if you feel the need; you can always have a discussion with the head of your research group about your supervisor.
4. **Schedule your Holidays**: It seems your boyfriend is not with you and this is sad to you, so you could always schedule your holidays around the year.
5. **Do Exercise**: This is important, to keep you motivated; keep yourself in shape; go for a walk, go to your university gym. This will help you in physically and mentally.
6. **Leaving PhD**: After all these, if you still think you don't like research and/or PhD; then leave your PhD; it is your life and journey.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: **You need to fundamentally evaluate why you are doing a PhD and if you think the end goal is worth it.**
If your only reason to get a PhD is "I wanna live the international student experience", then you have already achieved your goal. As you have discovered, "the international student experience" is often very isolating. It takes at least one year to build a new social circle, and unlike undergraduate studies, a PhD is more like a job and you're unlikely to find your friend group in your lab. That said, most of the time this is a temporary condition: keep working on making new friends and finding new places to go, and you will start feeling more at home in your new city. Consider how long can you hold out for those changes. For another month? Six months? A year? Until you graduate?
Ideally, your goal is that you really, really want to become a researcher. Now is the time where you get to see up close how that works out. Observe your advisor (and his colleagues, since he is apparently a less than ideal specimen), and imagine yourself in their place. Does that appeal to you? Can you see yourself doing what they do, five to ten years down the road? Also remember that academia is quite international and if you choose this career you will likely have to go through multiple international moves again in the future. Do you have a closely-held dream that makes it all seem worthwhile?
You also note that you are unhappy about the lower salary. It depends on what field you are in, but in most fields a PhD doesn't increase your earning power much compared to a master's, and may even reduce it if you choose to work at a university. Get a PhD because you love what you do, not because you want to earn more.
**After pondering these questions, you should have a good idea of why you are "doing this to yourself", i.e. getting a PhD.** Being able to tell yourself "I chose to do this, and I continue choosing to do this because I am getting something I want out of it" helps a lot. On the other hand, if you're only doing this because it seemed like a good idea at the time, you might want to write this PhD off as a failed experiment. (Or rather a successful experiment with negative results.)
Assuming you have some reasons and want to continue, there is a second question: **should you persevere with *this* PhD**. Your advisor's lack of involvement is frankly concerning. You should heed your colleagues' advice and look for ways to work around him. Explore your options actively: Find another professor at your uni to co-supervise, find your own project that you can manage with limited help, or if nothing seems to work out consider finding a different PhD position, maybe even in your home country or somewhere only a day trip away.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: We can't advise you on what you *should* do, but we can talk about some of the issues.
**Homesickness** This is real issue. There's no telling when it would spring up or what triggers it. However, it does get better over time. It comes from losing immediate connection with friends and family. It can help for you to find new people you have affinity with (religious, cultural, ethnic, hobbies, etc).
**Supervisor** An inattentive supervisor can stifle a PhD. At this early phase, you are exploring the problem space. You need to find out the limits to the state of the art and carve out a niche big enough to spend a few years researching yet small enough to complete. You'd want to gain credit for something novel, so you don't want it to be something that someone else is just about to publish.
It really helps to communicate with established experts in the general field. They will know where the unknowns are, and they should have a fair idea of what others are working on. Ideally, your supervisor would be such an expert. However, you can also ask to join research labs / teams during their regular discussions, or even just gather a few others in your position (not necessarily from your supervisor's small research group) and look up recent conference proceedings to browse through their "further work" sections.
In later stages of your PhD, it can also help to have co-supervisors or mentors who can coach you through papers and conferences, as well as the final write-up. You don't need to switch supervisors, but if your supervisor is inattentive, you will need to seek alternative assistence.
These are simply practical tips. The first thing you need to do, though, is to decide whether you still want to pursue a PhD. The opening paragraph of your question indicates that this was your ambition - so you're 'living your dream'! The thing to ask yourself is whether this is still your dream.
One more point: **going back**. It's a common experience among students studying abroad and ex-pats alike that in a sense, there's no 'going back' after several years away. You will be changed by your new environment, language and culture, and your friends and family will also have changed in the interim. Even the company that employed you would have filled the vacancy you left. Special consideration is also needed about how to nurture long distance relationships. This isn't to say that it's all uphill, but it's important to recognise that studying abroad (PhD or otherwise) is a potentially life-changing endeavour.
You sound like a resourceful person, so you're probably going to be able to work out a lot of the immediate issues yourself, and you're probably going to land on your feet whether you continue with your PhD or return now. It's the longer-term issues that can easily be overlooked during this emotionally-charged initial phase.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/08
| 613
| 2,617
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm still early in my scientific career, with only a few papers published. However, I've discovered a typo in a non-critical equation of my paper, and one of the graphs in the same paper should have smaller values (but exactly the same trend). It's important to say that it does not change any of the conclusions drawn in the paper. **I've requested to issue an erratum to fix these errors**.
At the moment, I am feeling extremely stressed and saddened thinking about how bad this erratum would reflect on my CV and in my integrity as a researcher... I would like to hear some opinions of people who have been through this process... Did you notice editors becoming more harsh on accepting other works from you because of a past mistake? Was it possible to still get grants and partnerships in projects even if you have a 'flawed' record?<issue_comment>username_1: **It will not affect you career. You'll be fine.**
An erratum is not a bad thing, per se. Errors happen, and if you fix them it's fine. The error you describe are totally normal and I would even guess that a large fraction of published paper contains this type of error and does not have an erratum.
Even a more serious error that invalidates some of your finding will not necessarily have any impact on your career (but in this case you should write an erratum!). A retraction would be more serious, because retraction are associated with misconduct.
Another point is, that most people will not even notice that there is as erratum for one of your papers.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Let's put it this way: An erratum describing a serious flaw in the paper may (or may not) have a negative effect on your career, but *withholding* knowledge of such a flaw will have a much worse effect when people find that out.
Also - it's only a problem if the error is such that you should have noticed it and not published the paper at all. Most errors are only seen as an unfortunate coincidence and do not reflect seriously (or at all) on the authors.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A "real" erratum (of the form "this part of my paper was wrong") will not affect your career unless it is about your most important work being all wrong, and all our prestige depends on that single paper.
This may depend on areas, but I would say that an "erratum" of the kind you mention would not (and should not) be accepted by the editor. There are more important things to use the journal's pages for. If it bothers you a lot, include your "erratum" in your list of publications in your web page.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/08
| 425
| 1,857
|
<issue_start>username_0: When presenting a scientific poster at a conference, I am often asked by colleagues if they can get a copy of the poster. Often, I have DIN A4 prints ready (quite hard to read...) and I am also happy to share them via email, if somebody is interested.
It would all be much easier if I could just upload the poster to some *open repository* where it is archived such that I just need to share a link.
Neither arXiv seems to be the right place for it, nor figshare. Is there some open repository for scientific posters which I missed so far?<issue_comment>username_1: ResearchGate lets you add posters (including the file) to your profile.
It even lets you generate DOIs for these research items, although they mention that this should only be done for unpublished research and they consider posters as published research. However, you can add the DOI from the book of abstracts (if you got one) and imo it would be at least technically possible to assign a DOI to the poster if it doesn't have one but you should check with the conference, and possibly researchgate, f that's fine with them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't know of any open repository that hosts research posters. But, some conferences do upload a pdf copy of all accepted posters to their website so you can check the venue where you presented your work to see if they offer something similar.
Another option which I see all the time is uploading the poster to your personal website or the website associated with your research group or lab. These websites always have a publications link that usually includes a subsection for poster publications.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I usually upload posters to my own website. Then I add a short link and a QR code to the bottom of the poster saying "Scan here for PDF of poster".
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/08
| 449
| 1,853
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a book chapter in theoretical computer science. I would like to add figures based on figures previously published in relevant papers.
In the caption of each Figure I will cite the original source. Obviously, the figures that I will include are not the original ones but are made by myself.
However, since the figures are explaining abstract proof concepts there is not much freedom to make them really different from the originals apart from minor changes.
Am I still at risk of legal retaliation from publishers?<issue_comment>username_1: [MIT has good advice on fair use of images.](https://libguides.mit.edu/usingimages)
>
> Judges have tended to focus on two questions that collapse the four factors:
>
>
> * Does the use ***transform*** the material, by using it for a different purpose?
> * Was the ***amount taken appropriate*** to the new purpose?
>
>
> **To help support a fair use case for an image:**
>
>
> * Use lower resolution or thumbnail versions where possible;
> * Place the image in a new context or use it for a new purpose; and
> * Use only the parts of the image needed for the purpose
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and the following is just my opinion.
Copyright protects expressions but not ideas or concepts (<https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html>). If the figures are entirely made by yourself expressing the ideas of the original works, while the original sources are properly cited, I don't think you have anything to worry regarding copyright.
Also, in many countries, a design of simple words and/or simple geometry shapes are not qualified for copyright protection. See the Wikipedia article for [Threshold of originality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/08
| 460
| 2,025
|
<issue_start>username_0: The students were never told this is the actual exam or this will be on the exam; my physics teacher used to give us the problems for the exam as a study guide and those were the exact problems on the test, if you studied that.
If this is a coordinated course, do I get some autonomy and do as my physics teacher used to do?<issue_comment>username_1: I give a mock exam that gives example questions from the *topics* that are covered in the exam but not the actual questions themselves.
This enables specific words or formats etc to be used in the mock so that one is sure that the students cannot say that they have not been covered...
Edit based on my comment:
For the nine topics covered, there are 15 or so practice questions which are part of the "coursework" for each topic, so there is plenty of practice. The exam questions are based on any of those questions, with a different story, different numbers or part A is the same but part B is then different etc
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't say "unethical" but I don't think it's a great idea. Although it does reward students who do the study problems, it will disproportionately reward students who can remember line-for-line exactly what they did, over those who instead focused on learning the general concepts.
Also, it only works once. After the first time, it will become known among students that you do this. Lazy students will know that they can get a friend to solve all the problems, borrow their solutions, and memorize them.
As to whether you have the autonomy to do this in a coordinated course: it depends. "Coordinated" covers a wide spectrum of practices. In many cases it is expected that the instructors will cooperate to write a single common exam. Even if not, I think this is something that you should not do without the coordinator's agreement; it's far enough outside the norm that the coordinator may feel that it is not equitable between your students and those in other sections.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/08
| 1,291
| 5,370
|
<issue_start>username_0: In [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/110929) recent question, the OP there describes a situation where they were assigned to be a session chair without being asked to do so.
After reading the above question, and having never chaired a conference session before, I wonder if I would be adequately prepared to take on such a task. For sure, one would expect the conference organizers to fill in the details upon request, but it'd still be useful to have an idea of what to expect; this would all be taking place at well-attended (electrical) engineering conferences.
>
> What is typically expected of a conference session chair?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps things are different in electrical engineering, but in math, the chair:
* introduces the speaker, sometimes just saying their name and the title of their talk, sometimes a lengthier introduction ("[speaker] is professor at XYZ University and works on blablabla");
* says "thank you" out loud and starts clapping at the end;
* asks if there are questions or comments from the audience;
* [optional] if the questions are taking too much time, the chair will say something like "we can discuss this more during the break" and go onto the next step;
* once the questions are over, says "let's thank [speaker] again" and starts clapping;
* announces the time of the next talk ("in 10 minutes", "after the break at 10:30"...). Rinse and repeat.
Sometimes the chair will go as far as warning the speaker if the time limit approaches or has passed. An extra task that sometimes pops up is when the organizers want to make an announcement before/after the talk; then the chair will say "[organizer] has an important announcement, please listen". This is pretty much it.
A handy trick is to get the schedule with speakers' names and talks' titles ahead of time. Then you can practice pronouncing speakers' names, and there's no awkward silence while you say "The second speaker this afternoon is [speaker], who will talk about... uh... *squints to read the title on the board* [title]".
It's also more or less expected for the chair to prepare at least one question about the talk, even a very simple one. This way, if no other member of the audience has any question, then the chair can say "I actually have a question, [insert question]" after the pause that occurs after "any questions?", saving the speaker a bit of embarrassment.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: *Disclaimer*: As usual, there can be different traditions depending on the field. I'll answer on the basis of my experience in a relatively small field, that of *metrology*, which is between physics and engineering.
The session chair is usually chosen among experienced researchers for the following reasons:
* At least out of courtesy, they are expected to ask questions when nobody else has one, and this usually requires deep knowledge and a sufficiently broad view of the session topic.
* At the beginning or a the end of the session, they are expected to outline the direction of the research about the session topic, taking into account the presented results.
* They can better introduce most of the speakers if they already know them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to what the others mentioned, in the Q&A:
* **Steer the Q&A**: keep audience questions fresh, focused and constructive, avoid non-questions, rants, ad-hominems, personality clashes, know when a back-and-forth needs to be (gracefully) taken offline vs when it doesn't. Know when to let things roll and when to change the topic.
* **When needed, generate discussion** If the speakers did not engage with each other (or the audience), try to compare and draw parallels, ask questions on where they differ, mention stuff from other sessions (if relevant) or publications, generate an interesting and lively dialog then sit back
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: * As a chair, it is a good idea to find and meet your presenters *before* your session, especially if you don't know them. Few things are more embarrassing than introducing a speaker you don't know, then asking "Uhm, is professor X actually in the room?", only to see X stand up in the first row right in front of you.
* You should make sure that the presentations are available and easily found on the presentation computer, e.g., on the desktop.
Both of these are really joint responsibilities of speakers and the chair.
* Make sure that there is paper on the flipchart and that the whiteboard is clean, and perhaps wipe it down between presentations. It's also considerate for the next session if you take charge to leave the room in a presentable state, with a clean whiteboard or flipchart etc.
* If you notice that a speaker is new at the conference (maybe a first time presenting grad student), it's nice to make a little small talk with her or him and make them feel welcome. Works wonders to reduce the jitters.
* Sometimes a speaker will have handouts. You should take charge that these are distributed, so the speaker can concentrate on the talk.
* Similarly, sometimes you should hand out feedback forms, or remind everyone to vote on their conference app, or other things, depending on the conference.
Overall, the theme is: make the session easy on the presenters, and enjoyable for everyone.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/06/08
| 958
| 3,794
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing my PhD thesis in engineering at a research university in the US.
My question is about using frames (or boxes) around a plot, specifically simulation results plotted as a function of time. These figures are intended to span the entire width of the type-area (i.e. paragraph width) and are to be displayed prominently.
Here is a simple example for comparison between the two options (framed and open):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/V7wvm.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/y2svQ.png)
Is there any convention regarding such frames, e.g., as documented by prominent style guides? I am all up for minimalism (use greyscale, avoid clutter etc), but I wonder if removing the surrounding frame itself is too much (and may surprise exam committee in unexpected ways) due to going against existing conventions.
My university doesn’t have a style guide. And when I checked with the research support office, they said that as long as it adheres to acceptable scientific style, it is fine.
### PS:
When this question was originally asked on the graphic design SE site, a user recommended that the x-label should not be near the bottom edge of the frame, but rather a horizontal axis should be drawn at y = 0, and the labelling of the x-axis should be done near this. I am skeptical of this advice, since most engineering software (eg. MATLAB) does not do this.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no convention or guide on this, at least none with appreciable universality. Having said that, one doesn't need a style guide for things like this.
The intention is to be clear to the reader. Minimalism or any other aesthetic ideal is secondary. In engineering, the values on graphs are potentially of interest, not just the trend. So a reader could potentially want to know the value of y(x), and your graph of y vs x should make it as easy as possible for him/her to do so. The top and right axes make it easier to read out values, because (a) you now have two sets of axes to check your value against, (b) a point on the top-right is as easy to read as a point on the bottom-left.
Given that, I wouldn't recommend removing the frame or the ticks on the frame.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In industry, you’ll often encounter branding guidelines around data visualization: fonts, colors, padding, margins, legends, etc. In academia, enforced adherence to branding guidelines is less common, particularly as an undergraduate. The exception is if you are presenting on behalf of the university or as part of your official role within the university. Even then, your institution may be happy with simply applying their logo to each slide. In terms of publishing research, every journal will have its guidelines that you need to apply to your articles layout and often the figures.
Now, in terms of the larger principles of data visualization, there are several go to figures. Perhaps the best known is [Edward Tufte](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Tufte), who’s published a number of books, such as *[Visual Explanations](https://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/books_visex)*. One of the ideas he’s contributed to is the maximization of the [data-ink ratio](https://infovis-wiki.net/index.php/Data-Ink_Ratio) (i.e. use the least amount of ink necessary to enable the data to ‘speak’).
In the context of your question, removing the frame is not a bad idea, in most cases they yield no utility. Removing axes entirely may be a bit aggressive. Removing unnecessary ticks and markers may be a nice middle ground. But those are just ideas; try exploring how the idea of a data-ink ratio can be put to use, it’s a fantastic tool.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/08
| 1,164
| 4,614
|
<issue_start>username_0: I took a specialization course at Coursera in which I have learned a lot of insights that would be essentially useful while writing my master's degree dissertation. **How can I refer to them?**
I've already found a paper that does this for another lecture at Coursera but I'm not sure if that is right:
>
> <NAME>. and <NAME>. Lecture 6.5 - RMSProp, COURSERA: Neural Networks for Machine Learning.
> Technical report, 2012.
>
>
>
**Could I use this same "model"?**<issue_comment>username_1: I'm afraid this will not be a direct answer, but first a series of questions to help you think through what you are asking.
(1) Did the insight come from the lecturer or someone/something the lecturer taught about? In other words, was this insight the creation of the person teaching the course? Or did (s)he quote someone else/some other study?
(2) If it wasn't an online course, and you physically attended the course, would you cite something you learnt there?
(3) Is this insight peer-reviewed, or does it have any other basis for it's validity?
(4) Can another researcher easily access this insight using your reference? (Easy here is referring to effort required, not cost).
(5) Are you confident that you are allowed to reveal this insight in your work, i.e. it does not run afoul of the license used by the course/course aggregator?
If the answers to most of these are 'no', you probably shouldn't add it as a formal reference. Remember, teaching aids are teaching aids, you don't see them cited unless they are published textbooks or reports. If it's an oral insight, it's all the more difficult to fix accountability in case of misuse. If it's not reviewed or published, one may rightly question why you believe it to be true. If it is sourced from other material, you should cite the original material, not the lecture. A reference should be verifiable by a researcher. If I want to access this insight, I wouldn't want to have to sit through a course for that. The licensing issue speaks for itself.
This is not to say that only peer-reviewed literature should be cited; I asked a related question about non-academic documents and received helpful answers [here on ASE](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107328/how-are-non-academic-eg-industrial-reports-cited-in-publications), you may like to take a look.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You should not cite coursera courses. The purpose of citations (even in an MSc thesis) is twofold:
1. Acknowledge the *inventor*. It is unlikely that the inventor is the coursera teacher.
2. Make is easy for the interested reader to follow the reference and learn more about the subject. It is unlikely that the reader wishes to follow an online course that takes weeks when he can also read a short chapter or research paper.
It is not unlikely that the coursera course will disappear or its URL will change in the (very) near future, making your reference useless.
So your options are to either find the original source of the information and cite that, or not cite the course at all. You don't "cite" your mother or your physical university teachers either, even if they gave you "valuable insights".
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: A citation like that would be fine, although I wouldn't include 'Technical Report'. Some citation styles have formats for lectures or other presentations.
However, the Coursera lecture may not be the best thing to cite.
* Does the instructor communicate the insight in writing somewhere? For example, in a paper or in published lecture notes for an in-person course?
* Does the instructor provide a source for the insights? In which case you may want to cite *that*. The source may be indicated in supplementary readings or lecture notes.
* Do you need to cite it? When in doubt, you should always cite, but you often don't need to cite things that you would ordinarily learn in a class on the subject. The line for this one is pretty fuzzy and nuanced, though, and it depends on how cutting-edge the insight is.
I would not let the ephemerality of Coursera stop you from citing it, but if you can find a better citation you should use it. It is better to cite something that disappears than to not cite.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Sorry to respond to this old topic, but I had exactly the same question and found this example for an APA-style reference:
<https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/references/examples/online-course-references>
I would use this style, maybe formatted as an @misc in BibTeX.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/09
| 505
| 2,415
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Context:** A paper has been conditionally accepted (subject to my major revision). Main issues that have been raised by two reviewers are:
1. The author should compare the testing times of different algorithms.
2. Some methods can be added for comparison.
3. Negative example used in experiment is 50%. According to the size of the dataset, the algorithm may overfit.
4. The algorithm should be evaluated according to the protocol of a known dataset.
It is clear that the main issues are related to the experiment.
**Question:** Is it mandatory to conduct new experiments to address issues made by reviewers? If I do not conduct new experiments, what is the probability of getting rejected?
I mean if reviewers are not convinced with experiments, the editor is supposed to reject the paper, but he didn't do that.
What should be done under such circumstances?<issue_comment>username_1: The editor has not rejected because (s)he believes that the shortcomings in your paper can be tackled by you. If this entails performing experiments, then further acceptance will be conditional upon that.
Whether or not you should do these experiments is a different issue and requires knowledge of the case- perhaps you can write a good rebuttal and justify why these added experiments are unnecessary. In general I would recommend against this, but you and your co-authors must make this call based on the issues raised.
Don't think that the editor will necessarily override the reviewers. You need to satisfy the reviewers, either through corrections, rebuttal or a combination of both. Once reviewers are satisfied, editor will be more inclined to accept.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Ask yourself if these comments are constructive and the added experiments will improve your study design and quality of research. If so, my suggestion is to do the experiments as the reviewers suggested. You may ask the editorial office for longer time of revision if needed.
If not, you should state clearly in the response letter why these added experiments are not necessary (beyond the scope of current study, irrelevant to the purpose of your study, etc.) The editor doesn't always override the reviewers. You have to come up with good reasons to convince the reviewers that these experiments are not necessary rather than guessing the probability of getting rejected/accepted.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/09
| 1,224
| 5,294
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've applied to a graduate program at a university in Germany and there is relatively clear evidence indicating that they've missed one or even two of my documents in application review based on the responses they've given me. Now they are reluctant to reconsidering my application when I resent the documents to them and explained how those documents mean the reason they mentioned for rejection is clearly not true. This is not a subjective thing and it's completely objective and bureaucratic.
It's stated on my rejection letter that I could appeal the decision at the court and I have their emails where they explained reasons that are in contradiction with each other about those documents, which could help me make the case. I really like that department and want to have the option to go there later in my academic career, but I'm afraid if I take my complaint to the court, the department may develop some level of animosity towards me.
Do you think I should forget about working in that department if I start an appeal process at the court, or could I assume that everyone could just be adults and behave professionally?
Note that while [I asked previously](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/110970/what-should-i-do-if-the-admission-committee-has-missed-something-in-my-applicati/110974#110974) about what possible decisions to take, this is just about the consequences of an appeal at court when it comes to working with the department in the future.<issue_comment>username_1: Oh dear.
If the graduate program is prestigious and linked to a scholarship/ paid job, there were many more applicants than spots available.
I don't know why you think they missed some documents. If they wrote you you haven't provided them and you are 100% positive you have, you can try your luck suing.
Otherwise you will be much better off just applying for other programs.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: This depends on a lot of factors:
* **Who was involved in the decision to reject your application and replying to your inquiries?**
Only these people (plus their superiors, such as the head of the admission committee or similar) *have* to be involved in taking this to court and know of it.
However, to what extent you can rely on only these people being involved depends on administrative legislation, which probably only a specialised lawyer¹ could tell you about.
If your application was rejected due to lacking strict formal requirements, this was probably done by administrative staff, and you are strictly speaking only “attacking” them.
If on the other hand, your application was rejected after an interview process or by a committee involving scientific staff (i.e., usually professors), the situation is different.
* **Is the application handled by the university, faculty, or the department?**
(You can usually find out by looking at whom you interacted with so far.)
Now why would this be important?
In Germany, there is usually a certain animosity between departments and university-level administration.
Scientific staff usually won’t care much if their university’s administration is attacked because they are used to them botching things, but they can get protective of their own department’s administration, who may be much more valuable to them.
* **How valid is your claim?** Your case will be viewed differently if somebody really botched something during the process than if all you have in your favour is a technicality.
* **Did you exhaust all other options?** Even if you have been clearly been wronged, directly escalating to court instead of trying other methods of resolution will not be in your favour.
* **What happens if you succeed?** The best you can expect in most cases that the admission process is resumed at the stage where you were rejected.
For example, if your application gets rejected on the entrance check, you still would have to go through an interview process.
Unless you and the university want to wait for the next regular round of applications, this means you get an extracurricular interview, etc.
Now, if everything goes really professional, all those participating this application will only learn that your application has to be re-evaluated due to a clerical error.
But you have to ask yourself how likely this really is depending on the above.
* **Are the positions limited?** Would you be taking somebody else’s place? There are master’s programs where everybody with a suitable bachelor degree will be admitted, and the crucial selection is who gets a scholarship (because most students need one). In this case, suing for admission is more likely to be seen as an administrative issue (which the academic staff doesn’t care much about).
At the end of the day, a lot can happen between the full range of:
* Only a few people you will never interact with again know that you went to court.
* Everybody knows that you are the person who sued themselves into the programme due to a technicality and nobody will accept you into their group (for a master’s thesis) since you are presumed trouble. On top, everybody hates you because you are the reason that the admission process was overbureaucratised the next year.
---
¹ whom you should probably consult anyway
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/09
| 2,411
| 10,201
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm at the end of the second year of a phd in engineering. My project is going well: I'm involved in an international project and I submitted 6 journal papers and 5 conference papers.
The problem is the relationship with my main supervisor.
I have two supervisors. I'm working really well with my co-supervisor. He has always showed interest in my work and in me as a person. He provides me accurate revisions on papers, reports, oral presentations, and so on. At the same time, he leaves me free to direct my project as I prefer, as long as my work is coherent with the topic of my thesis and with the objectives of the project we are involved in.
Things are different with my main supervisor. He couldn't care less about my work. I hardly remember the last time he gave me any guidance or even corrected one of my papers. He requested I help other phd students and provide him with didactic material for courses.
I spent most of the first year helping another student, understanding that the work would be part of my thesis. At the end of the year my supervisor asked me not to inform the phd committee of my participation in that work, because it could damage the evaluation the student.
This year, something similar happened. One of his M.Sc students could not finish a job in collaboration with another professor. Now he wants me to finish that job, because he doesn't want to offend that professor. The problem is that he's not even in my research group, I don't have any experience with the subject and this is slowing down my work, as this job should be completed by the end of the year. My supervisor also gave me other extra work, telling me not to tell the other supervisor and not to add his name in my works.
The worst part came when my co-supervisor proposed me a postdoc position. My main advisor became arrogant, telling me not to f\*\*k up things (litterally), that he's the boss and that if I want to go on working in research I have to stay with him.
I tried many, many times to talk to him, but his answers are always the same: "don't do s\*\*t, remember who's the boss here".
Normally, I wouldn't ask advice from random people over the internet, but I really don't know what to do. Talking to him seems completely useless. Maybe I should talk to the other supervisor, but I'm not sure he would support me against a colleague. I'm afraid I could end up even more isolated.<issue_comment>username_1: I was in a similar situation with my dissertation director. After trying to resolve things with him (he became increasingly hostile and abusive with each attempt), I got other professors involved, including the graduate ombudsperson. One professor - the department chair - did nothing and sided with my director - but the other faculty (the graduate director and my other committee members) stepped in and separated us, and one of them took over as my new dissertation director. After that, I went straight to Human Resources and filed a complaint against that professor, since no one in my department made any attempt to hold him accountable for his actions. I also reached out to the Dean's office when HR was initially unresponsive, which I think helped because they may have leaned on HR to pay attention to my case. The investigation was recently concluded and apparently they "took actions against him," (a slap on the wrist, I'm assuming. But at least he has a record now).
Personally, as horrible as my experience was and as painful of a battle it was (from which I still haven't recovered), I have no regrets about standing up to that professor, making as much noise as possible in my department and to outside administration. At the end of the day, I stood up for myself, made it clear to everyone in my department that I could not be bullied into silence, and that I was leaving with a PhD no matter what.
One caveat to this experience before recommending you go down the same path: I realize that my situation could have been so much worse had I not lucked out in a few ways. I was lucky that the graduate director + my other committee members were willing to support me and not abandon me, even if they couldn't bring themselves to confront their colleague about his behavior. I was lucky that my contact in HR was extremely nice and sympathetic to my situation, and I genuinely believe he made every effort to investigate my situation fairly. Unfortunately, having people like that on your side is not always the reality, and all too often, faculty/staff turn against graduate students who won't "stay in their place."
My suggestion would be to not take this professor's horrible treatment, stand up for yourself, and expose his inappropriate behavior. But do so very cautiously. In light of my own experiences that I shared, my question for you is, do you have allies? Other students who can and are willing to echo your complaints? There is power in numbers. Are there professors (including your secondary supervisor) that you can talk to? And keep in mind, there are (or should be) resources outside your department that you might consult, though I think I would only do so if you can't resolve things within your own department:
1. the graduate ombudsperson: if your university has one, absolutely try talking to them. They're usually very senior, experienced professors, and they're meant to be available for confidential consultation. This is typically a very safe place to discuss your issues.
2. Human Resources
3. Dean's Office of your college
4. Dean's Office of the graduate college
5. the graduate student association might have resources
Ultimately, his behavior towards you - all of this telling you to not tell so-and-so about his actions and his insistence on controlling you and other students - is incredibly inappropriate and abusive, and none of you deserve to be treated that way. I hope that the dynamics in your department/university allow for a safe place for you to voice your complaints. There's nothing worse than silently suffering.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> The worst part came when my second advisor proposed my a postdoc position. My main advisor became arrogant, telling me not to f\*\*k up things (litterally), that he's the boss and that if I want to go on working in research I have to do it with him.
>
>
>
I don't understand this part? Why does your main advisor has so much control over where you would do a postdoc? The worst he can do for you is not to give you a LoR or worse, to give you a bad LoR. But I guess you don't need one from him.
Just complete your degree, and move to your secondary advisor's group. That's it. Or if you apply somewhere else, you can list only your secondary advisor.
>
> At the end of the year he asked me not to tell the phd committee that
> I took part to that work, because it could damage the evaluation of
> the other student.
>
>
>
You should keep all evidences about your work on other PhD's student, including emails exchanged with that student or your advisor.
If I were you, I would not work for free any single day. You don't necessarily say NO. For example, if he says you need to help the other student before day/time. Just don't do it. How can he push you, via email? then you have some evidence then.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You have a bad boss - a situation common to all walks of life including academia and industry. This is temporary, and you’ll get through it, but you must be proactive.
One option is to just change advisors formally to the one you like. If that’s not possible, you are best off assuming the worst and treating this like a contract. Have a clear, frank discussion of what is expected to attain PhD candidacy, and get in writing (or email for the record) all his/her requirements. Make sure those requirements align with the *official* requirements of your institution. If you do this clearly and check in regularly, it would be difficult to hold you back.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I understand you are a productive and successful PhD student. Therefore I can imagine that both supervisors have interest in you. You are of value.
Your main supervisor seems ‘to claim’ you as his PhD student. What I do not understand: is your main supervisor your professor? Who is financing your position? Because it may be possible to change supervisors. It is not easy but not impossible.
I suspect you are in a graduate school. In that case you will have yearly updated plannings, a yearly progress meeting, an opportunity to give feedback on supervision and to express your whishes. These yearly plannings and agreements should protect PhD students from additional tasks that slow down PhD research.
I read talking to you main supervisor doesn’t work. You could try to formalise such meeting (a formal progress meeting) with more people attending. If you main supervisor keeps avoiding agreements than I would consider carefully expressing your intention of changing supervision. As said, you are of value, to him and your institution. Both will not want to let you go.
Alternatively: just finish in two years and get out of that unhealthy atmosphere. However, two years are long.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: My instinct, since you already figured out bad advisor. If it is early period of your PhD work, there is nothing wrong to find another advisor. Here in US academics, your future career almost depends on advisor whoever he is, it does not depend on you and your ability and your explanation why you had tought time working under him.Change your advisor!!!! if you haven't wasted your years.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: The possibility of toxicity in your relationship with Ph.D. supervisor is not uncommon. My story is dated going back to the early 1970s in India when my supervisor published a paper without my name using 110% of my work. Later, I published a paper challenging his scientific thoughts and life continued. The difference is that I was doing it post Ph.D. The important lesson is to avoid any "toxic" elements in your relationship but the supervisor must respect you and your professionalism at all times.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/10
| 1,377
| 6,019
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am entering Hofstra University this fall as a mechanical engineering student, and I am curious what the workload would be like if I took a second major in mathematics?
To clarify my situation, here are some points:
* im simply considering it and dont have to make a decision until, at the earliest, my second semester
* I am fascinated by how things work, and I have been told that math is the "purest" science in that it explains everything. I am operating on the assumption that this is accurate
* while I have a passion for engineering and hands on work, I would also very much like to participate in research
* math is one of my weaker subjects, so I would have to devote extra time to study, though it still fascinates me
* Im a hard worker, and plan on using summer and winter class sessions to get as much out of college as I can
* i intend to continue college through my masters degree at a minimum
Additionally, MechE is 131 credits and mathematics is 124. My university allows credits to apply to more than one degree. Please feel free to ask for any other clarifying info you need, and
Thank you all for your advice in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: I did a double major is physics and mathematics at a US university. Therefore, I think I can give you a somewhat accurate answer from my own experience. I hope you are coming to school with a lot of AP or IB credit, or some other way to get out of general education requirements. You are going to need the space in your schedule. I took a look at the requirements for the ME and Math majors at Hofstra, and there are four classes that overlap, and (if you choose the engineering math option) an additional nine hours of engineering courses count toward the math degree. That's a total of twenty-four overlap credits. That's pretty good, but it leaves an additional twenty-four credits dedicated to the math major to fit into your schedule. The total number of hours for your double major will be 155, or about nineteen hours per semester if you do eight semesters. That is quite a lot, which is why I hope you have some outside credit or take summer classes, or in some other way reduce the workload to sixteen to eighteen credits per semester.
If you are able to fit these classes into a reasonable schedule, the workload will not increase too much. I do not think that undergraduate math classes require all that much work. Most do not require essays or large projects. Furthermore, if your university's policies are like mine, you can drop out of the double major at any time, reverting to single-major status, so there is little risk in applying for a double-major. If you do double major, and find that your engineering classes are suffering because your math classes are taking too much time, I strongly advise you to drop out immediately. Having one strong major is much better than two weak majors.
Here are a few things to remember:
* Neither employers nor graduate programs place a lot of weight on a double major. If you have a strong GPA in an engineering major, and have several elective mathematics courses on your transcript as well, that is just as good as a double major.
* If you do get a graduate degree, employers will care way more about that than a second major.
* Unless you have a full scholarship, you are paying for this. I do not presume to know your financial situation, but I feel fairly comfortable in saying that the joy of taking math classes simply because you find them interesting is not worth $40,000 per year. So do not delay graduation to get a second major. Especially when you can check math books out at the University library for free.
* I would even be hesitant to take summer classes in order to double major if they come at the expense of an internship, REU, or some other career-enhancing opportunity. A double major looks good on a resume or a graduate school application, but not as good as work and research experience.
* As with all choices, there is an opportunity cost to double majoring. If you have time to double major, you could also use that time to take graduate level classes, or learn another language, or get a minor in computer science, all things that employers and graduate schools will see as valuable.
* Finally, it should be noted that a double major may be viewed by future employers as a sign of a lack of focus or of scattered interests. I do not know if this is a prevalent opinion, but I have heard it before. It may even be true in many cases.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The engineering program you are entering has a lot in common with other US schools, including the one at my institution. *Note: I am in electrical engineering, but I interact enough with the mechanical engineering program to have an understanding of the key issues involved here.*
As far as branching out into other fields goes, minoring in math is fairly common for mechanical and electrical engineering students, since these students take a lot of math. Engineering students who already take a lot of math can typically minor in math and graduate in the same amount of time as not minoring at all.
>
> I am curious what the workload would be like if I took a second major in mathematics?
>
>
>
Students who double major generally fall into two categories: those that want to graduate in the shortest amount of time possible and those that don't mind stretching the degree progressions out over another two or three more semesters.
The corresponding workload will depend on which of these two categories describes your situation. Other factors might come into play; e.g., suppose you take too many courses in a particular semester, then you fail or drop a few of those, and then have to retake them later. And so on.
You should also be aware, though, too, that not all courses are offered all of the time, so, if you really need to complete your degrees in a certain time frame, you need to be mindful of the actual course offering frequencies.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/10
| 2,120
| 8,592
|
<issue_start>username_0: Since it is required to be precise and ask one question at a time, I had to split my problem into two. The first part (background) is mentioned here:
[Gifting co-authorship if the topic of research was suggested by my boss?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/111033/gifting-co-authorship-if-the-topic-of-research-was-suggested-by-my-boss)
The second part is here. So, I had finished 40% of a paper 1 as a postdoc in institute X. And, I had resigned from X on 31st of May. After completing the paper 1, I am planning to work and write paper 2 which will be an extension; probably a much advanced version of paper 1. I will start working on paper 2 from July/August and probably submit it in November if everything goes according to the plan. But for paper 2, I need experimental data and even though I had many options for sources to get the data, I thought it was better to seek permission from my boss at X before I use their data.
Also, note that the topic of research for paper 1 was was suggested by my former boss at X, please see the link I mentioned above.
But my boss at X has two conditions: First, I am required to have affiliation of his research unit for paper 2. Second, in the acknowledgement section, I will have to strictly mention that the research of paper 2 was funded by a project grant from his research unit.
In reality, he had the data from the year 2008, from a private seismic survey company XYZ and such data is very regular thing to obtain in any seismic survey. I have such data as well from my previous job profile as a geophysicist. I can easily get more of such data and permission to use them from other companies without any hassle.
As a result of this conflict my relationship with him has also got strained. I tried to clear things with him through a meeting, sent him two emails, but he did not replied. He has probably burnt the bridges and avoids confrontation. He may also be upset from me as I am going away from his clutches. He had even restricted me that I cannot contact the company XYZ directly for asking them for the permission to use the data.
Is this not a form of bullying?
Also he made it sound as if I was stealing their data, on the contrary, I was merely seeking permission to use them. I was kind of miffed with that, not acceptable to me.
I was thinking, that if I am allowed to use the data, I will acknowledge the company, my boss at X and his research unit. Also I would acknowledge him for suggesting me the topic of research for paper 1. Regarding the data permission, I have done this before as well in a different institute with another professor. It was never a problem. A simple acknowledgment sentence in the paper has been sufficient for such purposes.
So how fair are the demands of my boss at X?<issue_comment>username_1: From what you describe here, the requests for the paper are fair: nothing is asked but a proper description of what you did where, and who funded you and who provided the data that is analyzed.
The crucial point is that you say paper 2 is an advanced version/extension of paper 1 you plan to do using data you got at affiliation 1, which I read as both papers are part of wrapping up your scientific output at affiliation 1.
(To me this sounds as if paper 1 is describing the theory and paper 2 describes the application to experimental data - if that's the case, you have two papers closely related to project 1.
Also, how closely related is your project at affiliation 2? The more different that is, the more related to affiliation 1 will paper 2 be seen.)
>
> I am required to have affiliation of his research unit for paper 2. Second, in the acknowledgement section, I will have to strictly mention that the research of paper 2 was funded by a project grant from his research unit.
>
>
>
At least in my field (not geophysics) it is perfectly normal to list an author who changed affiliations with 2 affiliations. From what you say, you'll anyways need to refer to paper with something like "this is an extension of [paper1]" in the introduction. In addition, you can clarify your affiliations in the acknowledgements saying that you started working on the project while at affiliation 1, funded by project 1, and now are at affiliation 2, funded by project 2. If you like, you coul dbe even more specific in describing what was done where.
If your project at affiliation 2 is unrelated, you may give affiliations as "1, now working at 2".
>
> In reality, he had the data from the year 2008, from a private seismic survey company XYZ and such data is very regular thing to obtain in any seismic survey.
>
> I have such data as well from my previous job profile as a geophysicist. I can easily get more of such data and permission to use them from other companies without any hassle.
>
>
>
Whether you *could have* used other data as well does not matter at all. The point is that you give the proper origin of the data you actually use.
And, regardless whether you use data you got at affiliation 1 or at job 0, you need permission by the respective employer to use that data for new studies or papers. (I'm talking German legislation, things may vary somewhere else, but I guess this is something you can safely extrapolate to other parts of the world).
---
The only thing you describe that sounds somewhat unusual to me is that prof. 1 asked you to no not contact company XYZ on your own. But we'd require background information by prof. 1 to judge whether this is fine or not.
I do have the impression from your posts, though, that you are still thoroughly stressed about your situation and still too upset to think calmly. One point that triggers this impression in your post is that you write in length about prof. 1 being upset - and are - judging from what your write - thoroughly upset yourself, but never mention taking into account even the possibility that *you* are also upset.
Seeing this, prof. 1 very clearly spelling out the IMHO usual points in wrapping up publication plans after a change of affiliation may even just be a reaction to you being as upset as you are. (Which does *not* mean that prof. 1 is not upset, but we academia.sx readers of your question do not have the neceassary background information to judge who else but you is upset.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Overall, your old Boss' requirement 1 about affiliation seems fair to me, I have certainly put double affiliations on papers myself, and it is not uncommon. For you, though, it might be a steep price to pay given your history. No one but yourself knows the answer to that question.
The second requirement about mentioning his funding agency, strikes me as a bit more odd. Depending on your situation, you should tread lightly. If the data is obtained under this research grant, you should write something like: "The data for this study was graciously provided by prof. X, funded by grant Z".
"Why?", you might ask. Most likely this is just a formality. But it could be such that prof. X has a grant provider, which he promised to deliver some amount of papers. Since your research is (I assume) in fact not funded by this grant, you would be lying by writing that it is. This could potentially come back to haunt you later, eg. in case you want to apply for grants in the same place.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Thanks for refining the question, adding relevant details and linking the previous question. I will simply add a few points to cbeleites' excellent answer.
(1) It isn't bullying because you are asking for permission to use data you got from him. He has the right to give it, deny or something in between. You, reciprocally, have the right to accept it or to negotiate through cajoling, coercing or litigating. It seems pretty symmetric, though unfortunate.
(2) About the fairness of it- the condition to not contact XYZ company seems unfair, especially if he doesn't furnish any reason. I don't know if he can hold you to that. Maybe he has some sort of agreement with them that constrains him, one can't say.
On the other hand if you can access such data as easily as you say, would it be possible to repeat your study with different data? If no, presumably there is something unique in this dataset, which may contribute to the resistance to sharing?
[This last point is only speculative logic as I am not from your field]
The part about mentioning the grant seems alright to me, because he isn't constraining you to NOT mention the present affiliation/grant alongside.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/10
| 738
| 3,283
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have two advisors for phd from differnt countries. I recieved an email from first professor. I just forwarded his email to second professor for his information. I used the native language of the second professor when I forwarded the email including one general statement. Is forwarding with the native of second person is mistake?<issue_comment>username_1: It is OK and totally normal to forward the 'raw' email from Professor A. Include any additional comments or summary of your own interpretation of what Professor A was suggesting or agreeing to. (Make sure that additional comments are clear to a reader as being your own 'side notes' - particularly if you are actually making them inside the original text).
It is appropriate to go ahead and try to explain any aspects that might be unclear due to the language issues. (If a student had to translate email into a language I understood, I'd still strongly prefer to have a clean (unaltered) copy of the original email attached in case there were any aspects that I wanted to ask about in greater detail.
The worst thing to do would be to 'rewrite' the original language in the email and send it as if it were the original text as sent from Prof A. (What if in your own enthusiasm, you misinterpreted what she was actually trying to say or propose or implied?)
The other thing that forwarding will do will make sure that everyone has everyone else's email addresses in case there need to be some other side-conversations.
However, it is in the OP's best interest to make sure there is some summary email at end of flurry of discussions that helps everyone know how the information was interpreted and acted upon by all parties.
Last line above has been added in response to @DeboraWeber-Wulff: The original (and current) answer is under the assumption that both Professor A and B are advisors/mentors to the OP and that they know each other but may have language issues - ("two advisors for PhD from different countries"). In that case, I don't agree that it is necessary to cc or ask permission before getting advice from one advisor about something communicated from the other advisor.
But, I agree with her totally - if this were a correspondence between a different set of scientists, the OP should ask permission, or at least cc the initial scientist, so that she knows that her private email is being forwarded to someone else.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: ### tl;dr Agree with your advisors on how you communicate
You've certainly not made a "mistake". But what you're realizing is that your assumptions about:
* Which language to use?
* What information should be shared?
* How verbose should you be?
* Whose responsibility is it, and who has permission, to update the 3rd person of the triangle about communication between the other two?
and so on. In your place I would talk to both my advisors, separately or together if you ever meet, about your "email routine" - what they expect and what, and what you expect and want. Then none of you will surprise/annoy the others with undersirable email practices.
And this is basically true about most kinds of collaborations in groups of people which don't all communicate together in a common forum.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/10
| 1,885
| 6,638
|
<issue_start>username_0: [According to <NAME>](https://mobile.twitter.com/ileanamfreytes/status/1005146039098146817?p=p),
>
> < 2% of people in the US have a #phd
>
> Of those, 6.5% are Hispanic
>
> By defending my PhD yesterday, I just became part of the 0.13% in the US that is #LatinoPhD
>
>
>
I find this statistic hard to believe, or if it is true maybe it is intentionally represented to look like a racial problem (although in my opinion Latino is not a race).
Regarding my field, almost 40% of references are from Spanish surnames, 40% Chinese, and 20% European. Based on this analogy (maybe false) I think her statement is wrong.
Is there any way or any source that can prove her claims?<issue_comment>username_1: The US Census Bureau gathers data on educational attainment of people living in the US, broken down by race, sex, age, and other categories. They specifically include "Hispanic origin" (though they do not consider this to be a "race"). The data come from the [American Community Survey](https://www.census.gov/topics/education/educational-attainment/about.html) and are widely considered to be authoritative.
[Here is their data for 2017.](https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/demo/education-attainment/cps-detailed-tables.html)
If you look in Table 1, "Educational Attainment of the Population 18 Years and Over, by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 2017", in the file labeled "Hispanic (of any race)", you'll find they estimate there are 235,000 people over age 18 of Hispanic origin who have a doctoral degree.
In the "All Races" file you can find that the total population over age 18 in 2017 was 246,325,000. So of the total US adult population, about 0.095% are people of Hispanic origin with a doctoral degree; even less than Freytes-Ortiz's figure. Also note that "Doctoral degree" may include degrees other than PhD, such as EdD, DD, etc (though not MD, DDS, JD, etc, which would be under "Professional Degrees").
This file also estimates 4,096,000 people of all races with doctoral degrees. From this, I get that 1.6% of the adult US population has a PhD, and of those, 5.7% are of Hispanic origin. Pretty close to Freytes-Ortiz. She may be using data from a different year, or a different source.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: So, I did a run using Census data, but a few clarifications (which some people have pointed out, but just to bring it all together): Census asks separate questions about a person's race (e.g., white, black, Asian, etc) and a person's ethnicity (that they are of Hispanic/Latino origin, or not).
As someone mentioned earlier, Census does not distinguish between Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish. You can find a CPS questionnaire [here](https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/techdocs/questionnaires/Demographics.pdf). I do think it is a little strange that she alternated between words (though Census does treat them interchangeably, for whatever that's worth).
Okay, so with those caveats -- When reporting poverty by education, Census usually limits to adults over 25, presumably because many 18 year olds will receive college degrees but are to young to do have done so (for example, see Table 3 from their annual report [here](https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2017/demo/P60-259.pdf)).
Using Census microdata from the March 2017 Current Population Survey, we find
* **1.88% of the population 25+ have a PhD**
* of these, 5.7% are Hispanic or Latino (compared to 15% of the entire population 25+)
* **0.7% of the Hispanic/Latino population 25+ have a PhD**
* 0.11% of the population 25+ are both Hispanic/Latino **and** have a PhD.
As Nate mentioned, she could simply be using data from an earlier year or from a different source like the American Community Survey.
This is pretty consistent with my priors; however, I'm glad you're surprised -- it means your program must be doing something right in terms of engaging diverse communities. Hopefully that spreads!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I would like to offer two reasons your observations might not match with this data. (Which is what you seem to be implying. You are concluding political motivation - I might just conclude pride in ones accomplishments and in the rising diversity of US PhD holders.)
First, you are likely observing a particular cohort. I am assuming the percentage of Hispanic PhD graduates is going up as institutions become more supportive of diversity. So if the overall percentage is 6.5%, that likely averages some older cohorts with less than 6.5% Hispanic PhD representation and some newer cohorts with percentages above 6.5%. So you might think this number is low, but that is because you don't know as many older PhD holders.
Second, your observation of citations includes many non-US residents. This statistic is about the US. Worldwide, the proportion of PhD holders from various countries is more reflective of the number of PhD slots in those countries. Futhermore, as a side note, looking at surnames also is difficult in the case of women who have taken a spouses' name.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This information came from a tweet I shared to express my excitement for finishing my PhD and, in the process, increase by 1 the number of underrepresented minorities in the US with a doctoral degree. I did not expect for this tweet to get the attention it has, but I'm glad it's opened the doors for more in-depth discussions about diversity and representation in academia.
To clarify, I got my information from the following sources:
1. >
> < 2% of people in the US have a #phd
>
>
>
–United Stated Census Bureau, Educational Attainment of the Population 18 Years and Over, by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 2014
2. >
> Of those, 6.5% are Hispanic
>
>
>
–National Science Foundation, Survey of Earned Doctorates 2016 (this number only includes Hispanic/Latinos that are also US citizens)
These were back-of-the-envelope calculations based on limited information I had at the time. I appreciate that others in this thread have provided further sources of information regarding this statistic. It seems like my back-of-the-envelope calculations were not far from the most recent figures of Hispanic/Latino representation in doctoral degrees.
My goal was not political or inflammatory in nature, I merely wanted to bring attention to the low numbers of Hispanic/Latinos with doctoral degrees, share my excitement for finishing my degree, and connect with others in a similar position. I hope this response can bring some clarity.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/10
| 1,427
| 5,961
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a detailed literature review of some twenty papers available on a newer topic of interest, which form the core of the topic. I am extensively using data from all of those twenty papers.
I want to know whether there is any limit to the amount of data that can be taken from a research paper (with proper citations and referencing) for writing a review paper. Will the excessive use of data (methodology, experimental results, author's proposed and unverified hypothesis etc.) from a research paper be called plagiarism?<issue_comment>username_1: Plagiarism, according to Marriam-Webster, quoted [here](http://www.plagiarism.org/article/what-is-plagiarism):
>
> * to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
> * to use (another's production) without crediting the source
> * to commit literary theft
> * to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source
>
>
>
From your description, it seems you are not committing any of these offenses. Review papers necessarily report large amounts of work and results from other researchers and are therefore, in a sense, derivative. This isn't plagiarism, as long as the sources are painstakingly referenced and acknowledged (as you do). The originality of a review consists in synthesising the existing body of work, identifying different strands in it, examining present shortcomings as well as best practices, and suggesting further research at the cutting edge.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Writing a review article is not plagiarism as long as you cite all sources correctly. If you don't, it's plagiarism.
Besides this, there are, at least in STM, limits regarding the amount of data that can be taken from a research paper due to copyright and permission handling, see [the guidelines of the STM Association](https://www.stm-assoc.org/2018_06_07_STM_Permissions_Guidelines_2014.pdf).
>
> use up to three figures (including tables) from a journal article or
> book chapter, but:
>
>
> * not more than five figures from a whole book or journal issue/edition;
> * not more than six figures from an annual journal volume; and
> * not more than three figures from works published by a single publisher for an article, and not more than three figures from works published by a single publisher for a book chapter (and in total not more than thirty figures from a single publisher for re-publication in a book, including a multi-volume book, with different authors per chapter)
>
>
> use single text extracts of less than 400 words from a journal article or book chapter, but
>
>
> * not more than a total of 800 words from a whole book or journal issue/edition
>
>
>
Note, that in most cases you have to [ask for permission or at least notify the publisher](https://www.stm-assoc.org/copyright-legal-affairs/permissions/permissions-guidelines/) about the re-use of the material.
If you want to use more, you defenitely have to ask for permission and might be charged. But this is a copyright an not a plagiarism issue.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As noted, you are not talking about plagiarism. But you may be talking about copyright violation: even if "facts" cannot be copyrighted a particular list of experimental results can.
On the other hand, a certain amount of a copyrighted work can be quoted in a review. This is the doctrine of "fair use". If you need legal advice, consult a lawyer. Perhaps your own institution has lawyers on staff (or as consultants) that you can consult.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: There are three closely related things that your question seems to conflate. Most of the existing answers mention plagiarism and copyright, but in academic publication, originality is also important:
* **Plagiarism:** As long as you properly cite your sources, there is absolutely no concern about plagiarism. You could literally copy and paste an entire book; as long as you clearly cite the author and you clearly say that your work is a copy-and-paste, there is no problem with plagiarism. (Obviously, that extreme example would have a serious problem with the following two items.)
* **Copyright violation:** If the works you are borrowing from are copyrighted, then you need to be careful not to copy-and-paste too much from them, even if you properly cite your source and explicitly mention that it is a copy-and-paste. How much is too much is a subjective question, but a widely accepted standard is that up to 10% of an article or chapter is acceptable, especially for purposes of research and education. However, note that I say "copy-and-paste": copyright does not protect ideas; it only protects the expression of those ideas, that is, the exact words used to express the ideas. So,if you merely borrow the same ideas and completely rewrite them in your own words (beyond mere paraphrasing), then there is absolutely no concern with copyright violation. Moreover, in many jurisdictions, databases (that is, unoriginal facts compiled as a table) are not copyrightable; you can freely copy them without concern for copyright violation (as long as the facts are truly unoriginal; if a lot of originality went into those tables, then it gets sticky and varies by jurisdiction).
* **Originality:** Regardlenss of moral issues of plagiarism and legal issues of copyright, when publishing academic work, you must also be concerned about originality: most publishers require that your work be truly original in some way; that is, it is not a mere rehashing of ideas that have already been published. So, merely copying other people's work and citing it might not be sufficient to be published. That said, what you describe should have no problem meeting this standard: combining multiple published works almost always creates a new, original work. The question of how original is enough is a very subjective question that depends on the editors.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/10
| 2,401
| 9,617
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am organising an upcoming conference and some of our participants were approached by Expo Housing Services, a company claiming - falsely - to be charged with arranging accommodation for our guests. The details of their operation, specifically targeting scientific conferences are explained [here](https://www.elsevier.com/events/conferences/international-conference-on-algal-biomass-biofuels-and-bioproducts/location/warning-scam-alert), in a warning on an Elsevier's bio-science event website (in short: under some pretense credit card details are requested, loss of funds ensues) which I was able to find quickly googling "EHS scam". However, to do that I needed to know the fraudster's name, which changes often.
Frankly I am amazed that scientific conferences are a big enough market for the scam to persist (google search returns hits from as far as 2014), but it concerns me that I have never heard of such a scam tailored towards academics. So suppose I would like to raise awareness of this scheme. **How to communicate such scams to a wider academic community?**
Obviously, I figured that writing on academia.stackexchange is a good first step (also, to the best of my search skills, this topic was not raised here yet). I can of course warn colleagues in my field, but EHS does not discriminate and targets various disciplines (and operates in various countries).
There is one more question here. **What reasonable measures can I take to prevent scammers from reaching my participants?** EHS called two invited speakers of my conference (obtaining their numbers from their institutions' websites, I presume), so I *could* simply not publish the invited speakers list. To clarify, this is a mathematics conference where we announce in advance several top-tier experts to be present and then expect members of community to register based on their interest in specific topics that these invited speakers are known to work on - you see why I don't consider anonymity a reasonable mesure. I am very curious if in any parts of academia there are protocols in place to prevent third parties from pretending to be associated with a conference. I'm considering adding appropriate disclaimers to websites of any future events I will organise, although I am aware that a significant portion of visitors only read participant lists.
I know that I am not responsible for the unsolicited contact from EHS (to be clear, there was no leak on my end - the scammers used only public information), but at the same time I can't shake the feeling that the very situation (or especially potential loss of money) reflects badly on me.
---
EDIT: 15.07.2018. Thank you all for the input. I am now after the conference and I figure an update of the story would not go amiss.
First of all, I accepted @KareemElashmawy answer, since I came to agree that it is on the relevant authority for the community to warn about and fight such scams: not on the particular organizer, and not on the particular university. I contacted my national maths society and they were very interested. I feel they will try to deal with the problem.
However, I also contacted several people at my faculty that I know were organizing conferences this summer. The mathematicians were grateful for the warning (not one mathematician whom I asked - and I did, home and abroad - ever encountered such scam), but the computer scientists dismissed me, because "they know the problem very well and it's no news to them". I was frankly astonished that this knowledge did not pass to me (or other mathematicians) from people working in the same building. Unfortunately I don't know any reasonable way to exchange such tacit knowledge **between** fields - to find one was a part of my motivation for asking this question here, but since no answer weighed in on this topic I guess I did a poor job of conveying that. Of course the issue of inter-fields communication is not easy (as witnessed in this case by my CS colleagues) and I greatly appreciate the comments from astronomers, chemists and statisticians that appeared here. It would be very interesting to understand why some groups were targeted by (and thus warn about) such scams, and why some were not (yet).
I also followed @Kareem's advice to contact the law enforcement, which wasn't my first instinct and here is why: I was only able to testify that *maybe* someone from an unspecified country tried to impersonate me (or just falsely presented themselves as an affiliate of my university, *maybe*) in order to *maybe* steal money from a third party, also *maybe* in a different country. I was utterly unsurprised that the policeman told me that since neither me or the university lost any money, short of the university claiming image losses we have no legal action. I left it at that, since I know my university would not have any interest in pursuing this route. There is of course also an issue of jurisdiction, since the chances the local law enforcement could reach the foreign scammers are pretty slim. I need however to stress that this paragraph is very country-, university-, or even perhaps the-policeman-talking-with-you-specific.
The links to Comic Con and Yankees 2016 that @Kareem has provided helped me to stop worrying too much about my participants - if a Comic Con attendee wants to buy the ticket from a shady source, it is on them if the ticket will turn out useless, and quite the same with my participants. Needless to say, the moment I heard about the attempt of this scam I did email all my participants, reiterating who are the only people that should be contacting them on our behalf (and with what - collecting abstracts is okay, asking for credit card details is not). It was too late to give any warning on the registration form (since by that time it was almost closed), but I will of course do that the next time I organize anything - and I will probably do it in @einpoklum's style:) However I now feel that such a warning is all that should be expected of the organizers in such situations.
Last but not least, I think that the conned participant got his money back, via [Chargeback](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chargeback) (I give a link, since I am illiterate at banking and did not know about it until this scam). It certainly didn't mar his stay, he seemed very happy to visit us despite the unfortunate start.
Again, thanks to everyone for sharing their thoughts.<issue_comment>username_1: **On the registration form** put, "Housing should be arranged only through [conference's official housing bureau] or directly with your hotel. Use of other services may result in unauthorized charges to your credit card." (Re-word as needed to reflect official housing arrangements.)
Include the same warning, in bold, when you invite speakers. Also, consider asking invited speakers to let you know if they are contacted by third parties.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Warn them like a boss! Warn them like Admiral Akbar:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XAg73.gif)
Actually, I'm at least half serious. Using humor + animation attracts attention, even if it's somewhat garish. Consider making such an image eminently visible to people interested in the conference (e.g. on some page of the website).
If this is a bit too much for you, maybe just a still image of the same thing...
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> How to communicate such scams to a wider academic community?
>
>
>
Report the scam to the relevant authority for your academic community ([ACS](https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en.html) for Chemistry for instance). They have the audience and impetus to disseminate such information. If they do not, then (IMO) said members ought to push for the society to take proactive measures.
>
> What reasonable measures can I take to prevent scammers from reaching my participants?
>
>
>
### Warn your attendees in all marketing materials.
Specify in clear transparent terms the existence of these scammers, how they predate upon attendees, and how attendees may detect them in all marketing materials that is received by attendees, speakers, or partners. This may include: Registration forms, Flyers, Emails, Invitations, the conference website, etc...
The exact wording of this is up to you; but, **it must explicitly specify that scammers may try to contact attendees and claim a fraudulent relationship with your conference**. As username_1 suggested, you may provide a list of all officially partnered entities that attendees may compare to or use. You do not need to push for attendees to register through your partners (as Bob suggested), but you do need to provide the base warning them to take care when registering with non-partners and to perform their due diligence!
Note: Similar proactive precautions taken by other conventions ([Comic Con](https://www.comic-con.org/toucan/03-don%E2%80%99t-be-scammed-companies-or-individuals-selling-fake-badges-comic-con-2017)) and Sports Events ([Yankees 2016](http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/news/yankees-discontinuing-print-at-home-tickets-2016-season-yankee-stadium/8qov9apgvy8s1hhjzx87dbsua)) may also be taken.
### Finally, don't forget to report this to law enforcement authorities as well.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I have recently seen a conference webpage that highlighted that there was similar scam going around. Later, I have seen it on their Twitter page as well. You could also use participant's email address to warn them.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/11
| 527
| 2,150
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently submitted a manuscript to a prestigious journal in my field. The manuscript is now under "minor revision" status and the reviewer only asked me to provide percentages in one of the table. The comments are positive and I think the overall chance of acceptance is quite high.
The thing is, as I go through my manuscript, I found one minor editorial error, that is, the supplemental materials are marked incorrectly (the supplemental material 1 appeared after supplemental material 2, not in the order of appearance. But the supplemental materials are correct, not missing or mismatched). It seems that the editors and reviewers are not aware of tis mistake.
So my question is, what should I do? There seems to be three options:
1. Correct this editorial error before resubmission and notify the editor in the cover letter. The decision letter has stated
>
> Do not make additional change unless absolutely necessary.
>
>
>
2. Correct this error anyway without notifying the editorial office since the error is quite trivial.
3. Don't correct this error now and wait till the copyediting process.
What would you guys suggest me do?
I don't want to leave bad impression on the editors and reviewers and jeopardize the chances of acceptance of my article.<issue_comment>username_1: Take option #1, correct it now and notify the editor. The decision letter did say "do not make additional changes", but that is almost certainly referring to changes that will need to be peer reviewed. This kind of minor change that no reasonable person will disagree with is not a problem.
If you're still worried, you can also do #3.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Forgive me for being condescending - You seem to be experiencing symptoms of anxiety.
What you need to do is:
* Take some slow, deep breaths.
* Go some place with a wide vista, like a hill or something, and soak in the feeling of being on top of things.
* Relax! Life is good - your paper was accepted.
* Go with option #1 of course, and don't sweat it.
* Did I mention taking deep breaths? Do that as much as possible.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/11
| 1,451
| 6,119
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am interested in different methods for scaling grades from a class test, say. In this case there is only one test and this gives the whole class grade. I remember from years ago a method that took into account the relative strength of the students taking the class by looking at their grades in other classes. However I can't remember the details at all. The idea was that a hard test taken by strong students would be scaled up more than an easy test taken by weak students.
Is anyone familiar with this idea and how it might work mathematically?
---
In response to comments let me give an example. Say there is an optional class on Semiotics and Structuralism that the strongest students typically choose to take. The mean for this unit is 60% typically, say. Say there is also another optional class on how to spell the words in Harry Potter book one that the weakest students take. Say this gets the same mean of 60% typically. It would be interesting to know what formulas have been used to scale the former class so that the mean is higher than the latter.<issue_comment>username_1: are you asking about just converting everything into standardized scores?
In which case, you take the mean of relative performance (for example, if you are teaching a senior level course, you might take the major gpa distribution rather than overall gpa distribution) assign everyone a z-score based on their position in the calculated normal distribution.
you do the same for your test, standardize the score. For example, if your test average is a 50 with an SD of 10, a person who got a 70 has a z of 2 while a 45 has a z of -.5.
Now if you are planning on basing their recorded grade based on expected performance you are probably opening up a serious can of worms. For example, a student who consistently scores in the z score range of 1.8-2.1 and then only scores at a 1.5 is given an 75 (assuming mean 80 score, and 10 sd) while a student who consistently scores at a -.5 to -.8 range and scores a zero is given an 85 on the test.
If this is your plan, I would seriously rethink it. Not only will it upset students, it penalizes high performing students and rewards low performers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **You need to re-use questions over several years**
A small subset of well-vetted questions needs to be reused across years to help distinguish the difficulty of tests from the skill of students. Let's say the mean percentage getting these questions right is 60%. In a year with a strong cohort of students, more than 60% will get them right. If these same (strong) students perform poorly on the other questions, it's a sign that the other questions were too hard, and indicates that the scores should be curved.
NB: care must be taken to avoid these questions being "leaked" to other students. In our course (I teach in a large coordinated course) we have a pool of vetted questions that we shuffle every year to reduce the potential for leaking/cheating.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: [added after the edit to the question] First of all, this is a phylosophical decision. In some countries / universities / models, votes are intended as an absolute measure (how well does this student know Calculus I *with respect to an unwritten golden standard of mathematical expertise*?). In others, they are a relative measure (how well does this student know Calculus I *with respect to the rest of their class*?). From what I understand, the 'relative' thinking is more common in the US, and the 'absolute' one in Europe. You need to decide which one you wish to go for. Both have their merits and their drawbacks.
As for "how to do it in practice", I'm definitely not familiar with it, but you might be referring to models like the [polytomous Rasch model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polytomous_Rasch_model).
Basically the idea is that the result of a test is given by f(difficulty of the test, ability of the student) + error, and you can obtain the two independent variables by fitting.
This produces an estimate of the difficulty of each test and the ability of each student, which you can then reuse to rescale things at your will.
There is plenty of [software](https://www.rasch.org/software.htm) to compute these scores, for instance R and Python packages.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I strongly recommend to look at this idea from a legal standpoint. At least in Germany, we would just not be allowed to do that. The result in one test may never affect the grading in an other course, even if they are closely related (e.g. I'm teaching Intro to CS and Programming for first semester students, both courses are highly interwoven with each other, sometimes even sharing or exchanging time slots, but the results are completely independent from each otherm which sometimes result in students which have to re-take only one of the courses next year).
An other thought: Students might be interested and high performers in topic A, but dislike topic B. If a good grade in A would affect the grading in B, this would be just unfair.
The only thing you can do (in my opinion) is, to give all of them high grades if they deserve it. But you will need your own mental model of which performance is required for each grade. You should define this prior to the exams and change it only if you made serious misassumptions.
This might have an interesting effect btw: The level in your course will lower over time, since "optimizing" students are recognizing, that all peaople in your corse are getting good grades and so they start taking it ;-). But usually you can demonstrate the required performance level by some short tests on the first weeks or so.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: "Scaling" to a curve, and adjusting the grade to reflect your expectations of a student's performance are two different things. The first is a common practice, though not without some controversy, and the second is a confirmational bias put into practice, and should be avoided. Every student in a course is entitled to the same treatment.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/11
| 1,094
| 4,799
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have an R1 offer in Engineering. The department and Dean, per my request, have offered me a very good salary competitive with my competing industry offers, as well as excellent lab space. However, the startup package is lacking. Equipment is 50% what I hoped for, travel budget is 25%, and they fund only one grad student for 2 years. This will slow my lab-building.
As a note, I was asked to apply, but was planning to move to an industry position. The result was an early assurance that a competitive salary offer could be made. The offer just arrived. I have, technically, not yet begun negotiating.
The question: have I spent my capital on this higher salary, or is the salary a reason to think I should be able to negotiate further? Any suggestions on how to approach this in terms of tone/strategy?
Update: because salary was a precondition of agreeing to apply, negotiating was indeed expected, and successful. My tone in negotiating was all about thanking them while identifying what more I needed to succeed.
UPDATE: I negotiated beyond salary, successfully. The high salary was brought up in that process, and I nonetheless substantially increased my non-salary offer.<issue_comment>username_1: Most departments do not want to negotiate piecemeal. They generally make you an initial offer that includes salary, benefits, space, teaching, startup package, etc. Most applicants then respond back with a counter offer that includes improvements in one or more area. This can go back and forth a number of times. I have never seen, or heard, of anyone trying to negotiate an offer one piece at a time.
I would therefore guess if you spent time negotiating your salary and not talking about the other aspects of the offer, that the department was assuming that those were acceptable. In other words, yes, you most likely spent you negotiating power on salary. You can always go back to the table and see if you can get more, or what you can trade reductions in your salary for.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, departments don't like extended negotiations with candidates for faculty positions. In some cases, candidates use this as a way to extend the time that they have to consider an offer so that they can interview for other positions and obtain other offers. If a candidate ends up not taking the job after an extended negotiation then it may be too late to get the next candidate on the list.
There are differences between salary and startup packages:
In negotiating faculty offers the budget that pays for faculty salary is often different from the budget that pays for the startup package. In any case, the startup package is one-time money rather than a permanent salary. Thus if the one-time money is available it might be easier to come up with $100K more of startup funds than $10K per year of salary.
At public institutions, faculty salaries are often public information while at private universities these are generally secret. At public institutions, it can upset other faculty members if a new assistant professor is hired in at a much higher than normal salary. Large differences in salary are much more common at private institutions.
It appears that the OP made his salary needs clear before agreeing to interview but that the startup package was not discussed before the interview. Furthermore, the offer that he has received is the first offer from the institution. Under those circumstances, it would be quite normal to negotiate the startup package.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I'm not sure how this worked out (in the past):
But I definitely disagree that "negotiating power is spent". This is the first time the candidate has the offer letter. Thus the first time that he has exact information on the complete offer. All, he did was give them a small heads up that the salary needed to be in industry range. Now he is getting the complete offer (salary, bennies, startup, travel, assistant, etc.)
It is completely reasonable for him to start negotiations based on this offer. And it is common to try to raise the startup package. And maybe even psychologically easier than paying a junior person higher than a senior one.
That's great they gave you a good salary. But the rest needs negotiation now. No reason for you to take first offer or to have pretold them exactly what has to be in it. (What if they had said zero startup package? It is silly to think you have to accept that.)
If anything that you have the salary settled makes it easier on the department. At least one part of the offer is settled. Also, psychologically they have made a committment to you (even a nice one, given the salary) and it can be normal for them to want to do more to seal the deal.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/12
| 997
| 4,116
|
<issue_start>username_0: 18 months into my PhD (after I had passed my quals), my advisor became so emotionally abusive and bullying that I had to take a semester off (I was already dealing with diagnosed depression). While I returned for six months, ultimately I was not able to make it work with my advisor (who went from bullying me to ignoring me) and have left the PhD program for industry.
I've kept in infrequent contact with my former undergraduate advisor, with whom I conducted about a year of research. She recently ran into a close friend at a conference and asked about me and how my PhD was going. While the friend did not disclose the specifics, he disclosed how my advisor was holding me back by requiring experimental work after withdrawing support/funds, at which point she said that based on my current work, it would be sufficient enough for a PhD with her (and that I should finish my PhD remotely with her).
Once I formally resigned my position (I have not officially "withdrawn" from the program till October), I emailed my former advisor to let her know of my decision. She has seemed eager to reconnect now that we are in the same geographic area (2 hr). I'm planning on meeting with her to catch up, but struggling with how much I should disclose about my departure from my program. She is not a frequent collaborator with my advisor (they wrote a book together some years ago), but they very much travel in the same circles, are on the same committees, etc. Should I tell her what happened? Or will this just lead to gossip that won't help me personally or professionally? Both advisors are still closely tied to industry, fwiw.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm sorry to hear about your experience, that sounds very distressing.
From what you've posted, it looks as if your undergrad advisor is sympathetic and thinks well of you. That being the case, you probably don't have much to lose by discussing it with her, especially if she asks about it.
It's also unlikely that you'll get much personal benefit from discussing it, other than a sympathetic ear (which is sometimes well worth having!) But it's quite possible that you'll be helping other students. If she is aware of this behaviour, then she's in a much better position to look out for other students who might run into the same problems with this guy.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Yes**. Abusive persons in positions of authority are a huge problem in academia. A major reason for the continued existence of this problem is the fact that it’s often swept under the carpet and hushed up.
Ask yourself: would *you* have liked to know before starting your PhD that your future adviser was known to be abusive? The answer, I hope, is self-evident.
Disclosing the abusiveness of your advisor might not help you personally but it would be a huge service to the academic community, and in particular to future students. Put in a different, more negative way, by *not* letting people know you’d be contributing to the problem. Unfortunately there are often good reasons for keeping such things to oneself (fear of reprisal probably being the main factor) but since you’ve moved on to industry, you’re in a unique position where disclosure is unlikely to cause you any harm.
One of the big revelations of the #MeToo movement is the fact that many people honestly don’t know that a colleague of theirs is a harasser, and thus are unable to help victims, or prevent abuse. The same is true for all forms of abuse, not just sexual harassment.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree that you should disclose this information. I know of a colleague who has a reputation for being hard on students, but I don't know whether it crosses the line. I know another who is a raging jerk, but again I don't know whether his annoying personality crosses into abusing students. In both cases it would be tremendously helpful to have a student tell me "Look, don't let anybody else get into the situation I wound up in."
Don't let them take advantage of fear. That's how the powerful get away with it.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/12
| 489
| 1,987
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am starting to write my thesis by the start of August this year.
I want to write it in a format so that later I can publish a book out of it.
How is it possible? Any suggestions?
Also, does this account for self-plagiarism? What are the key points I should keep in mind before start writing?<issue_comment>username_1: I would just focus on writing the thesis. If it is good enough to be published as a book, you will know when it is done. Regardless of what you do now, getting it into publishable form is going to be a huge job, and the problems will only become apparent once your thesis is finished. So what you do now is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to publishing your thesis as a book.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: For another view on this see <NAME>, *From Dissertation to Book.* <http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/288463.html> The author says, and I agree, that a dissertation can be turned into a book successfully.
Some differences between a dissertation and a book: topic (narrow vs broader), purpose (demonstrate knowledge to superiors vs inform learners), audience (faculty vs students & nonacademics), style (purely academic vs appealing, readable, comprehensible), and author authority (frequent citation of previous works for credibility vs creating something new from a position of your own authority). Academic presses don't make a lot of money from book sales, and they don't want to lose money on your book, so sales are important. The way to increase sales is to have a wide audience, which implies a broader topic and a different style.
If you want a career in academia, your first impulse may be to squeeze several published papers out of your dissertation. But if you're constantly recycling your dissertation into a series of articles and a book, your growth as a scholar will be limited. The lack of new topics will stand out on your CV when you're applying for jobs.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/12
| 1,434
| 6,282
|
<issue_start>username_0: My adviser is chairing an upcoming conference and I am wondering as his PhD student how can I benefit from this opportunity?
Other than attending the conference itself and benefiting from that, I am interested in knowing if it is common for PhD students from the conference chair research group can:
* review submitted papers
* help with organizing the conference
* help with anything else (I am not sure if there is anything else that PhD students can help with)<issue_comment>username_1: Help with organizing is a great start. Do what needs to be done and don't let any task be "too low". Top volunteering spots are registration help and IT support. You can build quite a bit of good rapport by being "so and so's friendly phd student who helped get my mac to connect to the projector". Makes your adviser look good as well. Happy adviser, happy phd life.
As someone who was in your position working with a faculty member who was an executive director of a conference, I did the following-
1. helped with registration
2. took photos
3. helped with general tech support issues
4. passed out drink tickets
5. whatever little thing needed to be done
In short, there is a TON to do behind the scenes at a conference to make things tick. Just be a can-do and helpful person. People notice that and it has the ability to do much more for your career than reviewing a few proposals. Those people you are helping get their mac to work on a projector might be on a search committee for a position you are applying for.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **TL;DR:** you can benefit in a small way by helping out with organizational duties, if you don’t let it distract you from more important work. Also, do not expect to review paper submissions - that is not typically something that PhD students are assigned to do.
---
Organizing a conference is mostly an exercise in logistics, and involves taking care of many small and (usually) not very interesting details. It is quite common that faculty members who are organizing a conference outsource some of the organizational duties to their PhD (and/or undergrad) students. I beieve that sometimes the students are paid for this.
As for your question, I think your advisor would probably appreciate if you simply asked them what are some ways you can help, and predict that they would be happy assigning you some organizational duties, but not to review papers, which is the work of the program committee that is typically made up of senior academics with established reputations.
Whether you “can benefit” from performing such organizational duties is not obvious to me. Some ways in which you *might* benefit are:
* You might get paid.
* You will get to share in the excitement of being part of the workings of an academic conference (perhaps with well known speakers or important people in your field).
* You might get to email or otherwise interact with such people as part of your organizational duties. As a result, they are marginally more likely to remember your existence if and when they encounter your name in the future.
* You will learn about how academic conferences work and gain experience in organizational activities, which you can list on your CV.
* Your adviser will be happy with you.
And here are some reasons why doing this might not benefit you (at least, not as much as you think):
* You likely will not get paid.
* The time you will spend helping out with the organization has an opportunity cost - you could have been using it for working on your research or doing other productive work that may be more beneficial.
* With regards to the perceived benefit of interacting with senior researchers (as mentioned above), in my opinion the correlation of this “benefit” to actual future career success is very close to 0. Unlike what @username_1’s answer suggests, no one would be more likely to offer you a job because you did an especially nice job emailing them about hotel reimbursements, connecting their Mac to a projector, or handling some similar logistical issue. If you want to impress researchers in your area, talking to them about *research* during a coffee break at the conference would be hugely more effective (assuming that you are actually an interesting person to talk to).
* I think there is also a *psychological* opportunity cost, namely the effect that by having the mindset of “how can I benefit” in connection with something that is ultimately a mundane event that has little connection to the actual research activities that a PhD student is expected to focus on, you will be at risk of being distracted from those more important goals.
**Summary.** Ultimately, while I think it could be fun and mildly beneficial for you to get involved in the conference organization, it would be good not to get too hung up on the idea of using this as an opportunity for career advancement.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I was part of organizing committee as a first year PhD student (not in USA; we start PhD after completing master studies). I checked for locations for the icebreaker event, figured out transportation to there, accepted registrations and generally participated in planning and implementing other practical things.
The conference is an annual one and a significant in my field and my country, so one consequence is that many people recognized me after the event, even though I had little idea of who they were.
This also gave me experience, and, more importantly, confidence, in organizing things, which has been useful in my personal life.
I can't say if there have been any, or any direct, academic benefits. I am presently a postdoc of a person who attended that conference, and who is not from the country in which the conference was organized.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: To add another angle to the already good answers: Be a good host of your home town. Seek out younger people, PhD students and post docs, and make sure they have someone to talk to after hours. Maybe organize a group of people going out for an informal dinner or drink in the evening. The contacts you make such places - and where people remember you as a friendly host - are contacts which often last for many years.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/12
| 747
| 3,284
|
<issue_start>username_0: Many people told me it is much more easier for an applied/computational mathematician to find a job in U.S. than a pure mathematician. I believe that it is largely due to the fact that applied/computational mathematicians have many advantages in finding jobs in industry. I wonder if this is still the case in academia, in particular research-oriented schools. Well, at least in the department I am studying at, most postdocs and newly-hired assistant professors are doing applied\computational math or potentially applicable math.
Specifically, Is it **generally easier** to find a job in research-oriented schools (regardless of ranking) if one works in applied math rather than pure math? (I naively believe that there is no special advantages for applied mathematicians to apply for a job in teaching-oriented schools. Please let me know if I am not right)
To avoid the tag that "*this question strongly depends on individual factors*", I want to clarify the words "**generally easier**". I want to know whether or not most research-oriented math departments (*specifically refer to those with both pure and applied mathematicians. I know in some universities, pure math and applied math belong to different departments*) are more interested in hiring applied/computational mathematicians as postdocs/APs and the reasons behind it.
Answers based on personal experience and objective evidence/statistics are both welcome here!<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Choose the odd one out: a pizza delivery guy, an engineer, a Walmart cashier and theoretical mathematician. The answer is theoretical mathematician because the other three can feed a family of three.
>
>
>
Granted the above is just a joke but whenever you've got a choice between theoretical and applied math, the choice should be the latter at least from the perspective of career benefits.
**Now to be specific to your question:** I would say that, all things being equal (which they rarely are), applied math still retains its job advantage over theory even in academia. Both aren't resource-intensive: all you need is pen, paper and a decent computer to do research. However, there will probably be more funded projects available and more opportunities for inter-disciplinary research in applied math. Companies and institutions really want to be able to model and simulate complex phenomena and are eager to sponsor and collaborate on that sort of research.
Specifically, in my field (reacting flows), mathematical modeling and accurate simulations save a lot of money and time that would have otherwise been wasted building prototypes and conducting numerous trial-and-error experiments. So, people in the field collaborate with applied physics and math folks all the time. |
Disclaimer: My field is not math and I'm hazarding a guess.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You can answer your question yourself with a bit of work. The American Mathematical Society has a job page for recent Ph.D.s. You can use it for free.
From the inside of a (now disjointed) Math and Computer Science Department, it looks like Deans are much more interested in applied mathematics as they hope for attracting outside funding and NSF grants. But this is just anecdotal information.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/12
| 504
| 2,164
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can reviewing experiences for top notch journals in a specific field be considered as a distinguishing and effective factor for the applying process?
I've read somewhere that having a fertile record in sites such as [Publons](http://publons.com/) can have a positive effect for applying for, e.g. a PhD position.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Choose the odd one out: a pizza delivery guy, an engineer, a Walmart cashier and theoretical mathematician. The answer is theoretical mathematician because the other three can feed a family of three.
>
>
>
Granted the above is just a joke but whenever you've got a choice between theoretical and applied math, the choice should be the latter at least from the perspective of career benefits.
**Now to be specific to your question:** I would say that, all things being equal (which they rarely are), applied math still retains its job advantage over theory even in academia. Both aren't resource-intensive: all you need is pen, paper and a decent computer to do research. However, there will probably be more funded projects available and more opportunities for inter-disciplinary research in applied math. Companies and institutions really want to be able to model and simulate complex phenomena and are eager to sponsor and collaborate on that sort of research.
Specifically, in my field (reacting flows), mathematical modeling and accurate simulations save a lot of money and time that would have otherwise been wasted building prototypes and conducting numerous trial-and-error experiments. So, people in the field collaborate with applied physics and math folks all the time. |
Disclaimer: My field is not math and I'm hazarding a guess.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You can answer your question yourself with a bit of work. The American Mathematical Society has a job page for recent Ph.D.s. You can use it for free.
From the inside of a (now disjointed) Math and Computer Science Department, it looks like Deans are much more interested in applied mathematics as they hope for attracting outside funding and NSF grants. But this is just anecdotal information.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/12
| 331
| 1,291
|
<issue_start>username_0: A colleague of mine (C1) from other University (U1) has asked me, by email, if another colleague (C2) from my University (U2) is moving from U2 to U1.
Should I tell to C2 about that rumor?
Or should I answer to C1 that I have no clue?
Of course, I do not have any idea of C2's plans but I have a closer relationship with him.<issue_comment>username_1: **If someone asks you in person**: I would recommend you to say to your colleague that you have no clue about what he is talking about, immediately - even if you know your supervisor's plan.
**If someone asks you by email:**
In this case it is easier. Just ignore it.
Some supervisors share a lot of things with their students and I think that is better to assume everything as private.
Since this rumour could have some professional consequence to your supervisor, I would alert him about that too.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The options you have presented are not exhaustive. If you do not wish to participate in the rumor mill, or disclose personal plans of a colleague, you could simply tell your colleague (C1) that you'd like to help, but you are nor at liberty to discuss the employment arrangements of your colleagues. Lying about things you know is generally a bad practice.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/12
| 2,231
| 9,649
|
<issue_start>username_0: During class, I asked my instructor about a certain thing that didn't make sense to me. Basically, there was a problem that I couldn't figure out how to solve using the methods we've studied. The instructor told me that the problem couldn't be solved using those methods. As this aligned with my own suspicion, I took her word on it and moved on.
During the oral exam, I was talking about this, and said that the problem was not solvable. The examinator said that it is solvable using those methods, and he explained how.
My response was "ah, I see, that makes sense", and then we kept on discussing.
But now, after the exam, I am thinking whether it would've been acceptable of me to just "put the blame" on the instructor by saying that I got the wrong information from her?
On one hand, that is the truth, and by telling them this, I might avoid being held responsible for a mistake that wasn't entirely my fault.
On the other hand, and this is how I felt during the exam, it felt to me out of order to bring up the instructor in the exam. She wasn't there to defend herself, so it seemed wrong to talk about her "behind her back", so to speak.<issue_comment>username_1: That is an annoying thing that happened to you, and I can see why it would bother you. University instructors are human, and we sometimes make mistakes, or misunderstand a question from a student, or have blind-spots in our knowledge. It is certainly annoying to a student if this leads them to error.
However, there is a bigger issue here. Setting aside the interpersonal issues of whether or not it is advisable to "blame the instructor", I would suggest you take a broader view of your responsibilities as a tertiary-level student. By university level, it is expected that students are no longer children or adolescents, and they are old and ugly enough to critically assess what they are told by their teachers, and proceed on the basis of rational inquiry and evidence, rather than on the basis of faith-in-authority. If you are told by an authority figure like a university instructor that X is true, then *it is up to you* as a student to seek evidence/argument to confirm this claim, and treat the claim with scepticism if there is not a clear and convincing explanation.
In your case, you were told something that was false by an instructor. Since that thing was false, presumably your instructor could not have backed up the claim with a water-tight argument, had you inquired about the reasoning for the claim. You say you "took her word for it", but that is not what tertiary-level instruction is about. By taking her word for it you rejected the standard of reason and instead adopted the heuristic of believing that which is plausible, and is confirmed to you by the assertion of an authority figure. You paid an appropriate price for that by getting caught in an error in your oral exam, so hopefully, lesson learned.
In this case your instructor probably just made a mistake when she asserted that error to you, or misunderstood your question. However, in my view, it would even be legitimate as a teaching exercise if she intentionally gave you a wrong answer and then tested to see whether you would parrot it back to her in an oral exam. The point here is this: you do not go to university to learn to uncritically repeat the assertions of authority figures with PhDs; you go to university to learn to reason rationally, based on evidence and logic. You failed to do that in this case, so you made a mistake. That is great, because university is where we go to make these mistakes, get penalised for them, and then learn not to do them again.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Gracefully accepting your mistake was the right thing to do. Even if your examiners took your story at face value, it's doubtful that they would have adjusted your score. It's unfortunate that you got bad advice, but at the end of the day, you're still responsible for the material.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: You're right - it would have been inappropriate to dump the matter on your instructor. It would have made no difference if she was present at the examination, because that's not the time to get into a he said/she said conversation.
The conversation you want to have is with your instructor. Confirm independently that she was wrong (otherwise you're simply taking the word of the examiner - not much better than simply taking the word of the instructor). Let her know, politely, that the information given in class doesn't seem correct for the following reasons: (show your work). If other students were present when the incorrect information was given, I imagine they would want to make a correction.
I would disagree with username_1 and say it's possible she should take some of the blame in this situation, but she is the person best equipped to make that decision as the instructor of your class. We certainly don't have that information. If she feels that it's appropriate, she might speak with the examiner on your behalf.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Lots of people will tell you lots of things over the course of your life. Ultimate responsibility for what you choose to believe and what you choose to pass along as true belongs to you.
In this case, assuming that everything you said is true (and five minutes with you in the front of the room during an oral exam is not necessarily the best place for you to assess if the examiner was correct, just as a casual discussion with an instructor after class isn't), you used the body of information you had to form an understanding on a topic, your examiner didn't feel like your understanding was correct, and explained why. You said "thank you". We call this "academic discourse".
Your actions were appropriate, if you did indeed see that the examiner's analysis made sense. That said, if the examiner had made some sort of mistake, and you saw a flaw in that analysis, you might have pointed out the error if you thought your own understanding was correct. If the analysis offered by the examiner wasn't clear to you, you might have asked for clarification. All of these, like the action you took, would have been appropriate. Even if you saw a flaw in the examiner's analysis, and you chose not to point it out, that is fairly acceptable (though I would prefer it if my students stuck to their guns when they know they are right).
"Blaming" someone else for your misunderstanding would *not* have been appropriate, and might well have been interpreted by your examiners as a character flaw.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Short answer:
Suck it up and move on.
Long answer:
Welcome to the real world. It will happen with your colleagues. It will happen with your supervisors. It will happen with your boss. Worse, often time, they would even point the finger back at you and deny they have even said such things. It's your words vs. theirs, and it is a battle you will never win. Paper trail helps, but everyone is too busy to get to the bottom.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I think username_1's answer is great, but I also want to give another possible perspective that has not been mentioned so far:
It could be that during the semester your instructor was referring to the methods you had studied **so far**, while you were referring to **all methods** related to the course (?). At least I can see how just a little change in the description of your question has a huge impact on how to interpret what has happened and there is enough room for misunderstandings.
In any circumstance, it is usually never a good idea to blame someone right away. It is, however, always acceptable to ask questions in order to clarify. Never attribute to malice what could be attributed to an honest mistake or misunderstanding. And, as a humble person, always be prepared that it could actually be you who made that mistake (for example, by misinterpreting what was said).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Others have given answers on what to do in that situation. I will instead highlight what I do to avoid this situation beforehand.
After asking the teaching assistant, I try to verify their solution. If I cannot reliably confirm it, especially if they were unsure themselves, I will then send a concise email to a reliable source asking for clarification. That is usually the second in command, else directly the professor - never a student assistant.
I have been burned enough times to know that any other way is unreliable. There is no need to feel guilty for asking once you 'did your homework'.
In another aspect, it sounds a lot like in your specific case, there was a misunderstanding. That you and the instructor have talked about a different question would be a probable explanation for the unfortunate situation you encountered.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I agree with the other answers that say you should probably just let it go and move on. However, **if** you think you might be on the borderline between two grades, or between passing and failing the course, then you might want to ask for consideration. Explain the situation to the instructor, explain that you accept responsibility for the mistake, you're not asking for a grade change, but if you end up with borderline marks you would appreciate any leniency that they think is appropriate.
When I did a little assistant teaching during my PhD, when there was a misunderstanding of this nature, the instructors were willing to take this approach. In any case, I don't think you'd offend anyone or look like a "whiner" for asking.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/13
| 1,045
| 4,788
|
<issue_start>username_0: After I have been accepted to present a paper at a conference, the organisers are asking me to fill in a registration form (participation and attendance are free) AND to produce proof of purchase of flight tickets. I find this bizarre and intrusive. Anyway, my travelling would happen between two capital cities in Europe (plenty of flights) and they demand the proof of purchase to include people in the first draft of the programme. It is a 3-day conference, so I would have to make travel and accommodation arrangements for 5 days many months in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: I do not think that the conference organizers have made good decisions about how to handle things. However, it is understandable that they should want firm confirmation that people are actually going to show up. Since they are operating a conference with no fees attached, it is unfortunately too easy for people to sign up, hoping to attend, but then cancel when it turns out the the time or funding are not available. This is a regular issued for conferences and meetings without any direct fees attached, and there are several ways to deal with it.
Some conferences rely on personal relationships with the people who will be participating and presenting. If the people who are going to be giving talks are known acquaintances of the organizers, these connections can be leveraged to ensure that the registered participants will indeed show up. (The day after tomorrow, I am leaving for a free conference, which I am attending even though it conflicts with a family event that I might like to attend. I know the people running the conference, and if I bailed out, it would cost me in terms of my professional relationships. Since I committed to attend many months ago, I am sticking to my commitment.)
The people running this conference are taking a different approach. They are not willing to put people on the presentation schedule unless they can verify that they have made travel plans. While I can understand the motivation for this decision (they do not want people who are slated to give talks to cancel, leaving gaps in the program), I do not think that it is a good approach to take. Asking for verification of flight information seems intrusive and unprofessional. I see no reason to believe that the organizers are acting in bad faith, but I suspect that they may not be very experienced in running academic conferences. So whether you feel like complying with their request for flight information depends on how you feel personally about this unorthodox request.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: This seems like an unreasonable request. Given that the conference is many months in the future, you may consider just telling the organizers that you have not purchased plane tickets yet, and will be unable to provide proof of travel arrangements until you actually decide on your mode of travel and precise dates of travel, which will not happen for some time.
While anything is possible, so I do not claim to predict the outcome, all I can say is that the organizers would have to be mildly insane to not allow you to register in such a situation.
Finally, even setting aside the lack of practicality and common sense of the request to provide detailed travel plans so far in advance of the conference date, asking for such details *any amount of time* in advance of the conference is a violation of privacy and in rather poor form (given that the organizers are not reimbursing your travel expenses, are not your friends, and have no need or right to know your whereabouts at any moment in time other than while you are presenting your paper at their conference). I think it would be completely reasonable for you to refuse to disclose such details on principle, regardless of whether you have already bought the tickets or not.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The organizers are definitely on the wrong foot here. I recommend contacting them and discussing the situation. If they refuse to talk or be reasonable, don't attend. In addition to being "bizarre and intrusive" (to quote the OP), it's also unreasonable for the organizers to dictate your mode of travel. If you wanted to drive to the conference, would you have to prove you own a car?
Although the conference is nominally free, perhaps the organizers should consider the concept of "earnest money" as an incentive for registrants to show up. They could charge some moderately painful amount up front as a registration fee, then refund the fee if the registrant actually attends. No-shows forfeit the fee. This begs the question of what to do with the forfeited money, but there are many options: it will be left, in the best academic tradition, as an exercise for the reader.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/13
| 733
| 3,057
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a review paper in the field of engineering.
At the moment the paper is 20 pages and I am afraid that this goes up to 80 pages when it is finished.
I was thinking about making it open access. However, I am afraid to break the paper into several parts and pay the open access fee multiple times which I definitely could not afford.
Could anyone please advise how much is the page limit for an open access review paper in IEEE and Elsevier. If my paper is not publishable there, where else could be a valid and feasible journal for me?<issue_comment>username_1: IEEE say on their [FAQ-page](http://ieeeaccess.ieee.org/frequently-asked-questions/):
>
> There is no page limit for articles
>
>
>
It is more complicated for Elsevier, as different journals have different page limitations, you simply have to check the journals' webpages.
Having said that, a paper of 80 pages seems to be rather long - in my field this would certainly result in an immediate rejection, unless you explicitly classify it as a review paper - and that seems to be what you should do. In my field, however, you are not simply writing a review paper, but are usually asked to do so and then it is clear/obvious (even expected) that the paper will be long.
So, if you were asked to write a review paper, everything should be fine, write as many pages as you want. If you have decided on your own to write a review paper, check if you can classify it as a review paper during submission process - if not, tell the editor that this is a review paper (the referees have to know this).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: IEEE Transactions have slightly different requirements and page limits during the submission process, so simply saying 80 pages without explaining the format does not help us give a proper answer.
Some comments from my experience:
1. Many IEEE Transactions do not accept Review articles without invitation or discussion with the Editor-in-chief. Some others,however, do.
2. The longest review paper I have seen in my field is around 20 pages content and 3 pages references in the IEEE format, and that is a rather unique exception to the typical standards.
3. Are you a well-recognised professor in the area writing the review with other well-recognised people in the field or many years of working experience in the field and articles in the area? If not, I cannot see how such a long review document will be accepted. From the way you are asking the question, my guess would be no.
4. In the AE meetings that I have participated there is a general consensus among editors and AEs that the literature review of a PhD student is typically not considered a review article, these submissions in mane cases are rejected before peer-review.
5. Besides the open access fee, IEEE has a per-page fee for publications longer than 8 pages in their journal. So even if the paper is accepted, a 20-page formatted article would need, on top of the OA fee around US $1500 - $3000 to be published.
Hope these help.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/13
| 1,133
| 4,703
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose you are in a tenure-track position in the US and lucky (or successful) enough to eventually get tenured.
The most important effect is obvious that you now have a permanent position. But what other effects are there? Does your salary increase automatically? Does your teaching load change? Do you get (additional) grad students? Are these changes negotiable?
PS: I am outside of the US system but interested in these facts for the purpose of comparison.<issue_comment>username_1: Tenure and faculty rank are somewhat independent in that a faculty member may be hired as an associate (or even full) professor without immediate tenure- in those cases the faculty member is typically awarded tenure after a shorter than usual probationary period of a year or two.
The more common situation is when a faculty member is hired as an untenured assistant professor and then awarded tenure and simultaneously promoted to associate professor after a fairly long (up to seven years) probationary period. I'll focus on this common case in the US.
>
> Does your salary increase automatically?
>
>
>
There is typically a pay raise given to faculty who are promoted, but this could be small (a couple of percents) or large (twenty percent) depending on the institution. There might be a standard pay raise, or it might be determined on an individual basis. At institutions with unionized faculty that pay raise would be part of the contract.
>
> Does your teaching load change?
>
>
>
At some institutions, tenure-track assistant professors have a reduced teaching load which goes up when they're promoted. It would be very unusual for the teaching load to be reduced due to promotion and tenure.
>
> Do you get (additional) grad students?
>
>
>
Graduate students in the US are typically supported by research assistantships (which are under the control of the faculty members who are PI's on the grants that fund the assistantships) and teaching assistantships (which are awarded to students by the department.) Students typically ask to work with an academic advisor and then either get an RA from the advisor or are supported by a departmental teaching assistantship if they can get one.
Thus promotion to associate professor doesn't really have any direct effect on your ability to support graduate students.
However, students may be more interested in working with you after you've been tenured. Students are rightly concerned about starting to work with an inexperienced assistant professor who might not get tenure and leave them with a half-finished thesis. Another issue is that in some disciplines (pure math is an example) it's traditional for assistant professors to focus more on their own research than supervising graduate students. In that situation, a newly tenured professor might be more willing to take on students.
>
> Are these changes negotiable?
>
>
>
It's always possible for a faculty member to ask for a pay raise or a reduction in teaching load. However, you're unlikely to be able to negotiate a pay raise or different working conditions just because you've been recently tenured. The norm is that faculty members who are tenured will simply accept a pay raise and continue their work.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Does your salary increase automatically?
>
>
>
It depends. Tenure may or may not come alongside a promotion (but often does). The increase in pay that comes from that promotion may be small or large - there are some universities where the move from Assistant to Associate Professor with Tenure is a major bump in pay, and others where it's relatively modest to encourage people to go after Full Professor.
>
> Does your teaching load change?
>
>
>
It...depends.
You may have more sway in what classes you teach, which may enable you to shift your teaching load toward classes you find more desirable.
>
> Do you get (additional) grad students?
>
>
>
It's possible that your promotion might come with a funding line for a graduate student, but I've honestly never seen this. Your ability to support graduate students is largely a function of recruitment and funding. Indirectly you might have more sway on admissions committees to shape the incoming class in a way where it's easier to draw people into your lab, but that's a pretty indirect method.
>
> Are these changes negotiable?
>
>
>
Getting tenure might make you more (or less) interesting as a recruitment prospect at another university. If you have another offer, *everything* is negotiable. But "I got tenure, now give me more things..." is not something that happens automatically.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/13
| 515
| 2,185
|
<issue_start>username_0: As an artist and retired visual art professor, I'm updating my master thesis written in 1997 as a hand-crafted art book. Today I'm self-publishing a rewritten thesis as a paperback book to include more of my artwork since graduating in 1997 with my master's degree. Is it legally okay for me to use the same Acknowledgement Page in my current self-publishing book with the same title as my master's thesis, or drop it completely?<issue_comment>username_1: If you wrote the original Acknowledgement page, and you still feel the same way about the help you acknowledged, then I believe that it is perfectly appropriate to use the same text. You are re-expressing sentiments that you had in 1997, using your own words. It is perfectly ethical to use them.
Beyond that, though, this would be a great opportunity to update the acknowledgements. *"When I first developed the work in this volume, I was indebted to the following people ... ¶ Since then I have further benefited from ..."*
Your decision to publish now, was it informed by your professional experience? Has your initial vision evolved since then, thanks to a stimulating work environment? Did anyone encourage you particularly to publish the manuscript?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If there are no copyright issues then the only other reason not to do it would be to avoid a charge of *self plagiarism* from somewhere. For research publications it is an important issue, since scholars want to see the complete context of a work to place it both historically and scientifically. But for an art publication, I doubt that consideration is as important. Except, perhaps, to art historians.
But as long as you say somewhere in the new publication that you are updating or "have taken material from" the earlier thesis, citing it, then you have fulfilled their needs.
But it would be pretty simple, perhaps, to title the page "Acknowledgements (1997)" to make it crystal clear. I recognize that artistic considerations are very important here, of course.
Of course, if the copyright to the original was given up to another party, then you need to deal with that issue directly.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/13
| 856
| 3,640
|
<issue_start>username_0: Just a quick question regarding authorship. Recently, a PI won a grant, which was used to buy some computer equipment (~$1000 piece of computation equipment along with some other equipment not relevant to the post).
I am a student that has been using the piece of equipment, as it was not being used by their students.
I am now going to be submitting a manuscript, which used the equipment as mentioned above. Does this entail the PI who won the funds to pay for it authorship? Or, as I believe, just acknowledgment (for both the grant and the PI who won it)?
EDIT 1: I should note, my research has nothing to do whatsoever with the PI's grant or their research.
EDIT 2: I found this [interesting paper](http://jme.bmj.com.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/content/40/10/683) on the subject.<issue_comment>username_1: Authorship, no, not if the only contribution was a piece of equipment. Authorship at a minimum requires an intellectual contribution to the project.
Acknowledgment, perhaps. $1000 sounds like a fairly minimal investment for an acknowledgment even, but the standards for what is worthy of acknowledging are much more up to the authors of a given paper. If the work truly would not have been possible without the equipment, then it may certainly be appropriate. If you were just borrowing someone's unused computer, that doesn't sound acknowledgment-worthy to me.
On a brief note in the other direction: some people come here and ask authorship questions where they feel someone (usually an advisor) doesn't deserve authorship, but in reality they made a substantial intellectual contribution to the project. Norms for this vary by field, but make sure when you are assessing answers you get here that you are describing this PI's complete contribution accurately.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Is the grant related to the project you worked on? If so, in my field (CS) that would be enough. Without their intellectual contribution there would have been no grant, no equipment, and no project.
Perhaps you should ask why are you writing a manuscript without supervision from a more senior researcher (if that's the case).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Journals have clear requirements of the authors, so it seems like you're asking a trivial question. But the rules do get bent/broken every day, so perhaps it is useful to point out that those requirements aren't a huge deal. It isn't like patents where including a non-contributing inventor can invalidate the whole thing. Keep in mind people stick their neck out by co-authoring your paper; if you commit misconduct or make a major error, they look bad too.
But the job of all authors isn't done until the paper is published. You need them in the loop at each step, and with an unsubmitted manuscript you aren't near the final step yet. So the real question is are you compelled, by custom or politeness or something, to offer an opportunity to co-author your paper to those who have helped you. This doesn't mean just slap their name on there like you would a reference, but to send them the draft and ask them if they wish to co-author it. Which implies that they will subsequently contribute meaningfully, and thereby earn legitimate co-authorship. And indeed the boundaries of what kind of favor rates this response probably varies by field.
I will say that burning bridges (by annoying people who had expected their minor contribution to pay off) can hurt you, while minimizing the number of co-authors doesn't help you too much. It may even hurt you as you appear less collaborative.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/14
| 1,531
| 6,193
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc who was supposed to *co-supervise* a PhD student along with another academic who invited me for that. However, I ended up fully supervising the student after the *supervisor* became too busy to attend meetings. Eventually, I also ended up defining a problem for the student, which, after 2 months of work, we discovered it is invalid. How should I deal with this situation? I feel that it's my fault and feel bad for the student. The student is in his first year, and this is his first research problem.
Any ideas on this from experienced supervisors over here? Thank you.
Edit: Thank you, everyone, for contributing your answers and comments. For those of you talking about failure/recovery/publishing what's in hand, I would clarify that the discovered issue is in the problem formulation, where the solution would involve inverting a rank-deficient matrix and differentiating a non-differentiable function. Thus, a mathematical solution is not defined. Therefore, the formulation is invalid. This wasn't foreseeable at the beginning, and only when the student made some deviations, it was possible to reach this conclusion. Now, in terms of publication and thesis content, the efforts exerted thus far don't mean anything.<issue_comment>username_1: On the grand scheme of things, what you just described is not the worst I've heard of. There are cases where a student spends years of their Ph. D. on a problem with nothing to show for in the end, for a variety of reasons. Sometimes even experienced advisors will, intentionally or unintentionally, end up letting their students work on ideas that are terrible in hindsight. A couple of months wasted in the first year really is not a big deal (and there are certainly worse ways to waste one's time as a grad student). Besides just learning the lesson and moving on, here are a couple perspectives that I find helpful:
1. Defining the research question is not the sole responsibility of the advisor. It is true that the advisor sometimes has to act as a quality check for the students' work, but the point of PhD is to take responsibility for your own work. So the fact that the student just accepted the research question without asking whether it's valid or not (I assume) is partly the student's fault as well.
2. Try to salvage the effort spent as much as possible. Oftentimes it is possible to recast what you've done in light of a different research question, and you should consider whether that's possible in your case. I'd go so far as to say that one should always work on things that will be publishable even if your original hypothesis turns out to be wrong.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It might be worth checking the policies of your university in relation to supervision requirements. At my university a junior academic (e.g., post-doc) cannot be the primary supervisor of a student, and needs to take a secondary position under the primary supervision of a more experienced academic. From your description it sounds like you have been a victim of the [bait-and-switch](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bait-and-switch), being appointed as co-supervisor but then effectively doing the job of a primary supervisor. If you are uncomfortable with this, you could raise it with your Head of Department, and you'd get a sympathetic hearing.
As to the present issue with your student, two months working on a badly formulated problem does not seem to me to be that bad. It is possible that the student would have learned something from the experience anyway, and you should try to help the student draw useful lessons from the failed attempt. If this is impossible, and you think it really was a *total waste*, you should just apologise to the student for the wild-goose-chase and move on. Plenty of students have had a lot more time than that wasted by bad supervision, and two months is very little in the scope of their candidature.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: A few short thoughts:
>
> I eventually also ended up defining a problem for the student,
>
>
>
That's a tad over-controlling. Defining the problem should be at most a joint endeavor of the PhD candidate and the supervisor.
>
> which after 2 months of work, we discovered it is invalid.
>
>
>
Invalid, or too hard to tackle? Or perhaps not as interesting as you had believed?
>
> The student is in his first year, and this is his first research problem.
>
>
>
Yeah, I really dislike this custom of a direct PhD track as the default. It's better IMHO to have a smaller-scope M.Sc. as the default target for graduates interested in trying research, while a direct PhD should be reserved for people who have a good idea of what research they want to do exactly. Your situation is part of the unfortunate but foreseeable consequences. Of course, it's not relevant to suggest to the student to switch...
For more concrete advice I would need more context, such as what has motivated the Ph.D. candidate to go into doing research, what motivated you to choose/define the problem you did, whether this is part of a larger, multi-person single effort or not, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You should give him a substitute problem. and you should know better. Heck, I knew enough as a grad STUDENT to make sure "you can publish even if it doesn't work". Leave the climbing mount Everest to people with risk tolerance. This is an area where professors over the years have burned students.
Plus, you should understand apprenticeship and progressive learning. Don't give too hard problems to start. Figure out something doable. There is time to move to harder stuff after mastering the easier.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Before you abandon it, dig deeper into the problem to find the nugget of gold.
"Success is failure turned inside out" [Whittier]
["In response to a question about his missteps, Edison once said, “I have not failed 10,000 times—I’ve successfully found 10,000 ways that will not work.”](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/7-epic-fails-brought-to-you-by-the-genius-mind-of-thomas-edison-180947786/#qDUeeodzHAPBm5EA.99)
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/14
| 436
| 1,664
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have to cite a product manual in a journal paper, but the product manual do not have a year mentioned on it. The content of product manual has not changes over the years. Could this type of documents be cited in a paper or thesis?
If you have not seen a manual like this, then this is an example: <https://www.specmeters.com/assets/1/22/6460_SM1002.pdf><issue_comment>username_1: I'm quite surprised that the manual does not provide a date - but indeed, it does not (checked your link, what was the manufacturer thinking?).
In terms of a practical solution, you could accompany your reference with the date you accessed the manual (like a webpage) if you use the online link or maybe the purchase/production year/revision number if you refer to the printed copy that came with the device.
And there is always the option of omitting the year, if it truly cannot be determined. But giving the reader an idea of when it was obtained may nevertheless prove beneficial. (The paper date would not be a good indication as in some cases, laboratory equipment can be decades old. So there is no obvious way to infer the age of equipment for the reader.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: First, if this is a student paper, ask your supervisor; if it's a journal article or similar publication, consult the style-sheet.
I've seen 'n.d.' for 'no date'. For online sources, it's a good idea to include the last access date, like so:
>
> <NAME> (n.d.), *On the Flubbication of Foobars*, Report, Institute for the Study of Things, Boulder, Co., <http://thingsistitute/pub/flubbication.pdf> (accessed 6 June 2018).
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/14
| 885
| 3,684
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am, or was, a math major in a big state university, and just graduated this year and I am taking a gap year. I finished my undergrad in three years and took some extra math courses. I also have one-year independent research experience with an Honors Thesis and a research award by the math department. The upper division courses that I have are : Linear Algebra, Analysis I&II, Adv Applied, ODE, PDE, Prob, Stats, Stochastics (All A's). some of them are in grad level. I also have an independent study on Fourier Analysis with Stien's book. As for the Application, I will have two very strong letters. Just haven't taken the GRE yet.
I understand that relatively good grad schools take the courses that students took seriously. And my problem is mainly about this.
However, every school's webpage that I looked at prefers students who also took Algebra and Topology, which I did not take for some reasons. But I am trying to learn Algebra with Artin's book and some more analysis with Stien's books myself in the gap year. Can someone please tell me just how much disadvantages would this bring me, and would what I am doing help with the admission process.
I am getting mixed messages about this. Some people say that I am pretty much locked out of top 50 schools, my professors could not really answer this, and my friends said it is not a big deal. I am very confused now. Any suggestions would be appreciated!
Thanks a lot.<issue_comment>username_1: I have never been on an admissions committee and can’t really speak to if it’s actually disqualifying or not. However, even if we operate under the assumption that it is disqualifying that doesn’t mean you can’t go to graduate school, it means you can’t go to graduate school this year. You can enroll as a non-degree student in the university of your choice and take the necessary courses. This may be expensive or difficult depending on the country / situation, but if you really do need the courses it’s an option available to you. I know several people in the US who have done this in math and math-adjacent fields, more commonly for a MS degree but also for a PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To be honest, I wouldn't worry a lot about what "some people say." Locked out is a pretty strong statement. I think you have a gap in your education, but you have filled that with other, also valuable, things.
I think that any reasonable admissions process will raise an eyebrow and look at what you have to offer overall. They may suggest a plan for filling the gap.
You are also well placed for applied programs by the way, if that is your interest and the reason that you took the courses that you did.
But when you apply, stress what you can do and have done, not your "weakness".
However, the best answer to this question is from someone in the admissions process (or a department head) at one or two of the universities you'd like to apply to. Likely they are willing (eager) to spend a bit of time with a prospective grad student.
My own history probably isn't relevant now (too far in the past), but I had only a very simple Intro to Topology as an undergraduate, but it became one of my top subjects in grad school. Likewise the first graduate course in Analysis (Measure Theory) was completely different from my undergrad experience. I loved it. Best. Thing. Ever. You can think. You can do math. No problem.
However, it will serve you well to try to fill what ever gaps you think you have. I would think that if you feel you lack in both Algebra and Topology that you work first on one, then the other, rather than getting too much on your plate at once.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/14
| 914
| 3,898
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first year Maths PhD student in Singapore.
As I am going to give my first talk at a Mathematics conference soon, I look for some tips on how to give a good talk.
While googling, I come across [<NAME>'s blog post entitled 'talks are not the same as paper'](https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/talks-are-not-the-same-as-papers/).
In the post, he stated in third paragraph that,
>
> Instead, a talk should complement a paper by providing a **high-level** and more informal overview of the same material, especially for the more standard or routine components of the argument; this allows one to channel more of the audience’s attention onto the most interesting or important components, which can be described in more detail.
>
>
>
I have difficulty understanding the meaning of 'high-level'.<issue_comment>username_1: This means that you don’t derive each equation shown in the paper but focus on the, perhaps generic, results and conclusions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: An illustrative example:
Let's say you have been working for a very long time on a great paper in which you finally manage to construct a widget which has some amazing properties, which have important consequences for some other area of math.
Now, most of the paper consists of the construction which is extremely deep and technical (this is, after all, why nobody else had been able to construct this widget before you).
To give a high level overview of your work, you need to talk mainly about what the widget *does*, rather than how it is constructed. Talk about these properties and the amazing consequences to other areas in generic terms that can be understood by everyone.
Maybe towards the end, you can talk a bit about the construction. But you should still keep it high-level, meaning that you can talk for example about the main ingredients ("we use a construction analogous to the one for constructing wadgets, but whack it with a hammer in certain places to make it fit our needs"). But leave out any actual technical details.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It may help to consider an analogy: flying over the topic at high altitude (=level), the details can't be seen, but the shape of the whole landscape can be appreciated.
This is "high-level" in the same sense as a [high-level programming language](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-level_programming_language), i.e. highly abstracted from the fiddly details.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: As referenced in username_3's answer, this use of "high-level" is the same as when computer scientists speak of high level and low level: there is a spectrum of *different ways to view something*, with "more physical, more detailed, more concrete" at the "low" end, and "more abstract, more theoretical, more conceptual" at the "high" end.
We might describe an action at the lowest level in terms of electrical signals. A slightly "higher" viewpoint would be to talk about network packets. An even higher viewpoint would be to talk about email. At the highest level, we would talk about the user interactions of a little girl sending a birthday email greeting to her grandmother.
All of those are describing **the same activity** but at different "levels". The choice of levels depends on what topic you're trying to address and the familiarity of your audience with that topic.
And of course, those aren't truly the lowest nor highest "levels" of how to view that activity, but only the lower/upper bounds which typically involve computer scientists! :-) Lower ones would involve physicists, higher ones would involve sociologists.
Also important to keep in mind that "lower" and "higher" in this context are not value judgements. None of these viewpoints is *better*, but some might be more applicable than others to solving a particular problem.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/14
| 535
| 2,348
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student mid stage, working on computational aspects of mathematics. I am working on a research problem with my supervisor. I am at a stage where I can't take much help from the supervisor because I am in the fourth year. I can't do something like going to supervisors office to verify my answers. I did these things in the initial years of my PhD, but now I can't poke my supervisor that often.
I am facing a difficulty that how to come with something non-trivial on myself. The problem with me is that I go into wrong directions many times, and in the past I have spent many days, weeks, or longer on these wrong directions. I want to minimise the number of these trials and failures. Does it come with age?
**Question:** Is there any way to pick a right direction (which yields a paper) in research while solving a problem? I can take the help of my research supervisor once in two weeks. However, many times a day or week, I also need to discard some of the possible directions of research.<issue_comment>username_1: The only way to pick the right direction in research inevitably leading to a research paper is knowledge of your field. There is no set way to do this. However, you can certainly, make educated guesses based off previous results and your knowledge of the literature.
Regarding your supervisor, I think it is very reasonable request that you ask for guidance as to whether you are working in the right direction. After all, he/she is probably an expert in this field and will have a better *hunch* about your chosen direction.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Short version: **no**.
Long version: **absolutely no**. Having experience in the field helps (and experienced people are those that have already taken lots of wrong directions in their life), but ultimately encountering road blocks is a part of research. It happens all the time. You take lots of wrong directions, you waste time.
What you read in the papers is the road that works and gives the best and shortest solution to the problem, but the people who wrote them typically have also tried [several approaches](https://abstrusegoose.com/230) that *didn't* work, or were a lot more cumbersome.
If it is already clear from the beginning what will work, it's not research anymore, it's just an exercise. :)
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/14
| 1,693
| 7,412
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am reading a paper that I find very hard to follow.
This is partially due to my lack of experience in the subfield, but also I think because the paper is unclearly written.
**Is it acceptable for me to email the writer of the paper, and ask for explanations of basic concepts in the paper?** i.e. I would ask for things that I think could have been explained more clearly.<issue_comment>username_1: It's okay, and more than okay, to ask for clarifications on specific bits that you were unable to follow. Academics love talking about their work, and they love spreading knowledge.
It's less okay to email someone out of the blue and say "explain yourself better". As SolarMike said, this paper has *already been peer-reviewed*; people in the field have looked over it and said "yep, that looks good". It may indeed be true that the paper was not written clearly enough to be understandable to someone without extensive knowledge of the subfield, and it may also be true that a better written version of the paper would have been more widely understandable without compromising its concision or its organization, but that's not a sin the author is required to atone for.
Try reading a few of the papers that paper cites, particularly ones sharing one or more authors; authors will often introduce and explain formalisms in one paper, and then take them "as read" in later papers (either accidentally or because they see the later paper as incorporating the earlier one by reference). If you still can't follow it, definitely contact the author... but make sure your request comes off as a request, not a criticism.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: 'I would ask for things that I think could have been explained more clearly.' : wrong approach.
'I would ask for help in understanding something that isn't fully clear to me at present' : right approach.
Your objective is to understand/learn, not to correct/improve the authors' writing style. If the latter is indeed your objective, this is not the time. You're a reader, not a reviewer.
The way you think about it manifests in your words, in your tone, and is very likely to influence the response you get.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it acceptable for me to email the writer of the paper, and ask for explanations of basic concepts in the paper?
>
>
>
Not really, no. When somebody writes a paper about something, they're not offering to explain the basics of that field to every stranger in the world who might be interested. Rather, they're explaining their particular advances to people who are already expected to be familiar with the basics.
You should try to find other sources for the basics. Textbooks, websites, earlier papers in the same field, members of your own department, a relevant Stack Exchange site, and so on. If you can't find appropriate resources on your own, it would definitely be appropriate to ask the authors of the paper if they have any recommendations of resources you could use to learn about the area.
I'm assuming here that, by "basic concepts", you mean the basic concepts of the field, rather than the concepts that they introduce. For example, if the paper is about prime numbers, it wouldn't be appropriate to ask the authors what a prime number is, or what Euler's totient function is. If, on the other hand, their whole paper is about their new concept of "squiggle primes" and you can't follow their definition, it's reasonable to ask about that, if no more local person can help you. But do try to ask something specific rather than, "You define squiggle primes but I don't get it. Please explain more."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: It really depends on how you do it. I am only speaking from personal experience, as I tend to receive mails like that a couple of times a month or more. This is due to me implementing my academic work into software, which people can then use to make calculations.
If you just imagine the person you are writing giving the rant below, and then ask your question accordingly, you will be fine.
1. I can immediately tell if you made an effort understanding it. Please do so before you write me. While I will surely answer your question, I can certainly have more fun than trying to paraphrase one of my papers in an email.
2. Ask genuine questions, don't try to hide anything out of fear that I will steal your idea. I wont, I have enough to do. I all too often have to drag out of people what they are actually trying to accomplish, enabling me to give them better answers.
3. If you are a student, ask your supervisor first. While I will be happy to help, I don't run a correspondence course.
4. For God's sake: spell check. Your English does not have to be perfect - mine certainly isn't - but I need to be able to understand your mail before answering it.
5. Don't open simultaneous, parallel mail threads with both me and my co-author. We do not often discuss "help" mail, and if we do, it's for giggles in the coffee room. We will not know that you reached out to both of us, and when we find out we will be annoyed.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I follow GEdgar in his answer. That strategy works for me. I get my self several (text) books on the subject underlying the paper. Often there is (mathematical) notation in papers that is explained clearly in books. Once you understand that language, the papers suddenly aren’t that difficult anymore. When I started my PhD some papers took me months to fully grasp. It is also a normal process, I guess. I have never emailed authors but I do not see why you shouldn’t if that feels right for you.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I don't think it would be a good use of the author's time to answer questions on basic concepts, however I think there are specific situations where asking questions is appropriate.
For my MedChem MSc we reviewed a number of papers on structure analysis that included statistical results. As I previously did statistics undergrad I was keen to replicate their steps (as their methods were fairly straight-forward) and replication should be a matter of plugging their data into Rstudio with the appropriate model. This approach worked fine, except for one particular paper.
After a week of messing around with variations, I couldn't get the same results. I asked some fellow students who suggested it was much more likely that I was wrong somewhere, than the paper was wrong, which was my feeling.
However eventually I emailed the author who quickly responded that indeed, the paper was missing some required details, and their clarifications allowed me to come up with the same results.
So sometimes, I assume rarely, papers have mistakes and omissions, and usually the author can help you with that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: It's certainly acceptable to ask the author of a paper questions when you don't understand something.
However, when corresponding with the author, take into account that the author will probably answer only two or three emails before giving up on you as somebody who is wasting too much of their time.
So if you have a basic question, try to answer it yourself, or get somebody at your institution who knows more about the field, before emailing them; save your emails for questions that you really need help on, and that only the author will be able to answer.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/14
| 329
| 1,365
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in applied mathematics. I have submitted my PhD thesis and started applying for postdoc positions. Now suppose I informally email somebody and suppose he says that he has no funding currently and once he has funding he will inform me. Now, suppose at the time he has funding, I have some better option, so I don't join him. Can that create a bad impression of me to him ?<issue_comment>username_1: If your situation has genuinely changed—six months or a year go by and you’re working as a postdoctoral or researcher somewhere else, why would you be expected to give up your position? This seems like a very one-sided transaction and unfair to you. Might the professor hold a grudge? It’s possible, but anybody who does hold a grudge in such a scenario is thinking primarily about their own needs rather than your mutual benefit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My idea of it would be that the first time you made him an offer but he rejected, while the next time he is making you an offer and you are rejecting. Lack of funding is just as good reason as having a better option. No grudge is due or rightful on either side. He may be a bit upset, of course (like you might have been upset when *he* said "no"), but if he goes mad at you, it merely means that you've made the right choice going elsewhere.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/14
| 399
| 1,665
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied for a position. Before the interview, I was encouraged by the selection committee that I was a very good candidate. But I was not sure. I thought it is far more above my capabilities, I was not sure what to do with my family (it was not a permanent position), etc. After the interview, I just withdrew even before I knew the results.
Now, after a couple of weeks, I think I made a mistake. Should I try to correct it? To ask them if the position is still available? It is in different country, so I have only email contacts.
Or should I just leave it as it is? I have the feeling, that if I will leave as it is, they will think I am arrogant because I rejected them. What would be the best solution?<issue_comment>username_1: Don’t worry. You are here to learn. Maybe you made a mistake, maybe you didn’t. If you really want that position, I would write that email. If you don’t get it, at least you have tried to correct a mistake. Other chances will come along. Do not be too harsh for yourself. Without mistakes, no growth.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Two weeks sounds like a lot of time and it is likely the position was already offered to another candidate. If it was, you lose nothing by sending an email. If it was not, they probably do not have an appointable candidate and in this case they can be actually quite happy to offer the position to you. However, consider providing a brief explanation of why you have withdrawn and why you are now asking to reconsider you for the post. The appointing committee needs some reassurance that you will take the post if you are offered it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/14
| 863
| 3,652
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received notification that I wasn't select for the final round, but they encourage me to apply next time when the application is open.
So I of course, out of curiosity ask when will be the next time.
I got the following reply
>
>
> >
> > Thanks for your reply,
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> This position is always open.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
I m in shock, what this implicate and how should I respond?
Should I immediately resubmit the application? Or ask on how to proceed?
what would you do? What is appropriate to reply? Why would they have always open position? Isn't that weird?<issue_comment>username_1: This is indeed unusual. For tenure-track positions at traditional universities in the US, a normal search proceeds on a specific timeline, from application deadline through interviews and leading up to the new hire's start date, usually the beginning of an academic year. Once a position is filled, no further applications are accepted until there is a new opening and a sufficiently high administrator has given permission to begin a new search.
So in this normal situation, if you have been rejected, there is no point in reapplying until a new opening is posted, and typically that would be the next year at earliest. (And there's no particular guarantee that the same department will have any openings at all the next year.) So if you still want to apply to this employer, you have to wait a year; otherwise, consider it a loss and focus on other opportunities.
Given all this, the only way that this reply makes sense to me is if the university has a policy that applications will technically always be accepted. That way if an extremely strong candidate decides to apply out of the blue, even if no opening currently exists, the university can consider creating a brand-new position just for them. (For a major research university, "extremely strong" probably means something like "Nobel laureate".) If you were such a candidate, you'd probably know. But otherwise, this is of no practical value, and I suggest you continue to follow my previous advice and consider it a loss. (And if you've already been rejected in one search, without even reaching the final round, then it seems clear they don't consider you "extremely strong", sorry to say.)
It's also possible that whoever replied to you is just confused. In that case, too, I think you should fall back to the above and consider it a loss.
In either case there is not much point in responding to the message at all.
Also note that any phrase like "we encourage you to apply next time the position is open" should not be taken literally. It's a mere courtesy which they surely write to everybody who is rejected. It does not necessarily indicate that they really want to hire you.
Emory's suggestion of "apply once a week" is unwise, in my view. This would be very annoying to the search committee, and make you look rather crazy. It would probably torpedo all hope of ever getting hired by that department.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While it's possible someone could re-apply to the same position and get an offer, that is unlikely without a major change by either the employer/department or the candidate.
A major change by the candidate could include an award, more published papers, completion of a degree, grant procurement, or a much better reference.
A major change by the employer could include a revision of the requirements possibly due to finding no one appropriate with the earlier requirements, or the loss of different employee that puts more pressure to hire, or a change to available funding.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/14
| 609
| 2,452
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am making a diagram in my paper. In that diagram I use several squares of different colors and one rectangle of multiple colors. An easy way to get a rectangle full of colors is the rainbow flag. I am sympathetic to the LGBT cause, but I am not LGBT. I thought the flag could be a small gesture but I am not trying to make a strong political point.
One labmate told me to not put political symbols in papers (+could make people think I am LGBT, nothing wrong with that, but false); another says it's completely fine.
I am considering whether to keep the flag or find an alternative (different colors, structure, or move the colors around).
Any ideas/opions?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm a strong supporter of LGBTI+ rights, but if I encountered a rainbow flag in an article with no particular connection to those issues and nothing else to explain the choice of that symbol in particular, I'd be more confused than anything else. The editors may also be confused about whether you're trying to sneak in a political statement.
Leaving politics aside: rainbow colour schemes are [often a bad idea](https://eagereyes.org/basics/rainbow-color-map) because they're not very good at communicating information.
As <NAME> suggested, it's wise to ensure that your diagrams are still readable in grayscale. Rainbows often fail this test because colours far apart on the spectrum may be close together in luminance (brightness), and vice versa. Even for readers who have full colour vision and are reading the colour version, rainbow palettes can create the illusion of abrupt changes where there are none, and so forth. For those with colour-vision impairments, they're extra-poor. For more information, see Borland and Taylor's [Rainbow Color Map (Still) Considered Harmful](https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4118486/?arnumber=4118486).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: While it is admirable that you wish to promote equality, a scientific work should be as objective and free from bias as possible. Sneaking in an LGBT ‘Easter egg’ doesn’t add anything substantive and in the worst case, may convey a sense of triviality that weakens your actual directive.
To use a silly example, suppose a figure in a paper had a 4x4 grid the cells of which were either filled or empty. Now suppose the filled squares were the American flag. There’s just more potential downside than upside.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/14
| 1,221
| 5,445
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to finish an undergraduate degree, with a good enough GPA that even if I got C's in all of my current classes, my final overall cumulative GPA would remain above 3.6.
Assuming I graduate with all the whistles in my diploma it would be:
Honours Bachelors of science in computer science with distinction and a minor in pure mathematics (quite pompous).
In order to complete all of those whistles I had to do supervised research for two semesters. Being a naive undergraduate, I knocked on proffessor's doors, asking for a supervisor, and one of them, very generously agreed. He suggested a problem I thought was interesting and so I started the research. I originally started throwing analysis at the problem, and started trying to solve some really complex differential equations (which kept me motivated). However I did not make much progress, so after my supervisor marked that I needed to get something, I fully changed my approach and started using some geometric approximations to solve the issue. This generated some results, but was too simple. I'd like to say that my results were inversely proportional to how much effort I was putting in the research.
Time passed, I had multiple potential solutions and a way to evaluate them. On the last week before the final submission I realised there was a bug in my code base that was destroying the results (they were mathematically impossible). I tried to find the error, but the best I could do was identify an area where a mistake could have happened.
Finally I got my evaluation on the course after presenting it. The feedback said the methods were a bit naive and could be improved on, and it was dissapointing that I didn't get numerical results (I had visual results, not numerical), however since I was not a seasoned researcher they decided to be lenient and gave me an A anyway.
I applied to the grad program at my university, and asked the same proffessor to be my supervisor for the grad program. I am in desperate need of financial support until the grad program starts, and so my supervisor said I could do summer research for him and in the meanwhile we could discuss what the grad project could be. What he wants me to do is finish my previous work and get a publication.
The issue is that I legitimately feel that dinking bleach would be more motivating (I am using this metaphor to convey just how much anxiety this is giving me). This research really does not appeal to me in any way or form, and the interesting part is over, all that is missing is finding the bug, which could take more than two weeks to solve and implementing a couple of modifications to make my naive methods less naive if things go well, or complete failure to finish it in the worst case.
In addition to that I have been doing independent research simultaneously as I have been taking courses and doing everything else. Although this independent research still needs a lot of work, it's in a good place, I have already improved many of the papers I have read and have multiple ideas to explore. In an ideal world I would win the lottery tomorrow and I could just support myself while I carry on with this research.
I am not sure how to approach my supervisor and tell him I don't want to finish this research, nor how to suggest to do my research instead and get a publication out of that, or even if I should touch on this topic at all.<issue_comment>username_1: **Talk to your supervisor when you know how long you will need to finish the publication.**
You are currently in the phase of a project where you have to make very sure everything really works. This is usually the least motivating stage, but it is absolutely necessary. So your supervisor will (hopefully) push you to go through this phase and finish the publication, because finishing research projects is something you have to learn as a budding researcher.
Of course, not every project should be finished. If the costs (time invested) of a project outweigh the benefits (results and publication strength), your supervisor may want to abandon the project. It is important to find out how long you still need, and only then (if still applicable - maybe it's a two-week bug fix that doesn't feel like drinking bleach) have a discussion with your supervisor. You can bring up your independent research during that discussion as well - either as an alternative or as a next project.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Short answer: caffeine.
Long version: If you need to write code you will periodically be finding yourself in the frustrated and overwhelmed position of needing to return to square one to progress. For that matter pretty much all research gets like that regularly. The only way to avoid this frustrating state of affairs is to pay someone else to do it (warning, solution doesn't always work either).
Getting a very incremental project to start with, is pretty par for the course in grad school too. Nothing here to run screaming from.
It's also quite typical to hate a project after not seeing the progress you hoped for, particularly when it was punctuated with a big scary deadline. You can find a new adviser and/or start fresh with a project that has less baggage, but it will probably just happen again with something else sooner or later. If you like the area, you should stick with it; the frustration goes away as soon as you get some progress.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/14
| 419
| 1,784
|
<issue_start>username_0: * I have a full ride for a grad program at a good school
* I've recently gone through an awful breakup with a girlfriend of 7 years
* I now want to take an extra year before going to school, for many reasons. I could explain them to you all here, but that seems beside the point; assume they are compelling enough.
* In my head, my justification sounded very legitimate and serious (the tale involves depression and hospitalization, an abrupt change of living situation, etc., all just before enrollment)
* Now, typing out an email to the department, I feel totally immature. I try to word it more professionally, which only makes it look like I'm trying to be vague about my immaturity, which perhaps sounds even more immature.
How can I talk about personal relationship issues to people who it matters to, but for professional reasons, and not feel like I've tainted my name at the school?<issue_comment>username_1: You don't need to give them all the details. Say "Some personal issues have come up, and I'd like to know how viable an option it would be to defer beginning my program". If they want more details, they'll ask for them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Essentially I don’t think this will succeed.
The deferment option at many schools is intended to allow students the opportunity to take part in an experience they would not otherwise be able or likely to pursue, such as a Rhodes or Marshall fellowship. Alternatively, the use of unexpected, serious illnesses that would prevent enrollment might be granted a waiver. Changes in relationship status do not normally clear such a bar. The fact that you are struggling to explain it gives you a good indication of how it will likely be received by the admissions committee.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/15
| 770
| 3,233
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had been invited to give a talk at a summer school abroad, but had to cancel due to a complex visa issue that could not be foreseen at the time I accepted to give the talk: it turns out that I'll be transitioning between two visas because of a job change, and will be unable to leave the country at that time. I had already spend time preparing and had bought airplane and train tickets. I've explored possible solutions to be able to attend in person, none of which panned out; I've offered the summer school to give the talk remotely, but this wasn't an option; I have since been working with the summer school to find a replacement and have offered to help them if needed. At this point I've invested a fair amount of effort, energy, and money into this invited talk that is not even going to happen. As a not particularly fancy postdoc, I only get very few invited talks. I was also looking forward to this particular summer school (which doesn't help with me having trouble letting go of this CV entry).
Is it OK to list this talk on my CV under the invited talk section, with some unambiguous qualifier e.g. "withdrawn for visa reasons", or perhaps something similar? Or would it do more harm than good?
Related question: [Invited to give a talk but could not attend, can it be on CV?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/104226/invited-to-give-a-talk-but-could-not-attend-can-it-be-on-cv) --> it seems the answer might depend on the specific reason for not being able to attend<issue_comment>username_1: As long as you're honest about it, I suppose you *could* put it on a CV. However, I don't think an invitation to give a talk is likely to count for anything if you didn't actually give the talk - it raises more questions than it's worth.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's a bad idea to put it on your curriculum. You should list on the curriculum things you have done, not things you could have done or might have done. Listing such things could generate questions about the credibility of what else is on the curriculum. Everyone has some mishaps along the way and can't do something that was planned; most never even think of listing it on a curriculum, so those that do so potentially generate skepticism about motivations.
In some metric obsessed institutional contexts it can appear that a single item on the curriculum has an importance it does not really have. Being invited to give talks is a nice thing, interesting for many reasons, but will never be decisive when a curriculum is evaluated. When one cuts through the nonsense, what principally matters on a curriculum are publications (quality and quantity), funding obtained in competitive contexts, and, in some contexts, teaching experience/ability (for engineers, one might add patents and commercialization to the list). All the rest is of marginal importance.
Finally, you do not want to create the impression that you do things in order to have them on your curriculum (as opposed to for their own sake). That might appeal to some deanish/director types, but it doesn't appeal to those who take their craft seriously, who are those most likely to be judging the curriculum.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/15
| 481
| 2,132
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have recently completed my PhD and now looking for a postdoc/research assistant position. I found a few positions that look attractive - but I don't have all the skills listed in the job ad. I have some and I know I can learn the rest quickly; I also know from talking to other postdocs that their current research is not related to their PhD projects.
The question is - should I apply for the jobs I'm not completely qualified for since it's normal to learn on the job, or is it a total waste of time? And how should I answer to selection criteria in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming you believe you can do the job and can make a compelling case in your application, yes you should apply. A person with the exact set of skills listed may not be available, in which case they will have to chose whomever they believe is the best fit of those who apply. Also, the skills you have may be beneficial for the position but may not have been thought of for the job ad.
In answering the selection criteria naturally emphasize the skills that you have which match the job ad. Additionally, highlight the skills which you have that are not listed but you believe would be beneficial and why. Finally, you can also make a case for why you can quickly (and independently) learn the additional skills that you do not already have.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The original *purpose* of a post doc was to learn a new skill, technique, literature, etc while engaging in an intense period of discovery and scholarship meant to bolster ones publication record and research toolbox.
Thus, i would argue that the best candidate has a strong foundation in science but seeks to learn the specific skills involved with the job. If that’s the case you must sell your passion and ability to quickly adapt and integrate. In fact, many post doc grants (eg NIH NRSA) require you detail your training plan and likely won’t find you if you already have all necessary skills.
Labs looking for a fully trained staff member that can be productive immediately are looking for a research scientist.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/15
| 296
| 1,229
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have 3 days left and I totally forgot I could add more than 1 reference letter to my application.
I need this teacher to write me a reference letter as soon as he can... and it feels so rude asking this.
How can I imply that subtly but clear enough for him to understand my situation?
Should I send him reference letters written by other professors to help him quickly find the form and content for the letter he will write?<issue_comment>username_1: Just go and talk to him.Tell him about how much you need the placement and how valuable his recommendation-letter would be to you (don't try to butter him/her).Be frank and kindly request him/her but be brief and direct. Don't worry teachers don't mind it,They want to help you as well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **What to say.** When you write and ask for the reference letter, tell your teacher when the deadline is and apologize for the short notice. Don't try to be subtle: being polite is about showing that you understand that you're asking for a big favour.
**What to do.** Make sure they have all the information they will need to write your letter (e.g., details of your grades and anything else that's relevant).
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/15
| 6,369
| 24,762
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach a certain course where I think the best way to test knowledge is using yes/no questions. However, with a simple yes/no exam, a student can just answer randomly to all questions and get, in expectation, a score of 50%, which is not very fair. I thought of several solutions, but each of them has a disadvantage:
1. Give a negative score to a wrong answer, such that the expected value of a student who answers randomly is 0. However, this rule made some students highly anxious, and I realized that this anxiety could unjustly harm their performance .
2. Ask the students to explain each answer. Award points only to correct answers with correct explanations. The problem is that it takes much more time to write and to grade, negating one of the main advantages of a multi-choice exam.
3. Give a grade of 0 to any student with less than 50% correct answers, and give twice the points for each answer above 50% (e.g, a student with 90% correct answers will receive 2·(90−50) = 80% score). However, I fear this might not be accepted by the university, which encourages additive scoring. E.g, students with 60% correct answers will complain that it is unfair to give them only 20% grade.
What is a good way to write an exam based on yes/no questions?<issue_comment>username_1: For this situation, I provide three answer options:
* Yes.
* No.
* I don't know.
The grading rubric is:
* Correct answer: +1
* Incorrect answer: 0
* I don't know: +0.5
That way, if the student really doesn't know, they are guaranteed the expectation of a random guess **and** you get feedback on holes in student knowledge, which can be used to take remedial action. If your aim is more effective student learning, this can be a good strategy.
I've tried to avoid negative marks [for a couple of reasons:](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/what-is-the-right-choice/159581.article)
>
> Imagine two candidates who achieve the same final score in a negatively marked exam. One candidate answers only part of the paper, losing a few marks for wrong answers. The other answers almost all of the paper, getting far more correct but also getting several wrong and having marks deducted. Which one knows more?
>
>
> The second problem is that the use of negative marking extends the theoretical range of marks for the exam. For example, if one mark is awarded for every correct answer and one deducted for each wrong answer, the theoretical range of the exam is - 100 to +100 per cent.
>
>
>
—
From the comments moved to chat: someone asked about a slightly different value for the “I don’t know” option. This is my response:
I tend not to use Yes/No questions, but multiple choice for some assessment. In those cases, I make the "I don't know" option worth 1/(N-1) where N is the number of other options. That way, if there are 3 other options, a random guess would expect to get 1/3 but the I don't know option gains 1/2 --- the expected value if the student can knock out one of the three options..
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a number of papers published on the over the years. A table of options is shown below from Bandaranayake, et. al., Using Multiple Response True-False Multiple Choice Questions, Royal Australian College of Surgeons, 1999. Some of these consider the construction of "multiple true/false" questions, that is, questions that have one "stem" and several (weakly or strongly) linked true-false statements:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BAxgS.png)
Another option is suggested by <NAME>, An Alternative Scoring Formula for Multiple-Choice and True False Tests, Journal of Educational Research, 2001:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/an2bR.png)
Some other papers I found include the following:
* [Multiple True-False Questions](https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ101479); <NAME>.; <NAME>. Education in Chemistry, 11, 3, 86-87, May 74
* [Scoring Multiple True/False Tests: Some Considerations](https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ278908); <NAME>., Evaluation and the Health Professions, v5 n4 p459-68 Dec 1982
* Burton, Multiple choice and true/false tests: reliability measures and some implications of negative marking, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2004.
* <NAME>. Misinformation, partial knowledge and guessing in true/false tests. Medical Education [serial online], 2002.
* <NAME>, <NAME>. A brief report on a comparison of six scoring methods for multiple true-false items. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 1993.
* Muijtjens, <NAME>, Hoogenboom, Evers, <NAME>, Muijtjens. The effect of a ‘don't know’ option on test scores: number-right and formula scoring compared. Medical Education, 1999.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Each yes or no question can be answered in three ways: yes, no, (blank).
State at the start that each correct answer has a +1 score, each blank has a 0 score, and each incorrect answer has, say, a -0.5 score. This discourages guessing but has a lesser penalty than a -1 score. The range of possible grades would then be from -50% to 100%.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You can also make a combination of a linear and a non-linear scales. Say, you give 5 problems with 4 yes/no questions in each one. To determine the problem score from, say, 0 to 20 you can use any reasonable (=monotone and explicable to the students) function on ${0,1}^4$ you wish (you can even assign different values to different questions) but then you just add the scores for the problems. This eliminates the threshold effect that is the main disadvantage of any "cutoff amplification" of just one final score but preserves the general idea that correct random guessing isn't worth much.
As to the common smooth amplification techniques, the ones I've seen in action are $x^2/100$ (so the lucky random guy with nominal 60% gets only 36) and $10\sqrt x$ (if everyone has really low score, this stretches the bottom part and boosts the morale a bit).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Another way to help lower the guessable score while still rewarding the students who have prepared themselves for the exams is to group like questions into one, where answering all the questions about one topic is showing mastery of that topic and earns full credit, whereas only knowing some of the answers is worth less credit.
This is easier to explain with an example. Let's say I'm preparing an exam for a US History class for the unit on the events leading up to the revolutionary war. Some of the events that I might want to be sure my students have studied and understood could be The Establishment of Jamestown, Virginia as the first permanent English settlement, Bacon's Rebellion, The Boston Massacre, The Boston Tea Party, and some others.
When preparing the question on Bacon's Rebellion, I might want to check that the students know when and where it was. So I could set up the question like this:
Bacon's Rebellion (4 points. Possible scores: 4, 1, 0):
* A) Bacon's Rebellion was in 1676. T F
* B) <NAME> led the rebellion in Jackson, Mississippi. T F
(Answers: A) True, B) False, it was in Jamestown, Virginia)
If the student gets both questions right, they get all 4 points. If they get only one right, they still get one point. If they get both questions wrong, they get 0 points.
This scoring system would have to be thoroughly explained to the students before hand and written at the top of the test, but to give you an idea of how this distributes the exam scores, if the exam is made up of questions each with two parts like this and a student simply guesses on every question, they have an expected average score of 1.5 points per question, or 37.5% on the whole exam. Yet for a student that knows most of the material and knows 95% of the answers is expected to get about a 92% on the exam.
By awarding one point instead of 0 for the partially correct answer, this helps mitigate the students complaints of "But I knew that the rebellion was in 1676, I just forgot where it was!" because they are still getting partial credit, just not as much as they would get if they showed a mastery of the material by being able to answer both questions.
By never giving any negative points either, this helps with the anxiety you were mentioning your students face with that prospect.
Two tips if you decide to implement this idea:
1. Stick to the same format for the whole exam, and make sure to explain to the students what they are going to see. Either make them all questions with two parts, or do something else, but don't mix them up. Students may become caught up in trying to figure out how the questions are scored, and will lose valuable time that should be used showing their knowledge of the material.
2. Don't try to group more than two questions together in this way. The math might look nice how the expected score of the person guessing drops greatly with each question you add about Bacon's Rebellion, but from the student perspective, if he or she has studied and knows most of the material but just can't remember one little detail that happens to be something you ask, that student immediately loses the majority of the credit for a question that they might know a lot about.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: If there is a reason why you are considering 50% to be of some benefit, you could restructure the course's grading structure to not be based on the Score (percentage), but instead be based on the Grade (A-F), using the same scale as for GPA calculation (A=4,F=0).
This would mean that scoring 0-59% on any test or assignment would result in 0 points contributing to the final course Grade.
This will make simply guessing on a True/False or Yes/No test to be statistically useless.
I will state that I believe that worrying over a student improperly "gaming" the system to score a failing grade that might be higher than another failing grade he might have received if he had properly taken the test, is stressing yourself out for no useful purpose.
---
The more I think about it, the more I have a problem with using GPA within a class. For one, it would be almost impossible to get an A, as that would be a perfect score.
Perhaps Scoring for assignments could be
* F=0
* D=2
* C=4
* B=6
* A=8
With the final course grade being
* '>=7 gives A
* '>=5 gives B
* '>=3 gives C
* '>=1 gives D
* '<1 gives F
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: You are, essentially, evaluating a binary predictor.
The usual score is known as *accuracy* (i.e., probability of giving the correct answer). For a random (coin toss) predictor you will get 50% (if the correct answers are evenly distributed between *yes* and *no*).
Note that the condition that the correct answers are distributed %50:%50 between `yes` and `no` is itself a huge hint to the students if they know that in advance.
I suggest that you consider two alternative metrics:
### [Matthews correlation coefficient](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthews_correlation_coefficient)
Same as [Phi
coefficient](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phi_coefficient), [Pearson correlation coefficient](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_correlation_coefficient).
1. Range: from -1 to 1
2. All correct: 1
3. All wrong: -1
4. Random: 0
### [Proficiency](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_coefficient)
Measures the *share of information* (percentage of bits) contained in the true answers which is captured by the submitted answers (*information* here means [entropy of the distribution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(information_theory))).
1. Range: from 0 to 1
2. All correct: 1
3. All wrong: 1 (sic!)
4. Random: 0
Note that the scores of "all correct" and "all opposite" are the same. This is a feature, not a bug: the person who got all answers wrong has probably confused the labels ("yes" and "no") but knows the subject.
It also gives a lower score to "close to random" results than MCC.
IOW, it discriminates good results better.
Caveats
-------
### Missing Answers
If an answer is missing, it should be replace with a random `yes`/`no` answer.
This is correct statistically, but wrong pedagogically because the honest "I don't know" answer shows *second order knowledge* that should be encouraged.
### Correct answer distribution
The metrics behave the same regardless of the distribution of the correct answers, except when *all* the correct answers are *the same* (in which case neither metric is defined). This is addressed by the Bernoulli shuffle (step 2 in the *protocol*).
### These are *statistical* metrics
These metrics make little sense when there are very few questions.
Specifically, a mistake in one question may have a very different cost depending on the question (this can be addressed by repeating the Bernoulli shuffle *many times* and taking the average score - see *protocol* step 2 below).
### Additivity
These metrics are ***not*** *additive*: you cannot score two halves of the test separately and somehow combine them to get the total test score (let alone *add* the scores for the two halves).
This can make these metrics a very hard sell to both students and administrators.
### Protocol
Given the above, the correct protocol for these metrics is:
1. Prepare *hundreds* of questions (it *is* okay for *all* questions to have the *same* correct answer).
2. Using a Bernoulli rng with *p=1/2*, for each question, map `yes`/`no` to `A`/`B` (i.e., for about 50% questions, `yes` will be `A` and for 50% it will be `B`, and for half of questions the correct answer is `A`) - this is done completely behind the screen. Neither the students nor the professor need to be aware what the actual map is.
3. Score the resulting binary predictors (now both the true base rate and the predicted base rates are the same - 50%).
The dependency on the Bernoulli rng does introduce some noise (order `1/N` where `N` is the number of test questions). I.e., the standard deviation of mcc and proficiency on a test with 100 questions will be under 1%. Since the steps 2 & 3 are automatic, they can be repeated many times and the mean or median score used.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: One possibility that solves all of the listed problems: Grading on a curve.
Granted, Curve Grading is something that gets a lot of peoples' hackles up (either for or against) but this is a situation that it's practically built for: you have a range of results that don't line up with fair letter grades but that *are* sorted/ranked by degree of knowledge.
Before, a student's 75% would be a 'C', even though they only actually knew the answers to half the questions (and guessed the other half.) On a curve, though, that student's 75% would likely give them a low or failing grade since most other people in the class would hopefully have a higher success rate.
Edit: For clarification, when I say "Grading on a Curve," I mean that X% of the class will get an 'A', Y% will get a 'B', etc. Heck, to be honest, if you explained up front, "I'll be grading this on a curve because, well, if I didn't, people could get 50% for just guessing everything randomly!" and made the curve semi-generous, then you would engender very little ill-will amongst the students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Sure, a student recording random guesses on a yes/no or true/false exam will have an expected score of 50%. So? Under most grading schemes, this is a solid **F**.
A more pertinent question to ask is "What is the probability that a randomly guessing student will receive a passing grade / a **B** or higher / an **A**?"
For this problem, *exam length is your friend!* Let's assume that each question is an independent trial and that correct and incorrect answers are equally likely (p=0.5). This places us in the context of the [Binomial Distribution.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution) I'll consider a passing grade to be a score of 70% or higher and an **A** to be a 90% or higher, with a correct answer getting 1pt and an incorrect answer getting 0pts on each question (which meets your institution's preference for additive grading).
* For a short 10 question exam, a random guesser has a 17.2% chance of passing and a 1.07% chance of getting an **A**.
* For a 20 question exam, a random guesser has a 5.77% chance of passing and a 0.0201% chance of getting an **A**.
* For a 50 question exam, a random guesser has only a 0.330% chance of passing and a 0.000000210% chance of getting an **A**.
* For a 100 question exam, a random guesser has only a 0.00393% chance of passing and a 1.52\*10^{-15}% chance of getting an **A**.
While there are many caveats to this rough analysis, this should highlight that random guessing is not a viable strategy for an exam of reasonable length. Keep in mind that the probability of passing is also the same probability that they get less than a 30% on the exam! Along the lines of this statistical analysis, there are many similar takeaways: a student who can make an educated guess (say p=0.7) at each question will almost always outperform a random guesser; a student who knows the answer to the first n-1 questions and then randomly guesses on the last question will do even better. Another takeaway would be that a multiple choice exam has a better likelihood of punishing a random guesser than a yes/no exam.
Personally, I don't find a multiple choice or yes/no exam all that great at evaluating student learning, as it generally hews towards regurgitation of facts and technicalities of wording, as opposed to demonstrating critical analysis and synthesis. If you do persist with grading yes/no or multiple choice, here's a few personal opinions:
* Use a random (or pseudo-random) process to determine the answers. Exams where every correct answer is choice (B) are cute, but are not a good evaluation tool. Students will also pick up on patterns in the order of correct answers, leading to meta-gaming.
* Use a simple metric (0pts incorrect/ 1pt correct or similar) and be sure to explain whether or not they will be penalized for guessing---exams are stressful enough without needing to consider game theory when recording each answer.
* Make the exam sufficiently long. This will help even out the noise from random guessing and make each individual question less stressful. Consider the extreme case of what it would feel like to take an exam with a single T/F question.
* On the flip side, make sure that there is enough time to give a reasoned response to each question.
### Edit
I was unaware of the different correlations between raw percentage score and typical grades, as pointed out in the comments. My thanks to @curiousdanii and @cfr for pointing this out to me and my sincere apologies for the ethnocentrism! I greatly appreciate the information from academia.stackexchange that can help us peer beyond our institutional bubbles.
Having only graded within the American system, I don't have a good qualitative feel for the various grades in other systems. However, I feel that a central theme of my answer is still worth considering: random guessing is almost always an inferior strategy to studying and answering questions correctly. As such, I would give serious thought to whether it is truly a problem that you need to control for when designing a rubric.
If pressed, I think the most natural way to account for an unacceptably high expected value (relative to a given grade scheme) would be to switch to a multiple choice format. As with a good T/F question, strive to make all the answers outwardly plausible. Having a "joke" response that can immediately be ruled out accomplishes little.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: >
> a student can just answer randomly to all questions and get, in expectation, a score of 50%, which is not very fair
>
>
>
Not really, unless your grading scheme also gives a high grade to scores above 50%. If you assume the scores follow a normal-like distribution (they almost always will) then the mean will come out somewhere well above 50% and the guessers who got 50% will end up with a pretty negative z-score, and thus a low grade (possibly F, depending on how you set it up).
I think the real issue with true/false questions is that you actually have pretty good odds of winning the lottery, and getting a good grade without knowing the material. Because of this, at least multiple choice or fill in the blank questions are much better. Essay questions, as you mention, are of course the best but much more laborious to actually grade.
Note that you can always convert T/F questions to multiple choice, by using "which of the three above statements are true?". This way it is impossible to guess independently, so the expected score can drop from 50% down to 12% (but in reality will be 20% or 25% because of the number of choices).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: One easy scheme that has been used by some mathematical olympiads is to make every question's answer to be an integer from 1 to 999. If you are careful in setting the question, you usually can make the probability of guessing the correct answer (even after some common sense elimination) to be no bigger than 10%. For example, if the question asks to find the length of some line segment in some geometric construction, engineer the construction so that there are no obvious inequalities that can bound the length to less than 100.
The advantages of this scheme is that the exam is easy to grade and yet difficult for students to get undeserved credit. I am strongly of the opinion that mathematics students should be graded based on proofs, but if you are considering multiple choice questions at least this scheme is a far better option.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: After reviewing all of the previously posted answers, I can't see any way in which the inherent problems of a yes-no exam can be overcome. It is simply not a good exam format. You can't extract a useful quantification of your students' knowledge and skill from it.
*You* can't, but your students can. So if you want to set yes-no exams, do so with the purpose of giving your students a regular purpose for reviewing what they have learnt. Give these exams a nominal 1-2% contribution to the final grade, with a max of 10% for all the yes-no exams combined, and then set one or two more involved assessments to make up the rest of the final grade.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: I see three main issues:
1. **Someone without any domain knowledge can still get points.** You say this is unfair, but unfair to whom? People without any knowledge are getting points, but those with knowledge are getting more points. And the grade thresholds tend to take this into account; the thresholds tend to run from about 50% (F) to 90% (A), so when you take the free points into account, that's effectively 0% knowledge is an F, while 80% knowledge is an A.
2. **Negative points make people feel bad.** The importance you should give this depends on the level. For elementary school, psychological issues are prominent, but by college, it should be less of an issue (although not entirely eliminated). This can be reduced by presenting students will mathematically equivalent situations with different formulations. For instance, with a 100 point test, you could tell students that they start the test with -50 points, but they get .5 points back every time they skip a question.
3. **People who guess do better than those who leave questions they don't know blank.** This does create a certain sort of "busy work" for students, having them choose between randomly filling in answers they don't know, or missing out on "free points". Note that this isn't addressed by including a "don't know" option, since they'll still have the busy work of marking "don't know" for all those questions, instead of just skipping them. There is, however, an advantage here where you're basically asking students "Okay, you don't know what the answer is here. But which do you think is *more likely*?"
There's no way you can fully address all three of these issues, so you're going to have to choose at least one to ignore. You can give half a point to each question left blank, which completely takes care of (3) and mostly takes care of (2) (students aren't getting negative points for getting questions wrong, but they are missing out on the points they could have gotten if they left them blank). You can leave things as they are, which fully addresses (2), but doesn't address (1) or (3). Or you can give negative points, which addresses (1) and (3), but not (2).
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/15
| 420
| 1,772
|
<issue_start>username_0: It looks like everyone has it's own theories on what's the function of a defense. People say that it has to be a contribution to knowledge, other people say that it has to reflect 3 years of work, other say that it has to be a work of publishable quality.
Given that "contribution to knowledge" is kinda a difficult ground to judge for some humanities, how are examiners approaching a PhD defense in the humanities?<issue_comment>username_1: Because there are so many different disciplines and educational systems, there is no universal definition of what constitutes either sufficient work for a PhD or constitutes a successful defense.
That said, the “original work of scholarship” connotes that the PhD candidate has produced something that is new at the time of the defense. In the arts, for instance, is an exhibition of sculptures or paintings “publishable?” That depends greatly on your definition, but it would unquestionably represent something original.
The goal of the defense is also quite variable, depending on local policies and culture but is usually regarded as a vehicle for demonstrating mastery to an audience by allowing for questioning of the candidate.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The ‘defense’ is part and parcel of the work itself. Typically you must first produce some novel work, and at the very end, you must ‘defend’ this work in an act of oral discourse. The defense is mostly a rite of passage in most disciplines. Your advisor and committee usually won’t let you get that far if the work is sub par and you’re likely to ‘fail’. Officially, you must be able to speak intelligently about the work and address criticisms on the fly, proving your scholarship and deep knowledge.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/15
| 471
| 1,948
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the following licence to publish:
6.b) preprints (before referee) can be posted to electronic preprint servers
6.c) postprints (after referee) can be posted to subject repositories
Now I am wondering whether arxiv is an electronic preprint server ([wiki says it is](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preprint#Physical_sciences)) a subject repository for math ([wiki says it is](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disciplinary_repository#Mathematics)) or neither or both.
As I could not find any useful distinction between these two terms online, it feels appropriate to ask the question here.<issue_comment>username_1: Because there are so many different disciplines and educational systems, there is no universal definition of what constitutes either sufficient work for a PhD or constitutes a successful defense.
That said, the “original work of scholarship” connotes that the PhD candidate has produced something that is new at the time of the defense. In the arts, for instance, is an exhibition of sculptures or paintings “publishable?” That depends greatly on your definition, but it would unquestionably represent something original.
The goal of the defense is also quite variable, depending on local policies and culture but is usually regarded as a vehicle for demonstrating mastery to an audience by allowing for questioning of the candidate.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The ‘defense’ is part and parcel of the work itself. Typically you must first produce some novel work, and at the very end, you must ‘defend’ this work in an act of oral discourse. The defense is mostly a rite of passage in most disciplines. Your advisor and committee usually won’t let you get that far if the work is sub par and you’re likely to ‘fail’. Officially, you must be able to speak intelligently about the work and address criticisms on the fly, proving your scholarship and deep knowledge.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/15
| 728
| 2,768
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a postdoc in the sciences.
My supervisor submitted a grant renewal to the NIH recently and listed me as "key personnel" on it. The renewal received very high marks and is likely to be approved.
Although I have received fellowships in the past, I've never applied for a grant, and I've never been key personnel on a grant before.
Would it be appropriate for me to list on my CV that I'm key personnel on this grant (if the renewal is officially approved)? If so, how should this be stated? Examples from actual CVs would be much appreciated. (To be specific, I'm not sure whether I should list this alongside my fellowships, in my "Awards" section . . . or start an entirely new section for "Grants" or something like that.)
**EDIT**: This question is similar in flavor to [this one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/25808/35513), but I'm looking for a more specific answer than that question received . . . It's possible this should be marked as duplicate.<issue_comment>username_1: I think I've found what I'm looking for, but I'm still interested in other answers/feedback.
I think a new section in my CV that looks like this would be appropriate:
>
> **Grants**
>
>
> * National Institutes of Health, AXZ-1394 (2018-2021)
>
>
> "Awesome Grant Title"
>
>
> Role: Key Personnel
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Would it be appropriate for me to list on my CV that I'm key personnel on this grant (if the renewal is officially approved)?
>
>
>
My answer to this, like all CV questions, is which CV. I have a big CV which has everything on it (including failed grant proposals for which I was listed as key personnel). I then delete things as I tailor the CV to a specific purpose. Every once in a while you will get an odd request from your department about things like *we need a list of every grant application you have been involved with in the past 10 years by tomorrow*. Having a single CV that I can cut from is much easier than going through all my files on my computer.
The next question then becomes, how useful is it to let people know that you were a key personnel on a grant. The answer is it depends on your funding history and what you are applying for. In my opinion, the extent to which not having applied for much funding will hurt you will depend on your role in the funding you have had (being a key personnel on a single grant is much better than having been shuttled from grant to grant and never named).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, it’s good to do so, and don’t be afraid to put all your grant/funding activities up front and center, even before your pubs. I’d put them all together under a more general ‘external funding’ section.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/15
| 910
| 4,035
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper to a Taylor & Francis journal. I received two constructive reviews and one negative, together with an editor’s request for major revision. My coauthors and I didn’t agree with the third reviewer and wrote a polite rebuttal. After major revision two referees accepted our work. However, a fourth review was provided and contained 3 pages of new issues, probably raised by reviewer 3 but it could also be a new first review. The editor now requested for a revision. Again we did not agree with the changes proposed by this reviewer and submitted a second polite rebuttal. This can go on and on. Can we actively ask the editor to take a decision if we are of the opinion that requested changes do not improve our work?<issue_comment>username_1: You can, but there's no guarantee the editor will make a decision. It's her journal - until she's satisfied nothing gets published.
A few things to think about:
* I personally find it pretty unusual to invite a fourth reviewer for a paper that already has three reviews. I might invite more reviewers if the reviews I received were poor or if I didn't have enough reviews to be confident the first time round, which doesn't seem like the case here. Hence I suspect the "fourth review" was written by the third reviewer.
* It's true that this can go on and on, but it's more likely that you're already at least halfway to a final decision. My experience is that very few papers reach four rounds of revisions.
* If the paper-to-editor ratio is high, then it's possible the editor is operating on autopilot. If you ask the editor to make a decision quickly, your paper could come under greater scrutiny. This could e.g. lead to the editor inserting some comments of her own or challenging some of your revisions that the 1st/2nd reviewer has already approved of. Conversely if the paper-to-editor ratio is low, then your request is much less likely to change anything.
* People don't like to be told what to do, especially in this situation where the editor is the person in charge of the journal. If you decide to ask for a decision, write something non-accusatory, e.g. "we've been through two rounds of major revisions. When can we expect a decision?"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you truly think you are subject to unnecessary hardship due to the review process, you might consider appealing to the editor in chief.
This might be particularly applicable if your first round revisions were nearly there, then a new reviewer requests unreasonably extensive revisions (eg, a new experiment). Sometimes you simply need to call attention to the situation to get a more thorough assessment. You shouldn’t try to ‘force’ a decision but you can ask whether or not it might be better to pull the submission and go elsewhere. That will get the point across.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, you can ask for a final decision after this rebuttal. However, I would suggest a slightly different approach: **Communicate to the editor, that you will not undertake another revision for this paper.**
In that way you don't ask the editor to do something, but say what you are about to do. The implication for the reviewer is the same, but it is their decision what to do. I think it would be good to explain why you think that another revision would not improve the paper anymore (or any other reason you have to not revise the paper another time). Keep in mind that multiple rounds of review-revise do happen. A colleague told me that he was up to *seven* rounds of review, and he was willing to go through the whole process as this was a good journal and the reviewer comments were always constructive (the paper was published in that journal in the end).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: It might be best to contact the editor and explain politely and concisely (a long letter won't help) why you disagree with the proposed changes. But asking the editor for a decision might be a bit too much.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/15
| 1,237
| 5,468
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just received a confirmation from my graduate program adviser that I successfully completed my two-year-long master's program. I had a negative experience in my second year because of a mandatory group project that I had to do in order to graduate.This group project was done under a certain level of guidance by a professor. The first semester of this group project was only one credit, while the second semester of this course was three credits. Much of the drama occurred in the last two days before the due date of the group's final paper, which was via email. I did not get along with two out of four former group members because those two bullied me and badmouthed me behind my back. It was evident to me that their actions were coordinated. Out of these two perpetrators, one was a female who was around my age (mid-20s), while the other one, the male, was 33 years old. I will only talk about the male here.
There were three different paper drafts that we had to submit in the second semester of this group project class. Both of these individuals referred to were procrastinators and felt like the rules of the group did not apply to them. However, they were the most domineering ones in the group and consistently used foul language in group settings. The 33-year-old male was the group editor, but he was an extreme procrastinator who would literally wait until the last moment to do things. He did not do much editing in the first two drafts, and right on the day before the due date of the third and final paper, he suggested to the group to make huge changes. He hardly communicated with me, so I wasn't even expecting any form of communication from him. Besides, I had another paper that was due at exactly the same day and time as this group project paper. By the time that he started communicating via email to the entire group to make significant changes, I was already much more focused on my other paper and I looked at his email much later. He had sent me an angry message asking if I "still wanted to be a part" of the project. Excuse me, I was involved in this project, but he chose to be actively involved at the very end. I replied to his email, politely asking why he could not make his suggestions much sooner, despite his angry tone in the email that he personally sent to me. What he did in his response was that he broke down every single sentence that I wrote, and commented on how I was 'wrong' or did "not know what I was talking about." In the process, he even dropped the F-bomb twice at me and called me "passive-aggressive" for "challenging him." He was clearly the aggressive one.
He attacked me, saying that he was "not expecting me to make an effort." Despite his abusive words, I still made the changes that he demanded.
Just one day after the due date of this paper, I scheduled an appointment with the professor and the associate dean at my school. I explained the behavior of this male. Their response was that his behavior was very unprofessional. I needed to have this meeting because no one, especially in a higher education setting deserves to be treated the way I was treated. This male referred to was interested in further pursuing a PhD. Besides, he was formerly in the US military, which is very surprising to me, considering his character issues and him physically being very out of shape.
I was able to talk with the professor and the associate dean long before the conferral of degrees. However, I did not receive any updates after this meeting, which kind of made me angry. I don't know if the school took any measures or disciplinary action against this particular student. I don't know if the school actually took this issue seriously. **Is it possible that no disciplinary action took place? Is it possible that students who exhibit such behavior get dismissed from the program for such unprofessional behavior?**<issue_comment>username_1: For what it's worth working in higher education I can guarantee the professors have noted the unprofessional behavior from the student(s). In project settings it's fairly evident who is completing the work. Often universities or the specific schools within them do have conduct guidelines which if they were violated can result in removal from the program. Unfortunately, in the world you're likely to encounter these individuals as well and should learn how to address such issues as they may even be in a higher position in your organization.
It really depends on your institution on the specific outcome but be prepared as you will encounter this again and typically the actions they exhibit are systemic of lack of repercussion.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's likely that there is a written record of this student's conduct, as username_1 said. It's possible that disciplinary action was taken as well (which I'm guessing would have consisted in an official warning to the student), but oftentimes those processes are confidential. I don't think there's any harm in a follow-up though. My guess is that they might just tell you that they took actions of some sort, but won't specify what those actions were. Still, it would be good to know - having been in a similar situation, I know it put my mind at ease when I knew that the perpetrator had been held accountable, even if I didn't know how/the extent. And if they didn't do anything to address that student's behavior, hopefully they can explain why.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/15
| 806
| 3,418
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just received an email from the editor of a monograph series letting me know the issue where my article is included is now live. I went through normal things recently to get it published, like a copyright statement, but I never saw proofs. Upon looking at the pdf as it is online, I noticed formatting concerns that I would have liked corrected. They are:
1. Some of the headings are inconsistently formatted (i.e., some bold, some indented, some nothing - all for what should be the same heading level)
2. I have some full page tables, which produce lots of empty space on the page just beforehand. Rather than continue the body of the document, it is paused until after the table (in one case mid-sentence).
Is it possible to have changes made, and in what conditions is it worth it? There are not format methods to submit corrigendum to my knowledge. I'm also part of a relatively small academic community and a young scholar. I don't want to be seen as being too picky, but I also want my work to be represented well.
A similar questions is [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/72970/45272) although I didn't get proofs and I'm specifically asking with regard to the size of the community I'm in.<issue_comment>username_1: It sounds like these issues are purely cosmetic and don't significantly affect the paper's content nor its readability. I would just leave it alone. I think you do risk being seen as picky or annoying if you make an issue of something this minor. Yes, it's not ideal, but life's not perfect.
If you're able to post a version of the paper to your website or a preprint server, you could certainly fix the formatting in that version. Depending on the culture in your field, it may be that most people will be reading that version instead of the "official" version anyway.
(It's also possible that you'll still receive proofs and be able to correct them at some point in the future. I have experienced cases where the publisher will post a preliminary version of the article before the author has corrected the proofs, and update it later after corrections are made.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would only raise the issue with the editor if one of two cases applies:
* The formatting has markably been altered from the version you submitted for publication, or
* The version online is markably different from other articles in the monograph series.
If it’s a “just accepted” manuscript that has not been through production, I wouldn’t worry about it too much, but if you’re still concerned about it, you might send a friendly note asking when you’ll have a chance to review the proofs.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Is the online article a preprint or a finished product? That is, did the publisher do anything to it (e.g. format the article, insert a DOI, copyright statement and so on)?
If no: then you'll probably be receiving proofs soon, so nothing to worry about yet.
If yes: normally, this means it's too late to make changes. The typesetters would have to effectively start from scratch. However, the defects you describe sound very basic, to the point it seems the typesetters did a (very) bad job. In this case I would write to the series editor and point out the obvious flaws. It's up to the series editor, but she might raise a formal complaint to the publisher or even switch publishers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/16
| 955
| 4,091
|
<issue_start>username_0: It took 5-6 months to hear from the referee in both of my accepted papers. In my one rejection it was only a couple of weeks.
I do not think it could possibly take 5-6 months to read and understand my papers.
Should I conclude that my referee's wait a few months to even begin reading my papers? Are they trying to answer questions I posed, to piggy-back before others see the publication? I just am having a hard time understanding the delay.<issue_comment>username_1: Reading your paper is not the only obligation your referee has. They are active researchers who, besides their own research, have teaching, administration, thesis defenses, other papers to review etc. They are also normal people, who have to make their personal life function.
5-6 months is a long time, but depending on the field and the length of your paper, it is not unusual.
Don't be so worried about other people stealing your ideas. Most likely the referees has more ideas of their own than they have available time.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It’s unlikely they’re all sitting on the paper, although as has been mentioned it’s very field-dependent. A six-month delay in my field without any feedback would be approaching a four- to five-sigma event, but in math or some humanities fields, for instance, it might be more common.
What is possible is that the editor has *some* reviews in hand, but not enough to render her decision. If somebody is straggling, then a new review has to be solicited, leading to more delays.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Reviewing a paper takes me 4 hours upto 2 days. I only accept review invitations when I have time to read those papers. I have not yet declined any serious invitation. I try to submit my (naturally constructive) review within two weeks after being invited by an editor, no matter the time being given.
In contrast, I had to wait seven months once to receive a rejection. Other peer-reviewed journals accepted within two - three months, including revision. Therefore, I have the same question as you have. I think it strongly depends on the journal and the reviewers it relies on.
I have a theory but it is just a theory. Some journals have procedures about how often a reviewer can be approached. What if you just have to wait until a reviewer in your field becomes available?
Further I notice that reviewers easily exploit the maximum time given by an editor. An editor probably waits for all reviews to return. Then there are reviewers that need reminders or just never respond after having accepted an invitation, forcing an editor to start all over again. I even consider the possibility that a small number of reviewers intentionally slows down the process for competitive reasons.
I feel the whole review and decision process would benefit from more transparency and behavioral professionalism. Being busy is no excuse. Nobody is enforced to accept an invitation. We all, without exception, have 24 hours in a day.
You could consider sharing your review experience at SciRev.org
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A personal experience as editor (which might help understand why this happens):
An interesting paper finds its way to me via the editorial office. I usually try to use one of the suggested reviewers and another one - so those are invited and have about 3 weeks to reply. Both reviewers fail to reply within 21 days and the next on the list are invited ... After about 12 weeks, I have two reviews: "Reject" and "Minor Revision". In that case, I prefer to get a third opinion (which is also policy) - so add another 6 to 8 weeks. In total it took 24 weeks from submission to a 'Major revision' decision - and resulted in a very unhappy author.
Unfortunately there is no easy solution: it is difficult to find (good) reviewers, and they tend to be inundated with review requests as they are known to be reliable.
Complain to the editor-in-chief (or publisher) - in a friendly way of course - perhaps they can reduce the time given to reviewers or find other ways.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/16
| 1,242
| 5,257
|
<issue_start>username_0: I accepted a postdoc position after a short interview by Skype and I haven't had the chance to get to know the people and the city. Anyway, my PI helped me to get my visa (EU - researcher) issued and, currently, I'm already working on the project with some good preliminary results.
BUT
I hate the city, I'm sure it can never be a home. Also, and I'm having some serious problems with another postdoc, which I need to work with because our projects are connected (he's sexist; gave me a wrong protocol to follow and I have lost time and samples; he doesn't leave me alone to work, slows my progress and is always criticizing my project and my experimental approach in not a good way).
I know it will cost me my health if I stay the agreed time (1 year, at least) and I have already landed some other postdoc interviews to work on better places (better places, with nicer people) and I believe I have good chances to get the job.
But, with the visa issued and being my current PI a really good researcher and person, I'm afraid it will look pretty bad on my CV and I don't know how to explain it if someone on the interview asks about it.
* I don't have a contract, I never signed anything for the fellowship, it's a normal procedure to have just a spoken agreement; Also I haven't received the payment yet because I still don't have a bank account because of the bureaucracy.
Since I really wish to stay in academia for quite some time what I should do? Tell that I cannot stay till the end of the agreement? Tell about the other possibilities? I'm lost here, the truth is that I never taught it could happend.<issue_comment>username_1: Reading your paper is not the only obligation your referee has. They are active researchers who, besides their own research, have teaching, administration, thesis defenses, other papers to review etc. They are also normal people, who have to make their personal life function.
5-6 months is a long time, but depending on the field and the length of your paper, it is not unusual.
Don't be so worried about other people stealing your ideas. Most likely the referees has more ideas of their own than they have available time.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It’s unlikely they’re all sitting on the paper, although as has been mentioned it’s very field-dependent. A six-month delay in my field without any feedback would be approaching a four- to five-sigma event, but in math or some humanities fields, for instance, it might be more common.
What is possible is that the editor has *some* reviews in hand, but not enough to render her decision. If somebody is straggling, then a new review has to be solicited, leading to more delays.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Reviewing a paper takes me 4 hours upto 2 days. I only accept review invitations when I have time to read those papers. I have not yet declined any serious invitation. I try to submit my (naturally constructive) review within two weeks after being invited by an editor, no matter the time being given.
In contrast, I had to wait seven months once to receive a rejection. Other peer-reviewed journals accepted within two - three months, including revision. Therefore, I have the same question as you have. I think it strongly depends on the journal and the reviewers it relies on.
I have a theory but it is just a theory. Some journals have procedures about how often a reviewer can be approached. What if you just have to wait until a reviewer in your field becomes available?
Further I notice that reviewers easily exploit the maximum time given by an editor. An editor probably waits for all reviews to return. Then there are reviewers that need reminders or just never respond after having accepted an invitation, forcing an editor to start all over again. I even consider the possibility that a small number of reviewers intentionally slows down the process for competitive reasons.
I feel the whole review and decision process would benefit from more transparency and behavioral professionalism. Being busy is no excuse. Nobody is enforced to accept an invitation. We all, without exception, have 24 hours in a day.
You could consider sharing your review experience at SciRev.org
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A personal experience as editor (which might help understand why this happens):
An interesting paper finds its way to me via the editorial office. I usually try to use one of the suggested reviewers and another one - so those are invited and have about 3 weeks to reply. Both reviewers fail to reply within 21 days and the next on the list are invited ... After about 12 weeks, I have two reviews: "Reject" and "Minor Revision". In that case, I prefer to get a third opinion (which is also policy) - so add another 6 to 8 weeks. In total it took 24 weeks from submission to a 'Major revision' decision - and resulted in a very unhappy author.
Unfortunately there is no easy solution: it is difficult to find (good) reviewers, and they tend to be inundated with review requests as they are known to be reliable.
Complain to the editor-in-chief (or publisher) - in a friendly way of course - perhaps they can reduce the time given to reviewers or find other ways.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/16
| 1,532
| 6,069
|
<issue_start>username_0: A couple of months ago, I defended my Master's thesis and got graduated. One of the referees, a professor of mine with a history of verbal contentions between us, did me an overt injustice and despite all my efforts, attacked me with her unfair judgement. I got angry and sent her an e-mail the other day, one could say explicitly offensive and disrespectful, implying her lack of knowledge and her biased criticisms. I also commented on her wasting too much time in social networks, rather than doing academic research.
I may have gone too far obviously for I heard she burst into tears after reading the e-mail, and has notified almost all other professors about it.
As a professor, do you still believe I have a chance to apologize the lady and ask for her forgiveness? If in her shoes, would you expect an apology e-mail or you'd prefer no more words from the arrogant student? If yes, what would you prefer to hear in the regret letter? And do you evaluate my reaction as provocative?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> *one could say*... *implying*... I also *commented* on... I *may have gone too far*... do you evaluate my reaction as provocative?...
>
>
>
Perhaps you're being a bit lenient on yourself?
I think the only right thing to do is to apologize, in person, and own your awful (truly awful!) behavior. You didn't *perhaps* offend and disrespect her, you *absolutely* offended and disrespected her. In my opinion, you were completely out of line (and unprofessional to boot.) Regardless of the opinion of others (including my own), I think you need to deal head on with this problem you have of lashing out at others for (real or perceived) slights. Part of dealing with a problem behavior is dealing with the consequences.
People are more likely to forgive an offense if the offender has actually apologized and asked for forgiveness. Though she may continue to harbor some residual ill-will towards you (and deservedly so), it will show the community to whom she belongs that you at least tried to do the civilized thing after exhibiting such poor judgement. Also, it will likely stop her from continuing to bad-mouth you if you have apologized appropriately. It doesn't sound good to the listener if she complains bitterly about you, then ends with, "...and then he apologized appropriately."
Don't send a letter or an email. Have the courage to do it in person, and to allow her the opportunity to tell you what you probably need to hear. It might also help you to read about [real apologies](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-dance-connection/201409/the-9-rules-true-apologies) lest you continue in the vein which started this.
However, if you want her continued ill-will and bad-mouthing to follow you around the start of your career (it may or may not hurt you, you never know), do nothing, or better yet, continue to ignore the better angels of your nature, and tell people she had it coming to her.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: OK, let's take this apart:
* "*One of the referees, a professor of mine with a history of verbal contentions between us, did me an overt injustice and despite all my efforts, attacked me with her unfair judgement.*" You may be short in your description, but she's a professor and so presumably knows her field. Have you had a moment of introspection in which you have considered that, just possibly, she may have been right? I mean, it's an exam and it's her job to find out how much you know. I have been to my fair share of exams in which the student simply did not know very much. On the face of it, the questions the students then tend to get from professors may sound harsh and are occasionally blunt ("I would have really liked it if you had known the answer to this -- it's second year undergraduate material"), but they're not factually wrong and certainly not "overt injustice" or "unfair judgment".
* "*I got angry and sent her an e-mail the other day, one could say explicitly offensive and disrespectful, implying her lack of knowledge and her biased criticisms.*" So you're saying that she's a professor but does not know very much, and on top of that is biased. Any reasonable outside observer would certainly say that (i) you're out of line here, (ii) that you're offensive, (iii) that you're almost certainly wrong.
* "*I also commented on her wasting too much time in social networks, rather than doing academic research.*" So you're saying here that she's not only unqualified (see above) but also not doing her job. If she's a professor, you're probably wrong on this -- first, how would you even evaluate how much she is or should be working; second, she may spend the occasional minute on social media (heck, I'm doing that too right now!), but she may be making up for it by working late at night or on weekends (of look, I'm doing that too!); and third, this is most definitely not your business.
* "*I heard she burst into tears after reading the e-mail, and has notified almost all other professors about it*." So someone was completely and unnecessarily awful to her and she went to her peers and friends to talk about this.
* "*A couple of months ago, I defended my Master's thesis [...] I got angry and sent her an e-mail the other day*." So you've been harboring a grudge for several weeks and finally lost your temper?
As others have pointed out in comments, this question may as well have been asked in the Interpersonal Skills forum, but since you're already here: Can you see how completely inappropriate your original email was? If you can't, then you definitely have a blind spot in your interactions with other people that you need to work on.
Now, about what to do: I suspect that there is really not all that much you can do, and there is really nobody other than yourself you can blame for this. But if you want to try: Be an upright person, take responsibility for having made a mistake, and go apologize in person and with sincere contriteness and regret. The last half-sentence is important.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/16
| 2,848
| 12,189
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a phd student that is very smart. They had a small baby a few months before starting the PhD in a foreign country and then moved to do the PhD with their family in the UK.
It has been 7 months now and the PhD student is not performing well. We have weekly meetings and I try hard to guide and help (more than I normally do). The student sometimes disappears for 1-2 weeks without answering emails and comes back offering no excuse rather vague "family-issues". The funding is fixed for 3 years without the possibility of extending or freezing. Also, the uni is rigid on students submitting at 3 years. We have discussed several times and I have suggested asking the university for help. Didn't happen yet.
At the end of the first year, PhD students have a mini-viva called transfer. The examiner is another professor from the department. With the current work, failure is almost certain, unless I appeal to that professor on behalf of the student (which I've never done before, I find it morally wrong, and don't even know if it would work).
On academic performance, the situation is clear, the student would fail. I only find myself in dilemma because of the family situation (small baby, new country, no relatives, low salary). The official guidelines state my suggestion should only be based on the academic performance. This is advisory since the examiner will make the final decision. Nevertheless, how can I do this knowing the student will lose their funding and visa and have to go back with their family?<issue_comment>username_1: Have you communicated with the student clearly about the situation? It's easy to softball negative news so they might not realize just how dire their situation is. Sit them down and straightforwardly tell them that their options are ask for help or get sent home soon, like you have in this post.
Currently, since you (and the future examiner) have no insight into the reasons for the low performance, you have no indications that it would get any better soon or that the student would be capable of catching up in time to defend their thesis. Therefore the transfer is working as intended: to catch these cases early so that the student does not waste another two years to no end. It will feel harsh in the moment, but it is not in the student's best interest to stretch out their failure for another two years (I imagine they don't feel great about their work either).
If they can explain what went wrong, establish a plan for stopping it from happening in the future, and demonstrate improvement by the time of the deadline, only then would I consider pleading for leniency with the examiner or administration. Essentially, inspire yourself from standard management techniques and put the student on a performance improvement plan.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Have you had a heart to heart with the student? I'd tell them they will fail after the first year on their current trajectory. I'd say this nicely but firmly. If performance doesn't immediately improve, there isn't much you can do. If performance does quickly improve, then I'd consider intervening on their behalf if they still haven't quite made it up to snuff for the year review.
Regarding your core question "...how can I do this knowing the student will lose their funding and visa and have to go back with their family?" remember that the student is there to learn and become an expert in their field. If they are not accomplishing that, they should not continue in the program (hard as that may be for you given the student's external situation).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The previous answers are excellent, and so I'd like to only add that it is worthwhile putting things in text. In case you have an in-person "heart to heart" in which you lay out the options and have a discussion with the student, sit down later on and summarize the discussion in an email that you send to the student. If you want to do it the other way around, that's fine as well -- sometimes a student needs to see written down and have time to digest something before they understand the gravity of the situation.
I suggest this for two reasons:
* For some students, especially if English is not their first language and/or if they come from cultures where the culture is so that they say "yes" and nod to everything a professor says, having things written down provides a different level of reality than just hear someone say something. It also gives them a way to go over it again a couple of times to really understand what you are saying, if necessary with a dictionary.
* For you, it gives you something you can point at if push eventually does come to shove. You can now reference an email or memo that can be looked at and that has a concrete date, in case you need to write the student about not performing the tasks you had laid out previously, or if you are asked by administration later on if you can back up your claim that the student has consistently underperformed.
I've been in your situation before, and at the time put the student on academic probation for two semesters after having struggled with the student for a year or more. That got her attention, and in the end she wrote an excellent thesis, independently and on a topic of her own choice. I admit that that was one of the worst things I had to do as a PhD adviser -- our students are our kids too, in some sense. But at the same time, dragging them along is also not a solution: they need to pull themselves out by their bootstrap, because (i) we can't just give them a degree, and (ii) there is a better student somewhere who could be admitted if we let students who don't do well go.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Having worked through an MA and PhD myself, while not only starting a family but also simultaneously working freelance and undertaking sessional teaching, I know that life is not easy in this situation.
So many things can, and do, go wrong from the birth forwards. Mothers need the support of fathers. When childcare falls through, or a child is ill, then it is up to the person studying and working from home, with the most flexible schedule, upon whom everything falls. This is because they can catch up the work. Or so it is supposed. In reality, having had a first baby who struggled to feed and therefore to sleep, I found that exhaustion very quickly took over. The extra hours available to me were very few. I had to work through the night to keep everything going. Every few hours our child would awaken, needing me again, and I would try and let my wife rest and recover as much as possible.
The quality of my work suffered, and I felt trapped by the PhD. I thought many times about simply walking away from it, and all the stress. The one thing I didn't want to do was to make excuses based on my family situation, because explaining that nappy changing, parent and child groups, hospital appointments, bronchiolitis, chicken pox, asthma attacks, even conditions involving ambulances and overnight stays in hospital, might have interfered with a deadline was almost shameful to me given my work ethos.
So in all but the most extreme cases, I tried to maintain the illusion of normality while my brain was just sometimes so tired I couldn't converse, and I felt delirious almost constantly. This might be the reason you are not given fuller reasons; your student might fear being seen as lame in their excuses, and at the same time be only barely functioning.
It's a cliche but if you haven't had children of your own (you don't say whether you have or not), then just how much work they involve is unimaginable. As is the way in which time slips through a parent's fingers. At the same time, children in the long term force people to manage their time much more effectively than if everything is free floating and time is undefined by the needs of routine. So please don't give up on this person, try and find a way to help them, they are likely over-stretching themselves to meet everyone's needs and demands. To be the one who takes into account the human in the highly-pressured academic environment is to be an absolute hero. If you can set a precedent to help people with families, then everyone will in the long-term benefit I have no doubt.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: AFAICS no-one has mentioned clinical depression (can be triggered by lack of sleep or of course other reasons). The unexplained disappearances make me wonder. Is your student properly hooked into a medical system? I am not an academic, but when I was a student the Uni had a duty of care in this regard. This might justify an intervention even though they are adults.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I don't have an account but the question caught my eye as I was browsing other stack forums. It caught my eye because I went through the situation of the student and ended failing the PhD.
In my opinion you should be crystal clear with the student about what you wrote in your first post. Specially remark these three points:
* Lack of results.
* Deadline for the examination.
* In case of failure of the examination the scholarship will be terminated, no excuses! Also, make sure he understands the final decision won't be up to you!.
If you really care you should help him as much as you can on getting better or sufficient results to pass the deadline, but before that, you should sit down with him and have long and calmed talk about what is going wrong.
That said not everybody is a decent person, you are trying to help him but may be he is trying to take advantage of the situation. Also, the first time he was absent for weeks and you didn't take measures you failed him as a supervisor.
In my case the language barrier was determinant, my professor wasn't able to properly to communicate in english and he didn't really wanted to supervise me because of that. I am also to blame as I didn't take the proper measures, partly because I was afraid of the consequences, and partly because I still hoped that the problem was going to be solved at some point. On a personal level I have a very good opinion about my supervisor but it didn't work in the end.
In short:
* Wishful thinking doesn't usually works very well.
* Expose the situation clearly and with conviction.
* If you care enough help him with the deadline and his personal problems.
Finally, failing the PhD is not the end of the world, it is a hard blow but he will continue with his life. As someone that went trough the same problem and understand how stressful it can be I wish you both all the best
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> They had a small baby a few months before starting the PhD... It has
> been 7 months now
>
>
>
So the baby is just around 1 year now? You are so kind to put a effort in finding a way for the student, instead of choosing the easy way to fail them.
You didn't mention in your question, but I guess your student is the mom. If this is the case, I would hope that you give your student another chance to improve.
Sorry to say the obvious, but during the first year:
* Many babies will not sleep through the night, and they need to be fed every 3 hours. If the mom is breastfeeding them, she will not have much sleep.
* Most women will suffer from some level of [postnatal depression](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postpartum_depression). In the extreme cases, many women killed their babies because of depression. So a PhD is nothing compare to this.
* ...
The list goes on. It is not surprised that your student doesn't perform well.
But after a year, things start getting better. The baby sleeps through the night, depression may already go way, the parents have more experience, etc.
It may be the time that she can start making progress. So I hope you can give her a month or two to improve.
---
By the way, in my field (Computer Science), even at the top universities in the UK like Oxbridge, Imperial, UCL etc, most students cannot submit their thesis within 3 years. As this means only 2.5 years to do research, and 0.5 years for writing. How this is possible?
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/16
| 2,624
| 11,242
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'll be attending to a conference and do a poster presentation of my master's thesis work so far. What I'm concerned of is that my tutor wants me to also wirte a short report to be submitted as a conference proceeding.
What I've done so far is nothing new. I've just applied already existing theory and numerical codes to specific cases... which should be easy to do for people that already understands the topic and has technical expertise with the numerical code I'm using (I know there is people that do have it).
Should I just write the report or talk it with my tutor?<issue_comment>username_1: Have you communicated with the student clearly about the situation? It's easy to softball negative news so they might not realize just how dire their situation is. Sit them down and straightforwardly tell them that their options are ask for help or get sent home soon, like you have in this post.
Currently, since you (and the future examiner) have no insight into the reasons for the low performance, you have no indications that it would get any better soon or that the student would be capable of catching up in time to defend their thesis. Therefore the transfer is working as intended: to catch these cases early so that the student does not waste another two years to no end. It will feel harsh in the moment, but it is not in the student's best interest to stretch out their failure for another two years (I imagine they don't feel great about their work either).
If they can explain what went wrong, establish a plan for stopping it from happening in the future, and demonstrate improvement by the time of the deadline, only then would I consider pleading for leniency with the examiner or administration. Essentially, inspire yourself from standard management techniques and put the student on a performance improvement plan.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Have you had a heart to heart with the student? I'd tell them they will fail after the first year on their current trajectory. I'd say this nicely but firmly. If performance doesn't immediately improve, there isn't much you can do. If performance does quickly improve, then I'd consider intervening on their behalf if they still haven't quite made it up to snuff for the year review.
Regarding your core question "...how can I do this knowing the student will lose their funding and visa and have to go back with their family?" remember that the student is there to learn and become an expert in their field. If they are not accomplishing that, they should not continue in the program (hard as that may be for you given the student's external situation).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The previous answers are excellent, and so I'd like to only add that it is worthwhile putting things in text. In case you have an in-person "heart to heart" in which you lay out the options and have a discussion with the student, sit down later on and summarize the discussion in an email that you send to the student. If you want to do it the other way around, that's fine as well -- sometimes a student needs to see written down and have time to digest something before they understand the gravity of the situation.
I suggest this for two reasons:
* For some students, especially if English is not their first language and/or if they come from cultures where the culture is so that they say "yes" and nod to everything a professor says, having things written down provides a different level of reality than just hear someone say something. It also gives them a way to go over it again a couple of times to really understand what you are saying, if necessary with a dictionary.
* For you, it gives you something you can point at if push eventually does come to shove. You can now reference an email or memo that can be looked at and that has a concrete date, in case you need to write the student about not performing the tasks you had laid out previously, or if you are asked by administration later on if you can back up your claim that the student has consistently underperformed.
I've been in your situation before, and at the time put the student on academic probation for two semesters after having struggled with the student for a year or more. That got her attention, and in the end she wrote an excellent thesis, independently and on a topic of her own choice. I admit that that was one of the worst things I had to do as a PhD adviser -- our students are our kids too, in some sense. But at the same time, dragging them along is also not a solution: they need to pull themselves out by their bootstrap, because (i) we can't just give them a degree, and (ii) there is a better student somewhere who could be admitted if we let students who don't do well go.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Having worked through an MA and PhD myself, while not only starting a family but also simultaneously working freelance and undertaking sessional teaching, I know that life is not easy in this situation.
So many things can, and do, go wrong from the birth forwards. Mothers need the support of fathers. When childcare falls through, or a child is ill, then it is up to the person studying and working from home, with the most flexible schedule, upon whom everything falls. This is because they can catch up the work. Or so it is supposed. In reality, having had a first baby who struggled to feed and therefore to sleep, I found that exhaustion very quickly took over. The extra hours available to me were very few. I had to work through the night to keep everything going. Every few hours our child would awaken, needing me again, and I would try and let my wife rest and recover as much as possible.
The quality of my work suffered, and I felt trapped by the PhD. I thought many times about simply walking away from it, and all the stress. The one thing I didn't want to do was to make excuses based on my family situation, because explaining that nappy changing, parent and child groups, hospital appointments, bronchiolitis, chicken pox, asthma attacks, even conditions involving ambulances and overnight stays in hospital, might have interfered with a deadline was almost shameful to me given my work ethos.
So in all but the most extreme cases, I tried to maintain the illusion of normality while my brain was just sometimes so tired I couldn't converse, and I felt delirious almost constantly. This might be the reason you are not given fuller reasons; your student might fear being seen as lame in their excuses, and at the same time be only barely functioning.
It's a cliche but if you haven't had children of your own (you don't say whether you have or not), then just how much work they involve is unimaginable. As is the way in which time slips through a parent's fingers. At the same time, children in the long term force people to manage their time much more effectively than if everything is free floating and time is undefined by the needs of routine. So please don't give up on this person, try and find a way to help them, they are likely over-stretching themselves to meet everyone's needs and demands. To be the one who takes into account the human in the highly-pressured academic environment is to be an absolute hero. If you can set a precedent to help people with families, then everyone will in the long-term benefit I have no doubt.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: AFAICS no-one has mentioned clinical depression (can be triggered by lack of sleep or of course other reasons). The unexplained disappearances make me wonder. Is your student properly hooked into a medical system? I am not an academic, but when I was a student the Uni had a duty of care in this regard. This might justify an intervention even though they are adults.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I don't have an account but the question caught my eye as I was browsing other stack forums. It caught my eye because I went through the situation of the student and ended failing the PhD.
In my opinion you should be crystal clear with the student about what you wrote in your first post. Specially remark these three points:
* Lack of results.
* Deadline for the examination.
* In case of failure of the examination the scholarship will be terminated, no excuses! Also, make sure he understands the final decision won't be up to you!.
If you really care you should help him as much as you can on getting better or sufficient results to pass the deadline, but before that, you should sit down with him and have long and calmed talk about what is going wrong.
That said not everybody is a decent person, you are trying to help him but may be he is trying to take advantage of the situation. Also, the first time he was absent for weeks and you didn't take measures you failed him as a supervisor.
In my case the language barrier was determinant, my professor wasn't able to properly to communicate in english and he didn't really wanted to supervise me because of that. I am also to blame as I didn't take the proper measures, partly because I was afraid of the consequences, and partly because I still hoped that the problem was going to be solved at some point. On a personal level I have a very good opinion about my supervisor but it didn't work in the end.
In short:
* Wishful thinking doesn't usually works very well.
* Expose the situation clearly and with conviction.
* If you care enough help him with the deadline and his personal problems.
Finally, failing the PhD is not the end of the world, it is a hard blow but he will continue with his life. As someone that went trough the same problem and understand how stressful it can be I wish you both all the best
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> They had a small baby a few months before starting the PhD... It has
> been 7 months now
>
>
>
So the baby is just around 1 year now? You are so kind to put a effort in finding a way for the student, instead of choosing the easy way to fail them.
You didn't mention in your question, but I guess your student is the mom. If this is the case, I would hope that you give your student another chance to improve.
Sorry to say the obvious, but during the first year:
* Many babies will not sleep through the night, and they need to be fed every 3 hours. If the mom is breastfeeding them, she will not have much sleep.
* Most women will suffer from some level of [postnatal depression](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postpartum_depression). In the extreme cases, many women killed their babies because of depression. So a PhD is nothing compare to this.
* ...
The list goes on. It is not surprised that your student doesn't perform well.
But after a year, things start getting better. The baby sleeps through the night, depression may already go way, the parents have more experience, etc.
It may be the time that she can start making progress. So I hope you can give her a month or two to improve.
---
By the way, in my field (Computer Science), even at the top universities in the UK like Oxbridge, Imperial, UCL etc, most students cannot submit their thesis within 3 years. As this means only 2.5 years to do research, and 0.5 years for writing. How this is possible?
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/16
| 900
| 3,659
|
<issue_start>username_0: I heard somewhere that publishing in open access (OA) journals is not a good strategy and such papers may be less valuable (specially for who want to apply for a PhD program in EU and North America)! However, I think this is not a strong remark but publishing in low level and paid journals form unknown publishers is thought to be less constructive for the resume. Specifically, I mean journals and magazines by highly esteemed publishers such as Elsevier, Springer and Hindawi.
What's the fact about OA journals?<issue_comment>username_1: Strategically, it gives better chances to aim for journal that are recognized by your peers. This need not be related to openness of the journal, but it is true that there are fewer well-recognized OA journals than subscription journals. Ask around (to several peoples, taste can vary in a field).
Do not forget that you can in many cases publish green Open-Access (self-deposit into an Open repository) your manuscript even if you publish at a paywalled journal. This gives a good compromise between openness and strategy for beginning careers. Information about what you can do publisher by publisher and journal by journal is available at [Sherpa/Romeo](http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php).
Last remark: judging a paper by the journal it is published in is quite bold, but judging it by the publisher of said journal is far worse. Elsevier has crappy journals in its portfolio, as most publishers do.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Your question is really broad. I suggest reading e.g. [the Wikipedia article on open access](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_access) to get some sense on what it's about.
Traditional journals operate by subscriptions. They publish articles, and would-be readers must subscribe to be able to read them (or they can buy individual articles, which is similar). This model has been criticized for making it difficult to disseminate academic knowledge. After all, if you can't pay, you can't read the paper either and so won't be able to build on that work. Since academic publishing costs money, [someone has to pay](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1322/why-do-universities-have-to-spend-money-on-journals/111222#111222), and OA proposes to make that "someone" the authors. The authors pay the publishers, who then makes the articles available for free.
The main problem with OA is that it introduces a conflict of interest. Since the publisher makes money every time it accepts a paper, it (and by extension the editorial board) is incentivized to accept papers. This has led to so-called [predatory open access publishers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_open-access_publishing), who basically accept everything that's submitted with no thought for quality control. Subscription journals cannot do this because if they publish junk people won't subscribe, but OA journals can.
That is not to say that *all* open access articles are junk or that all open access publishers are predatory, but you can imagine the tension. Not helpful is that some people consider X predatory while others do not. Hindawi and MDPI are examples. Both were listed by <NAME> (the authority on predatory OA publishing before he retired) as predatory at some point, but they also had vocal defenders.
Practically speaking, open access papers do have more usage than subscription ones, but whether that translates to more citations is [hotly debated](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_access#Author_citation_advantage). Whether or not to publish open access is up to you, and possibly your funding agency.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/16
| 867
| 3,573
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just recently graduated university with a bachelors in computer science. I did not participate in the career fairs at my uni, because I wanted to apply for MS in US/Canada, even though everyone told me to have a backup option. Unfortunately, I did not get admit for any of the MS Programs I applied to. Now I'm not sure what to do. I want to apply next year again but I'm just afraid now.
My parents told me to get a job right now - but my problem is that I have really low confidence. First, not getting an admit really threw off my morale. And also, I'm really bad with interviews. I throw up before each one. I am very socially awkward. Even thinking about an interview makes me want to puke and gives me headaches and fear. Another thing is, I haven't had any revision/practice in almost 2 years - with the DS Algo OS DBMS stuff that they ask in the interviews. This makes me hate the technical interviews even more.
I'm thinking to take a gap year... revise my courses, practice interviewing by applying for jobs, learning ML from MOOCs (and maybe write a paper), and doing some volunteer work in the following year.
Will taking a gap hurt my career or my MS application?<issue_comment>username_1: First of all congrats on your Bsc Computer Science! You now have a foundation to build upon which is great! I think having a gap year does not hurt from an academic perspective. It would only hurt if you wouldn't pursue a Master because you lost faith.
Because you say you have anxiety towards job interviews I think it would be nice to grow professionally if you would get a (temp) job of your interest. In this way you can get experience how computer science is applied in a real world context. Job interviews are part of this reality too. A (programming) job can give you more confidence in general and it shows you that you have already acquired skills that you can be proud of.
In your free time you can also pursue things like MOOCs or maybe contribute to open source. But it won't give as much incentive to learn compared to an university (in my experience).
I think the master program will be great for further extending your toolkit as a computer scientist and it gives better incentive to really work with these topics. But for now, enjoy and I think this gap year can be seen as an opportunity!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **Get a job**. You write that you have really low confidence, are really bad with interviews, are socially awkward, etc. These are not reasons to not get a job. The point is that even if you had been admitted, you will still have to get a job after you finish your MS degree. Since you will have to face these demons eventually, you might as well do it now. These things may be scary, but they can also be conquered (see Workplace.SE for more advice). It can even be a blessing in disguise - you might decide that you'd rather keep working than go to graduate school. Remember also that *the longer you wait, the less employable you become.*
You could take a gap year also and do all the stuff you mentioned, but you would be spending money without earning it. That is not sustainable. Unless you are independently wealthy, you would be burdening your caregivers for an extra year. Your caregivers are likely much older than you (i.e. they need to think about their own retirement). Meanwhile you'd be spending one of the best years of your life on things with uncertain long-term benefits. Is that responsible behavior to you?
You can't postpone growing up forever. Get a job.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/16
| 376
| 1,617
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for PhD positions nowadays. Recently, few PhDs are announced (in CoQus, Austria) and I am very interested in these positions. But it looks like these positions require very high profile candidates. They have asked about publications (if applicable) in nearly each paragraph of advertisement. It is also written that a candidate can only apply once for PhD in that institute in whole life.
I have written a paper during my M.Sc. but its status is "submitted". So, technically I don't have any publication yet.
I don't want to lose my chance by applying without publication. So, my question is:
**Is it a good idea to email professor of my interest asking about if my profile is good enough to have any chance to get this PhD?**<issue_comment>username_1: Normally, a PI wouldn't reply this type of question. But if they do I'm not sure if they would like to hire such an insecure student.
I would just send an email introducing myself and showing interest on the PIs lab and questioning some things about the program. But I would never ask if I'm good enough... or show any type of insecurity.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The conditions invite potential candidates to *self-assess* their profiles. The reason is probably that the University receives a lot of applications per post and HRs want to save a bit of time during the shortlisting stage by ensuring that candidates apply only when they are ready. In all fairness, it seems that you want your potential supervisor to do a bit of this work for you. I am not sure it is a good idea.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/16
| 343
| 1,430
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in physics.
Throughout my graduate career, I heard about people who have been known to see work done in a talk and subsequently catch up to that work and then-some, and attempt to publish first. I ignored this lore assuming it wasn't really true.
Now I am presenting at a conference where there will be someone (actually a big-wig) who has a reputation for this sort of maneuver, and I don't have a pre-print yet to post online.
Any recommendations about how to mitigate the potential for this to happen (besides being ready sooner obviously, I'm working very hard on this work). Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: Give the impression that the preprint is almost ready so that big-wig sees no chance to be first.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Assuming you *have results* that are developed enough that there is something to steal, why are you giving talks before writing it up? Write it up and put a preprint on arXiv or similar. It doesn't have to be in 100% ready to submit form, just include the important parts that you are trying to establish precedence for.
Alternately, give a big-picture overview that does not give enough small details that your results could be recreated easily. Presumably your work would take even a big-wig months of compiling data, running computations, or SOMETHING before they could write a paper and submit it before you.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/16
| 442
| 1,856
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm planning to consult a potential future advisor for a postdoc position. However, they do not put up any advertisement for postdocs, thus there is a large possibility that they cannot afford a postdoc. However, even if they cannot afford any postdocs, I still prefer them to read my email, as our work are close in some degree and I do not wanna lose the opportunity for them to point me to someone else. For this reason, is it a good idea to not mentioning postdoc position upfront in the subject and only mention it much later in the body of the email?<issue_comment>username_1: Professors are often very busy. Sometimes they receive more than 100 emails per day, not including automatic messages. An email from a stranger without essential information in the subject field / first line is not likely to be answered.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Consider a title such as: Postdoc on [subject]
Body:
[Greetings]
I am PhD student / postdoc working with/at/on institute/advisor/subject (whichever you judge would interest the advisor). I am interested in your work on [subject] and maybe mention a particularly interesting article. Would you happen to have open postdoc positions or other funding options I could pursue?
I attached my CV and here is a link to a related publication of mine that I am proud of, or my homepage etc.
Maybe mention a concrete research idea here, if you have one.
[End matter]
---
I would not expect the potential advisor to work as a recruitment service, but if they answer positively but do not have positions open, you might ask if they know someone working on related subjects who could hire you.
Also, if you are willing to co-operate even without, or before, getting the position, you might want to mention that and maybe even add it to the subject.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/17
| 611
| 2,447
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a 3rd-year computer engineering student at a mid-tier state school with a high GPA (3.97/4.0), top of my class, and 1 semester worth of research. I am also currently participating in a very prestigious REU program, so I do have a decent amount of research experience. I have also taken the GRE and done pretty well (mid 80s) percentile in verb/quant and 99th percentile in AWA. I've also basically narrowed down my research interests to 2 fields, so I have a general idea of what I'd like to specialize in. My goal is to become a Professor in Electrical and Computer Engineering, and I'm starting to contemplate applying to grad schools. I really want a PhD because I know that it is absolutely necessary for my goals.
My only problem is that I am afraid of doing the PhD, because I feel that I won't remember everything (or a good amount) of everything from undergrad. This especially scares me because despite my successes in undergrad, I'm not sure that I could pass the qualifying exams. I guess I'm just afraid of the unknown; do you think that I should just go for it?
Thanks, sorry if my question comes off as rambling; I really want to earn a PhD so I can be a professor or faculty member at some point and knowing that I could fail is very scary.<issue_comment>username_1: **Talk to your professors**. They've been through PhDs themselves, and they know your capabilities much better than anyone else to boot.
Having said that, if you have both a very high GPA and research experience (which you did not dislike), you should be more than qualified to do PhD studies. If you aren't qualified then nobody else in your cohort is qualified, which is not believable. Besides, if you want to become a professor, you'll need to get a PhD - since it's something you must do, you might as well attempt it (or change career goals).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If this is your dream: Go for it!!!
Otherwise, one day you will regret that you didn’t try.
If you are top of your class, you are qualified, no doubt. Other capabilities required are love for research and perseverance. Writing skills, in my opinion, are also important because you will have to publish. In addition to a previous anwser I would like to suggest to talk to current PhD students.
Finally, if you are still in doubt, you can also do a PhD later in your career, but becoming professor will then become more difficult.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/17
| 609
| 2,849
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been researching a specific topic in computer science for a couple of years now and a well established professor and his students have recently published a couple of publications in that topic too. In their work they do reference the well known and well cited previous work that basically everyone in that topic references, but I have noticed that they ignore (don't reference) a couple of publications that are doing essentially what they are publishing about, i.e. extremely related work. And I am wondering even though there is a gap of a couple of years between the work they have published and the available previous literature how did they miss referencing the relevant previous work? Was it done intentionally or did they just do a hasty job at finding more recent related work?
Either way my main concern here is if there is anything that can be done to remedy the situation now, since the paper has already been published?<issue_comment>username_1: Realistically, there is nothing you can do to change an already published paper. There are some options for extreme cases, but they are unlikely to apply.
What you can do is try to have the record correct in future publications. Unless you have hard evidence to the contrary (and usually even then), it is best to communicate on the basis that this is not an act of malice. You can write the authors of these papers (and authors of preprints on the topic) a polite email stating that you liked their interesting work and have done related work that you think might be of interest to them. What they do with that information is up to them then.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: What do you expect to see in references? Every article on the topic?
References should contain the articles that the article in question actually reference. They publish some results. If these results are in the area that those "well known" articles defined and set up - they reference those. If they use certain results found in other articles - they reference those. But they don't owe you a reference just because you do similar stuff in parallel. If your results weren't used in their work, there's nothing to reference.
If they are writing a survey, they should include every notable result and reference it. If this is the case, you could actually contact them and ask (in a non-aggressive manner) why your work hasn't been included. But everyday articles should just cite the articles that they base the work on.
If you suspect they simply don't know about your work, feel free to write something friendly like "hey, looks like we are working on the same stuff, I noticed that you found Fact1 about Topic1 in Article1, I managed to find Fact2 in Article2. do you think Fact3 could be true? have you managed to do any work on that yet?"
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/06/17
| 1,305
| 4,979
|
<issue_start>username_0: **The scenario:**
* in an article, found a point/claim/fact that would fit/support perfectly a broader point I'm trying to construct (@Related works section)
**The dilemma:**
* Whom to cite?
+ a) only the article in which I found the [whole] point/claim/synthesis
+ b) the original sources, the author cited during his construction of the point
+ c) both i.e. the complete paragraph or part of the paragraph that serves my purpose
**Pros and cons:**
* a)
+ Pro: I pay proper respect to the author from whom I learnt about the sources/facts. + the article is the only source I really read
+ Con: I would have single reference to support the point, while in reality there are several relevant sources (used by the author)
* b)
+ Pro: I would provide the reader with deeper/direct references for further researching
+ Con: it is a form of plagiarism, as it would seem that it was me that read all the sources and drawn conclusion presented. The conclusion is not the issue, I discuss that particular point anyway (in my paper), but the first part bothers me: it wasn't me that studied all that sources, but the author
* c) seems to me as just solution but I'm not sure how it should be formulated so it is clear for reader what is reference (let it be: [1]) from the article and what (sub) references are just taken from the article (let them be: [1.a] [1.b])
Alternatively, (and this is what I would normally do):
* I follow his references, find the articles, read them and then use (some or all of) them together with other references (known to me from earlier research). The issue with such practice: too often there is no justification for referencing his article -- and it seems not to be not right i.e. smells to me like a tiny plagiarism-sin.
---
**The example:**
....
>
> To achieve the first goal, the crawler has to visit as many web sites as possible, and to achieve the second goal, the crawler has to
> maintain the freshness of the previously visited web sites, which can
> be achieved by re-visiting such web sites in a routinely manner. In
> the following, the most frequently used re-visiting policies are
> summarized: (1) Uniform policy: in this policy, the entire web sites
> are downloaded at each visit (Bhute and Meshram, 2010; Pichler et al.,
> 2011; Leng et al., 2011; Sharma et al., 2012; Singh and Vikasn, 2014).
> Although this approach enriches the databases, it requires a large
> processing time. (2) Proportional policy: this policy is performed in
> many ways, such as: • Downloading only the pages that have a rank more
> than a threshold value specified by the crawler administrator (Bhute
> and Meshram, 2010;)
>
>
>
From the article:
>
> <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2015). Efficient watcher
> based web crawler design. Aslib Journal of Information Management,
> 67(6), 663–686. <http://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-02-2015-0019>
>
>
>
In my article I want to explain/define these two policies, together with his remarks, my own remarks, and, potentially, to expand (support) it with other sources.<issue_comment>username_1: Realistically, there is nothing you can do to change an already published paper. There are some options for extreme cases, but they are unlikely to apply.
What you can do is try to have the record correct in future publications. Unless you have hard evidence to the contrary (and usually even then), it is best to communicate on the basis that this is not an act of malice. You can write the authors of these papers (and authors of preprints on the topic) a polite email stating that you liked their interesting work and have done related work that you think might be of interest to them. What they do with that information is up to them then.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: What do you expect to see in references? Every article on the topic?
References should contain the articles that the article in question actually reference. They publish some results. If these results are in the area that those "well known" articles defined and set up - they reference those. If they use certain results found in other articles - they reference those. But they don't owe you a reference just because you do similar stuff in parallel. If your results weren't used in their work, there's nothing to reference.
If they are writing a survey, they should include every notable result and reference it. If this is the case, you could actually contact them and ask (in a non-aggressive manner) why your work hasn't been included. But everyday articles should just cite the articles that they base the work on.
If you suspect they simply don't know about your work, feel free to write something friendly like "hey, looks like we are working on the same stuff, I noticed that you found Fact1 about Topic1 in Article1, I managed to find Fact2 in Article2. do you think Fact3 could be true? have you managed to do any work on that yet?"
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/06/17
| 504
| 1,709
|
<issue_start>username_0: Are there APIs or databases that allow to retrieve the works that a *book* cites. Eg. I give it an ISBN, and it returns all the works that it cites (*not* those it is cited by).
APIs or databases like Microsoft Academic Search usually only contain citations of journal articles and papers, but not books.<issue_comment>username_1: Mendeley has quite powerful database on all kind of sources.
<http://dev.mendeley.com/>
---
Also, you should check Elsevier's developer portal, as they provide a number of APIs for their services:
<http://dev.elsevier.com/>
Where ScienceDirect API is especially relevant for you:
<http://www.elsevier.com/solutions/sciencedirect/support/api>
As you probably know, Elsevier is one of (if not the) the biggest publisher(s) of academic publications, including books.
In case you might want to query your own instance of Mendeley Desktop - check my blog post, for few starting points:
<http://blog.veles.rs/mendeley-desktop-http-api/>
---
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Books (and their chapters) may have a DOI, especially if their publishers focus on academic works.
Use the DOI to access *CrossRef*'s [API](https://github.com/CrossRef/rest-api-doc) (by using `https://api.crossref.org/works/{DOI}`) and look for the `reference`-field.
You could even access the API by the ISBN via `http://api.crossref.org/types/book/works?filter=isbn:{ISBN}` (though it seems to me that the API usually works better with DOIs).
[Here is an example](https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1017/9781108677516) from a book published by Cambridge University Press. It says `reference-count: 1427` and lists all the 1427 works cited by that book.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/17
| 345
| 1,492
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have the possibility to organize a special track/session at a small computer science conference, however at the moment I'm in the last year of my PhD study.
The special session includes an introduction presentation (related to an editorial) by the organizer (me in this case), some accepted papers presentations, and an "Open Discussion and Closing Remarks" chaired by me as well.
Although I believe to have enough expertise/general knowledge on the topic of the session, do you think it'd be appropriate for me as a PhD student to do this? Or is everyone expecting a doctorate or a professor to organize such sessions?<issue_comment>username_1: I have done so, and the participants weren't troubled by it at all. As a PhD student you are supposed to become an expert on your (very narrow) topic, so near the end you are supposed to know more than most about that one topic than others in your field.
Susceptability to status differs quite a bit from country to country and discipline to discipline, so whether this works in your field depends. I am Dutch, but the conference was an international one, and my discipline is sociology.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Quite to the contrary, pulling this off demonstrates that you’re able to collaborate, work in a field of special interest, and affords you recognition with a group of leaders. No downside here aside from the time drain and general annoyance of having to do it.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/17
| 612
| 2,637
|
<issue_start>username_0: A month ago I applied for a postdoc in a renowned institute in my field. Through the process of evaluating the different candidates, an assessment was performed by other professors from the same institute but from a different team.
*An assessment here means a paragraph written by someone in the field but not the potential PI that summaries the candidate studies and experience and ends with: qualified or not qualified for the job.*
My assessment was very positive so I reached the interview stage but at the end I didn’t get the job. Two weeks later the professor that wrote my assessment published a postdoc position ad, and I’m very interested in the offer. The institute is famous in my field and the position fits with both my expertise and interest.
**Question:** Do you think that applying for this postdoc position only after few weeks will be regarded negatively by this professor? Do you think that I will look like someone who wants to work in the institute no matter what?
**Update:**
Thanks everyone for your valuable replies;
I indeed applied for the position, I wrote a personal statement from scratch and I had a really great time reading about the proposed project, I really learnt a lot while preparing for the application.
However, I couldn’t even pass the first stage of pre-selection (I think my transcripts are to be blamed).
But I have no regrets, as everyone here said; if I don’t apply, I won’t get the position. as Buffy said, Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Thanks everyone again!<issue_comment>username_1: If you're interested in the new position, just go ahead and apply! If the two teams in question are working in closely related fields, the new position is presumably a good fit for your profile anyway. In that case you're unlikely to look like someone who just wants to work at that institute. If they're in rather different fields (maybe they fall on different ends of your spectrum of interests) make sure you really explain why you're interested in the cover letter.
In any case, what's the worst that can happen if you're viewed as only looking to get into institution X? You don't get the position there? Well, you're even less likely to get it if you don't apply for it...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Do you think that I will look like someone who wants to work in the institute no matter what?
>
>
>
You’re overthinking this. If you apply to the position, you will look like someone who is potentially interested in the position, nothing more or less. That is what it means to apply. It doesn’t signal any other information.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/18
| 1,041
| 3,762
|
<issue_start>username_0: The Austrian school system used to not have undergraduates. So when graduated from a high school, you just got in a Master's program for about 2 years and then PhD program for about 4 years. However, we called it "Master" and "PhD". So it means that "it is a PhD degree in Austria", but by American standards, it is actually "a Master's degree". Should I still list as "PhD" degree on my CV?<issue_comment>username_1: I would argue the opposite way. An Austrian PhD definitely qualifies as PhD internationally. The former master curricula were typically composed of two parts that resemble the undergrad and graduate master studies. So in essence, in order to get an Austrian PhD, you need to pass undergraduate, graduate master and a PhD curriculum, while in American standards, you just need an undergrad + a PhD program. I don't see, why this should be worth less. Besides, the PhD curriculum is distinct from the others in both cases since it typically involves research, publications and conference or workshop presentations. So a PhD degree in one country also matches a PhD degree in another just by the competence you gained in addition to exams.
I don't have the exact comparison in terms of credit/effort or something like that. Maybe someone else can clarify.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Before Bachelor and master was introduced at Austrian universities, the first
degree a student could get was a Magister- or Diplomgrad (master- or diploma-degree).
The titles broadly fall in three categories:
* Magister/Magistra is awarded for studies in natural sciences (*Mag.rer.nat*),
pharmaceutics (*Mag.pharm.*), law (*Mag.iur.*), theology (*Mag.theol.*) and so on.
These studies typically last 8 to 10 semesters.
* Diplom-Ingenieur/Diplom-Ingenieurin (*Dipl.-Ing.*) is the degree for technical
sciences. These studies typically last 10 semesters.
* <NAME> (*Dr.med.univ.*) is actually the master degree for a medical
doctor. This one has a strange naming, because it is not a doctors degree.
Confusingly, a veterinarian finishes with *Mag.med.vet.* Medicine typically
has to be studied for 12 semesters.
Although the titles have different names depending on the type of university and
the type of studies, these are all considered the second highest degrees in Austria.
The English translation would be---depending on the studies---one of
master of art (MA), master of law (LLM), master of science (Msc), medical doctor (MD)
and so on.
Having one of the degrees above is usually a requirement for starting PhD studies.
PhD studies end with a doctor degree (Doktor of something). So there
is *Dr.rer.nat.*, *Dr.iur.*, *Dr.theol.*, *Dr.techn.* (following a Dipl.-Ing.),
*Dr.med.vet.*, and *Dr.med.univ. et scient.med.* (this one is the true doctor degree in
medicine). Those are commonly translated as PhD.
When the bachelor-master-system was introduced at my university, they would simply
split the studies into two parts. After 6 semester, one would get the bachelor degree
and after 4 more semesters they would get the Magister/Diplom (master). Having only
a bachelor is not enough for starting a PhD.
There is another type of university in Austria called Fachhochschule (Universities
of Applied Science). Their studies end with a *Mag.(FH)* or *Dipl.-Ing.(FH)* after 8 semesters.
These universities are not allowed to offer PhD studies. However, having such a degree
allows to start a PhD at a 'regular' university but one has to attend additional courses
(often for 2 semesters).
The Austrian Ministry of Education has published the degrees and their international equivalent ([pdf](https://bmbwf.gv.at/fileadmin/user_upload/Kasparovsky/EMpfehlungen/1.2.3.2__Akademische_Grade.pdf)).
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/18
| 1,364
| 5,792
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently deciding whether to take up a tenure-track faculty position. It's a good position (R1, top-50 department in USNWR ranking), but I'm not very excited about it. In particular, the location is not to my liking. So I would seek to move elsewhere if I took up the position. That is, I would conduct another job search in 2-5 years.
This seems to me to be potentially unwise (as I have been told that it is hard to move between TT positions) and it also seems potentially unethical.
My alternative is to do another postdoc and try the job market again in 2 years or so. That also seems potentially unwise, as I have no idea what the job market will be like then and I may end up with even worse options. I'm also worried that I'll start to look "old" as a candidate, as I'm already 2 years out of my PhD.
I have talked to a few people. They have given me conflicting advice and they are not particularly able to relate to my situation, so I want to ask for some other perspectives.
My specific questions:
1) Is it unethical to take up a TT position with a desire to leave it? I.e. would it upset people when I end up searching for another job.
2) When evaluating TT candidates, does it look better to have 2 more years of postdoc or a few years as an Assistant Professor?
3) In general, is a second job search usually more/less successful than the first one? What factors might determine this?<issue_comment>username_1: There is nothing unethical about making your life choices.
However, a tenure track role usually involves a fair amount of teaching and more importantly, preparation of teaching materials and administration of the teaching process. Preparation of your own course is a big time investment. Unfortunately, when you move places you often need to make significant adjustments to the courses you teach or basically start from scratch. You will of course benefit from the experience of preparing your own course, and hence you will be more successful in your second job, but pragmatically it is more effective to prepare a good course once and improve it through many years, rather than change places and courses every now and then.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: No, it is not unethical. When you accept a job, in academia or anywhere else, you imply a commitment to do the job in the immediate, short-term future, and nothing more. What that means exactly is somewhat context-dependent, and in academia that minimum period is usually interpreted as one year.
Leaving a tenure-track job after only one year may leave people at your department a bit disappointed and potentially sour your future relations with them a bit, but I have never heard anyone argue that doing so (or even having the intention of doing so) is *unethical*, and don’t believe a reasonable person would adopt such a position. All the more so with a plan of leaving after 2 years or more; I simply cannot see how this can offend anyone’s moral sensibilities.
As for whether such a plan would be *wise*: it may or may not be, but your explanation of what’s driving your doubts about this makes me think you are overthinking the matter. It is no harder in general to move from one tenure-track position to another tenure-track position than it is to move from a non-tenure-track position to a tenure-track position. Depending on the precise circumstances, it may be harder, or less hard, or (most typically IMO) would be exactly as hard. Everything depends on how attractive of a job candidate you will be 2-5 years in the future, which is a function of how attractive you are now and what you’ll be doing between now and then. One particular factor that could actual play in your favor is that already having a tenure track position in an R1, top-50 department could give you a stamp of legitimacy that would make other departments of equal or lesser (or even slightly higher) stature more inclined to view you as a strong prospect for hiring.
Finally, another thing to consider is that, while you think you don’t like the location of the place where you have the current offer, your opinion about this might change in the future. People generally tend to overestimate the extent to which they can predict what their future selves will want. Which is another reason the whole ethics question here doesn’t really apply in my opinion - you should reserve your ethics-based doubts to actual actions (which in this case are also okay ethically given what you are considering doing), and not to tenuous intentions that may or may not ever translate into actions.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It's easier to be hired already as a professor than as a post-doc in most fields. I believe you can find data about this, plus your time as a professor will give you practice on all of the things that professors need to be good at, whereas a post-doc may not. Also, as a professor you are better situated for networking.
You are in computer science, so I don't know particularly for your field.
It is not unethical to have doubts about your long-term commitment to a position. You may find that you end up wanting to stay after all, or you may find that you need to leave even more than you thought.
In terms of second job searches, I have known people who have been courted while assistant professors, and others who have struggled to find opportunities if the one they were in didn't fit. This is especially true if they are particular about exactly where they want to live -- maybe there is only one university there and they aren't hiring in your field. Still, while job searching is always a challenge, I have seen a lot of mobility among assistant professors who wanted to move out of the R1 school I have most experience with.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/06/18
| 1,501
| 6,220
|
<issue_start>username_0: Earlier this year, I interviewed and received offers for two postdoc positions from competing universities, with one- and three-year contracts, respectively. The first is more related to my PhD, while the second is a bit distant but still in the general area of my discipline. I eventually accepted the second one for different reasons:
1. It's in a multidisciplinary research centre, and the description was that I will be part of a large team working on a massive project, which I found really exciting and non-traditional.
2. Huge amount of money is being poured into this centre by the government, so there's a good potential to grow.
3. The project itself is interesting and I will gain different skills by pursuing it. The intended work was of industry-like nature
4. The PI was extremely keen to have me onboard, which made me feel valued.
On the flip side, the university is large, but I will be working at a small campus. Most of the team are from one discipline and only a couple of members are actually from my discipline (say, for example, most of them are mechanical engineers, but I'm an electronic engineer). The PI is not from my discipline.
The disadvantages did not mean much to me when I received their offer as I considered myself joining an industry R&D department, which I also confirmed during the interview, and from the position description.
Once I accepted the offer and joined the research centre, I was shocked that I was assigned a very boring project that I will work on alone and doesn't fit my background. It's academic in nature, but with almost zero supervision. The potential to publish in reputable venues is small. I also found out that they hired another postdoc to fill the advertised position. This was a dead-end for me. I felt like I was put under a glass ceiling not to join the other university (a competitor). I deeply regretted accepting this offer, but at the same time, I cannot resign as I have just moved to a new city with a spouse and kids.
The good news is that I did a really great PhD on a hot topic, and was approached by 3 universities abroad to co-supervise PhD students distantly.
I communicated with my supervisor in this regards and expressed my feeling of being alienated and my preference to be integrated with the large team and be given a role as discussed during the interview. He agreed and gave me a task to do, but never replied to any email I sent later. He ignored me big time. Under the fear of being kicked out and putting myself and family in a financial hardship, 6 weeks later, I agreed to work on the project he assigned me earlier while working distantly with the other universities to keep my passion and academic career going. Ever since, our communication improved but still I feel isolated and doing worthless work.
What's your advice for me? Finding another job is a top priority for me but that is going to be hard due to job market trends and the limitation of moving with my family to a new city/country for another time (kids, school, etc). I have been in this position for 4 months - long enough to hate it.<issue_comment>username_1: That's a really annoying situation!
I'd start by seriously considering finding another postdoc position somewhere. It may not be possible due to the job market and because of your spouse and kids, but you need to find out if this is a possibility at all or whether it is not. Talk to your spouse about this and put out feelers for other postdoc positions.
If that doesn't work, look for other work in or around the city you are living in right now. This would mean leaving academics and that's a hard pill to swallow for some, but many, many people are perfectly happy not being in academics.
The final option is to find a way to make things work in your current position. I'm ranking this third because you sound like you lost trust in your supervisor and/or employer and that's quite difficult to recover from.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You have been scammed. I recently went through a rather similar situation, see the thread below:
[Persistent issues with salary pay as a postdoc in China: What can I do?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/104541/persistent-issues-with-salary-pay-as-a-postdoc-in-china-what-can-i-do)
Apparently there are several cheaters fishing for foreign postdocs into such schemes. Tracing the parallel of my situation onto yours, I was hired by a Chinese university on a false salary expectation under their pretence that all my project ideas sounded interesting. They were keen in that I would convince my wife to move as well to another department, and kept encouraging us into joining the university later as professors.
As soon as I landed and lodged, salary was "unexpectedly" irregular and much lower, and they started pushing to work 12/6 on other undiscussed projects. Their strategy of manipulation was exactly as you describe: no email communication unless where I complied with their demands.
I played their game until the end of the contract. I am sure they hoped I'd give up. I was actually benefitting from investing time on personal projects, saving money, and learning a foreign culture while they shunned me. I kept wondering whether they'd eventually kick me out, which they never did. But I do not recommend this line of action: I do not like playing games, and everyday I felt angry. Furthermore it is a waste of time, in the end.
My advice to you is that you focus 100% on *networking* and finding *another job* asap. Apply for an industry position within the same region. Of course the PI will feel you're up to something but try to keep this person isolating you. (A trick is to look miserable whenever you're seen.) They expect you to just settle, and they probably will not fire you unless given a good reason. So don't fall for any provocation, play victim, and invest heavy on getting a new position. How is your LinkedIn profile? Ever heard of The Cheeky username_2s Association? Aware of any networking fairs around your location? There is a lot to be done.
**You will win**: just bite the bullet and cheat these cheaters. Good luck.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/18
| 250
| 1,065
|
<issue_start>username_0: The answer contained 4 words, I wrote them in a large font size.
I erased them at the last minute, but it's still visible if you see it closely. Can lecturer accuse me of cheating in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: I suspect this will get closed, but you can be *accused* of anything. Due process will dictate whether the accusation holds water, however. All you can do is wait and see.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This depends on two things. First if you get caught, and then second on the academic misconduct policy of your class/department/school/university/... As for getting caught, eraser marks of large text seems like a pretty obvious example of attempted cheating. I would expect most graders to see these marks and want to follow up. As for academic misconduct policies, most of the policies I have seen include helping another student gain an unfair advantage as academic misconduct. Some policies include additional penalties for trying to cover up academic misconduct (i.e., erasing the large text).
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/18
| 772
| 3,303
|
<issue_start>username_0: In some European countries, PhD programs are free. As I understand, PhD opening depends on the research funds of the supervisor. In other words, PhD research is funded by a national agency or EU.
Some countries offer the programs for free and an international student in the UK should pay about $20,000 per annum?
In addition to the research cost (which is funded through the same routes), a PhD student has other expenses for the university, which is provided by the tuition fee in the UK, while in countries with free PhD programs, the governments provides the supports (correct me if I am wrong).
My question is: Why/how such governments support PhD education of international students? And if it is reasonable, why isn't it the case in the UK?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe what you're talking about is the issue of *tuition waivers*: that is, are students obligated to pay fees for the tuition, or are those handled by the university.
In many countries in central Europe (including Scandinavia, Benelux, Germany, Switzerland, and Austria) PhD studies are actually paid employee positions, so what tuition charges exist are small, since students normally don't have to take many courses as part of the PhD program (international students may need to register for a few classes to satisfy qualification requirements, but it's not a coursework requirement *per se*). In other locales, such as as some programs in the US, grants cover tuition charges as well as stipends, preventing students from having to pay those charges. And in many of those countries, the tuition fees amount only to a few hundred euros, not tens of thousands.
It's only where students are expected to do large amounts of coursework *and* where no arrangements to remit or waive tuition are made that students are responsible for paying large amounts of tuition.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Many people believe that education is not a commodity. They think that tuition fees are wrong and cannot be justified. While this belief may not be as widespread as it used to be, it is one of the most important reasons why many European countries charge low tuition fees or no fees at all.
There are also practical aspects. Many European countries are small, with often only one or two universities offering any particular subfield. Without sufficient international mobility, those subfields can easily become inbred. Governments often encourage universities to hire more foreign PhD students, researchers, and professors. Many politicians who otherwise support high tuition fees for foreign students prefer to keep PhD education free.
Let's assume that the typical cost of undergraduate education is €10,000/year to the university. PhD studies are more expensive, maybe €15,000/year, because the students need more one-to-one time with their supervisors. International PhD students are typically employed, which may cost €40,000 to €50,000/year. Then there are reseach expenses, which vary greatly depending on the field. Most of these expenses are ultimately paid by the government. If the university tries to pass a large fraction of tuition costs to the student, it becomes less attractive to foreign students, without reducing the overall cost to the public significantly.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/18
| 1,096
| 4,548
|
<issue_start>username_0: The situation maybe a little bit unusual, and I am asking for your opinion.
I have taught an undergraduate course on differential geometry of curves and surfaces last Fall semester. One of the students in my class, whom I think is really bright, told me that he found the proof of a certain well known theorem is a little bit hard to understand. We had some discussion on it, but I was quite busy so I wasn't paying too much attention on it, so we didn't get any good conclusion.
Recently I was revising my lecture notes and I was reminded of his question. Then he and I found that no fewer than three books (two textbooks and a research monograph) give wrong proofs of that theorem. We are quite satisfied with what we found, and his question was settled. Then he asked whether we should write a paper on this issue and submit it to some undergraduate research journal, like *Involve*. At first I didn't think it was a good idea because finding a mistake of a proof of a theorem in three books isn't really a big deal, and I told him we could send an email to the authors of those books about the mistakes. But then I think his idea might not be as bad as it seems to be because, essentially, when an undergrad can find some mistakes in well-known textbooks that (it seems to me that) nobody can find, it means something to me. My concern is I don't know even if we are talking about an undergraduate research journal, do the editors think it's certainly not worth a try or the opposite?
On the math side of that theorem, those three books use the same techniques but with different assumptions (or you may want to call simplifications). However, the proof in each of those books have different mathematical mistakes (i.e., not just some simple typos). So far we only found one textbook which gives a correct proof. The other books which contain a correct proof of this theorem are either too sketchy/wordy or those books are research monographs.
Since I have no experience on writing a paper based on the "discovery" of this nature, any comment is welcome. On one hand I think it's something to an undergrad student and on the other hand, I am not sure about what the editors think.
Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally, writing a paper about some kind of a discovery is not a bad idea.
However, are you sure (as in: really, really sure) that:
* the proofs in question are wrong;
* you have a correct proof?
Pointing "they are wrong" with a finger is not the best behaviour, even less so if you have little credibility (i.e., you are a student). If you can produce a fail-safe proof of that theorem, then why not. I have seen some papers with titles "A bla bli blup proof of foo biz baz theorem".
It *might* be that your course professor is the best person to approach first. (And I also highly recommend to do so.) It takes some experience to judge if an idea is valid and fruitful or not. Said professor might also be able to discern that you all are wrong and book authors are correct with little to no image damage to you.
---
*Update:* **If** you think your discovery is fail-proof, then aim for the publication by any means (with or without) the professor.
Don't fear being an undergrad.
Kolmogorov (you'd heard this name, I am sure) had at some time a hypothesis that multiplication of two n-sized inputs in on Big-Omega of n^2, i.e. that it is impossible to multiply faster than O(n^2). He mentioned it in a seminar. He was a world-known name then already. A week later an undergrad student showed him a proof that it is possible to do so faster.
While the actual story of the publication is also quite fun and breath-taking, you can research it yourself. I'd just mention, that we all know this student by this method, the Karatsuba multiplication.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Given that a correct and satisfactory proof exists in the literature, you would not be providing "research results" *per se*, so a full research article probably is not worth writing at this stage, **unless** you can devise a more elegant or straightforward or otherwise "improved" proof.
If you are unable to provide that, it would certainly be appropriate to comment on the difficulty of correctly proving the theorem, and do a "comparative" study in the form of a letter to indicate the challenges and make them known to a wider audience.
But, as you said, it's certainly a matter worth talking about—it really is a question about the appropriate "form" of writing your results up.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/18
| 750
| 3,295
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a 4th year Ph.D. Student. After submitting my first paper 6 months ago, I have been continuing that research. I have a lot of new methods and results, and I am almost ready to start writing again.
How do I know if I should split my research into two papers or write a single comprehensive paper? If I choose to split, how do I decide where best to split the two papers?
Without going into too much detail, I have a method that explains the causes of a fairly well studied phenomenon. I can show that there are four distinct causes of this phenomenon and explain the relative importance of each cause in different situations. If I split my research into papers 1 and 2, the conclusions of paper 1 may seem vague and inconclusive. If I combine my research into a single paper, it may be quite long and rambling. I want to choose a path that minimizes both of these problems.
---
My mental model for the situation is a [tipi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipi). Some of the concepts in that I need to write about have to lean on one another for support, like the tent poles of a tipi. If there are not enough concepts (or tent poles) the rest of the concepts fall short of a real conclusion; The tipi will fall over the first time there is a strong wind. There are clusters of mutually supporting concepts that I can split off into separate papers, but I have a few unique ways to divide these concepts into clusters. I suspect that any of these individual clusters will be less stable and robust that all of the concepts built into a single paper, but maybe I am just being a paranoid perfectionist.
---
How can I frame my dilemma to help me make this decision? What question should I ask myself to find the right balance?<issue_comment>username_1: As @GEdgar said in comments, you should consult with your adviser. But in general, a paper should be about one thing. What you need to determine is whether that one thing is the method, whether it is the application of the method to a particular cause (then four related papers), or your other posited approach of two papers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: A key rule you should consider is that you should not 'salami slice' your research. Publishing multiple uninteresting papers is not (generally) considered as good as publishing one interesting one, particularly if doing so impacts the quality of the journal you submit to.
As well as asking your supervisor, you should look at other papers in your field, particularly in the journals you want to publish in. If your paper is a very different length from those papers, that will make it harder for you to get it published.
Another point to consider is how much repetition would occur in writing two papers. If you need a lot of background material that would appear in both papers, that is a point in favour of writing one. If a combined paper would consist of the first followed by the second, then perhaps the topics are different enough to make two papers.
A further question to ask yourself is why you decided the first paper was complete enough to submit to a journal. You haven't said if you've had a response yet. It is possible to change the results of a paper after submission (I did so once), but it is rarely a good idea.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/18
| 364
| 1,674
|
<issue_start>username_0: As far as I understand "accepted pending revisions" is not the same as "submission accepted".
What are some important things to keep in mind while revising the submission in order for it to be finally accepted? Which have been the most useful to you?<issue_comment>username_1: Following all reviewers' suggestions and remaks (if appropriate).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: When they say that, they send you a list of suggested revisions (or several lists, one from each reviewer). Just follow those suggestions. When you send it back, explain which suggestions you followed, and which you did not (and why not).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Follow all suggestions that you agree with and document those you do not agree with and attach a clear explanation of why you disagree with them (possibly offering an alternative if you understand what exactly the referee was unhappy with in the original version or asking for clarification if you don't). Remember that it is *your* paper and you want to have it the way you think is right *more* than you want it to get published, so don't forget yourself when listing the parties whose opinion should be taken into account. Normally, a compromise satisfying everybody can be reached in finite time but it may require more than one iteration. As long as you stay polite and make your point of view clear and substantiated, occasional disagreements with reviewers and editors constitute a normal part of the publication process and are nothing to be afraid of. And, of course, try to meet the deadlines or at least inform the editors in advance when you cannot.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/18
| 5,138
| 21,004
|
<issue_start>username_0: Imagine this scenario: you're in an exam. Somebody asks for your help to answer a question. You help them (whisper the answer, slip them a note, whatever). You get caught. You get punished.
That's fine. You're not allowed to help others cheat. You broke the rules. The university is liable to punish you. All of this makes perfect sense so far.
**But**.
In my experience, it is often the case that this student who, remember, *did not cheat on their own exam*, often receives a punishment directly related to that exam, i.e. they fail the exam.
This does not seem to make any sense at all. The wrongdoing of the student has nothing to do with their performance on the exam. They did not cheat. Therefore, their exam is a *separate* thing entirely, and punishing them by failing them seems like an arbitrary thing to do.
Let me give you an example. Say a student punches a teacher. Would this student *ever* receive a punishment like "oh now you have failed your exam in Abstract Algebra!"?
No. The punishent will be general (suspension, etc), but the exams are not touched.
So, in the above example, why is the student who helped others cheat being punished on their exam, when their exam performance involved no cheating at all? What is the justification for this?<issue_comment>username_1: Giving the answer is always considered to be a form of cheating.
For example, [Fairfield University's website](https://librarybestbets.fairfield.edu/c.php?g=476878&p=3314738) says:
>
> Cheating
> ========
>
>
> Cheating is the most well-known academically dishonest behavior.
>
>
> But cheating includes more than just copying a neighbor’s answers on an exam or peeking at a cheat sheet or storing answers on your phone. **Giving or offering information in examinations is also dishonest.**
>
>
> Turning in someone else’s work as your own is also considered cheating.
>
>
>
Emphasis mine.
See also:
>
> Collusion
> =========
>
>
> Collusion, such as working with another person or persons when independent work is assigned is considered academically dishonesty.
>
>
> While it is fine to work in a team if your faculty member specifically requires or allows it, be sure to communicate with your faculty about guidelines on permissible collaboration (including how to attribute the contributions of others).
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Probably the main issue that makes this policy logical is that when two students are caught communicating during an exam, there is no foolproof way for the instructor to tell who copied from whom. The communication may have been one-sided, or it may have been two-sided, or it may have been one-sided but in the opposite direction than what the instructor suspects. Thus, by the mere act of exchanging information with another student, in any direction, the student undermines trust in the value of their own exam as an indication of their knowledge. Giving them a failing grade is the only policy that *guarantees* that they will not get away with getting illicitly-earned points. Since as you yourself said, some form of punishment is definitely logical, giving that specific punishment becomes logical both as a deterrent and as a defense against a student getting away with copying.
In other words, the policy makes perfect sense, and is pretty much the only rational way for universities to address cheating on exams.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: A security guard who intentionally leaves a door/building unlocked to enable/facilitate a theft never actually "steals" anything in the literal sense that they do not remove anything from the supposedly-secure area, but they are still guilty of being involved in a theft.
This is still true even if there is no direct benefit to themself, and will likely be sacked/dismissed from that place of employment at minimum regardless of whether they are otherwise an excellent guard.
In the exam example, the person supplying answers has enabled/facilitated/committed academic fraud/dishonesty - even if they have not directly benefited from it themself. As such, punishment in that area of work (i.e. the subject/module) is warranted and I suggest that the assessment where this occurred is a logical place to start.
Edit: Note the distinction between the ***corrective action*** of removing any illicitly-obtained jobs/goods/grades/marks removed from them, in contrast to the ***punitive action*** of removing legitimately-obtained jobs/goods/grades/marks (the latter applying to both the thief/cheater and the facilitator).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: The justification is that:
(1) If the punishments are different for providing and receiving answers, the students may try to put [cooperative game theory](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_game_theory) into practice and collude to both get the lesser punishment.
(2) Providing answers in an exam is very much an exam-related misdemeanor, as it subverts the integrity of the exam, erodes students' trust in the system and unfairly affects the result. Therefore there's no contradiction in giving an exam-related punishment.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Let me explain the problem with a very good situation in German law.
You are severely drunk with 2 per mill alcohol in the blood. So you leave the car, but use a bicycle for riding to home. The police stops you and tests positively for alcohol.
**You are able to lose your driving license.**
Why? You did not drive a car?!
Yes, but German law says that someone with such a high alcohol level is not able anymore to use **any** vehicle securely and you are endangering other people (Easy example: You cannot perceive a car on collision course, the driver startles, tries to evade and drive the car against a tree). The *ability and willingness to risk hurting others* is sufficient, not the existence of a real accident.
Another situation: Referees in many sport disciplines are not only able to punish players on the field, they are allowed to discipline you as spectator **outside the field**. If you throw a beer bottle on the field, such a referee has the right to stop the game and order that you are escorted out of the playing field. If you are even a **player in private** doing such things, the referee has the full rights to punish and disqualify you as player for future games.
But it was not in the rules? You were outside the field? Does not matter. **Your behavior shows a lack of sportmanship and professionalism which is required for participating in further games. You are unfit as sportsman.**
So you are not punished for trying to cheat, but you are punished for the missing discipline expected in academic circles. It's the very same for plagiarism: If you use a copied text, it does not matter if a copyright was violated, if anyone was harmed or even if the author allowed you to use his work. **It means that people cannot trust you that your work is done with your very best and honest efforts. If you allow others to cheat, in what cases could observers decide if an article has been honestly reviewed or created? They can't, so they lose trust in you.**
Now that was quite a big talk and I know that humans are fallible. But in the end: You cannot claim innocence if you are caught helping others to cheat.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I was once administrator of a computer based test that university students could complete at any time. One student took multiple attempts at the test (which was fine) and then gave their answers to most of the rest of the class. The other students did an hour long test in only a few minutes and all provided the same answers (it was multiple choice). The entire group were disciplined in the same way.
The cheating of the others would not have been possible without the first person **enabling** them to cheat. Unfortunately this sort of thing is all too common. Often a student will help others to cheat and then expect the same back in other classes. No doubt some would not have cheated if the first student hadn't facilitated it and made it so easy.
EDIT: as it was mentioned I didn't answer the question. Someone who facilitated the cheating of other students should also be made to fail that assessment. The assessment was not done ethically and honestly and is a process corrupted by them against the values of the University that they have accepted by being a student there. Someone who helps others cheat is themselves cheating the system, and others who are doing the right thing. The punishment needs to be focused on what the person did, in this instance they've wrecked the fair assessment of the exam so they deserve to be punished for that exam.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: **The incentive view of the law.**
The reason for punishing cheaters is not to right some wrong in the moral universe, it is to deter students from cheating and to deter students from enabling cheating. The goal is less cheating, not the balance of good and evil.
The ideal punishment is a punishment that has never to be carried out since it is so effective in deterring that it never has to be actually applied. This is a rare thing to achieve, but it is the basic goal.
Given that the goal of punishment is deterrence, there is little reason why it should be directly tied to the "crime." Indeed, it rarely is. We don't punish arsonists by burning down their house. People go to prison for reasons other than illegal restraint.
So yes, punishing students this way is a fairly arbitrary thing to do. But so is pretty much every other form of punishment.
Note: I did not go into a discussion of the severity of punishment, which is clearly an important constraint on the form of punishment to be applied.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: I think my perspective on this is more a practical one: As a professor, my options for punishing inappropriate student behavior are pretty limited. Unlike the legal system, I don't have the option of fines, imprisonment, community service, etc. If the infraction is severe enough, I can petition to have the student removed from the class but, short of that, the only tool I have is negatively impacting the student's grade. Since that's the only tool I have, it's the one I'm going to use.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_9: The basic issue here is that helping someone else to cheat is **also** a form of academic dishonesty. It may not quite rise, in your estimation, to the same level of seriousness, but that by no means exculpates the student who enabled the cheating. Perhaps you may believe it should reduce the anticipated punishment, but that should be a policy-level decision rather than something entirely discretionary.
I would not be very charitable to someone who enabled others to cheat, as I believe it is just as unethical to enable others to cheat as to cheat oneself. In some respects, it’s even worse, since you’re not just being personally dishonest, the helper is contributing to making the problem of cheating worse in general, and should not be rewarded for it with a lesser punishment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: An exam is a very specific and defined event based in an implied social contract between instructor and students. That instructor's obligations in this contract are: to set and indicate the date of the exam from the start of the term; to remind of the date of the exam; to create and distribute at the appointed time a fair, appropriate exam that is a valid tool for assessing course knowledge; to proctor the exam appropriately; to grade all exams fairly; to hand back the exams; to go over the exams; and to field any follow-up questions or correct grading mistakes.
The exam-takers' only obligations are to **take the exam under exam conditions**, which are a specific set of behaviors that are quite different from everyday social behaviors. These are designed to ensure that every exam taker has a fair opportunity to do as well as any other exam taker.
Now, let's say you were an instructor and, prior to an exam, four students came up to you and said, "We are going to refuse to take this exam under exam conditions. We are going to be talking loudly, and playing music, using our cell phones, as well as shouting out answers occasionally, some of which will be wrong." Would you allow these four students to take the exam? No, it would invalidate the entire exam, for all students. They would be breaking the implied social contract.
In the same way, a student providing answers to other students is breaking exam conditions. If one student were to announce, prior to the exam, that he was planning on sharing answers with three other students, would you allow him to take the exam? No, again, it would be completely invalidating the fairness of the exam, in that the 25 students who weren't whispered to were at a great disadvantage compared to the few who were.
So you can't let this person take the exam, at least in the normal way--agreed?
So, how *can* you then evaluate this "protesting" student? You could go out of your way to provide another exam that you proctor yourself, but are you *sure* that is as fair as the original exam conditions would have been? And, further, *why should you have to do that?*. The process of "examining" students fairly and well is challenging enough--why should an instructor have to spend appreciably extra energy to accommodate students who refuse to adhere to the social contract? And if the instructor chooses to expend his/her limited supply of academic energy, is *that* fair to the other students, who *are* adhering to the social contract? The reasonable position is to make no accommodation, and to disallow taking that exam at all.
Now, what you're asking about is this same situation, except the student *doesn't announce ahead of time that he is planning to invalidate the whole class's exam*. He just does it secretly--but is caught.
Do you really think the instructor should respond, "Agh, had you told me you were going to do this I would not have let you take the exam, but gosh, now that you have, I guess I have no choice but to allow it as a valid exam."?
No, instead, the social contract and the consequences are defined well ahead of time, for all students. If a student breaks the social contract, their exam is invalidated, just as if they had never taken it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: Even when people tell that the one who has helped to cheat doesn't make a mistake, there are always many reasons to tell that he has done a mistake because
1. If he helps, what happens? He may help his friend but in the end his friend will be motivated by this and will repeat this many times. So he was an obstacle to his progress which means he has committed a serious mistake.
2. If you help cheating you are on the side of promoting cheating. So you should be also punished.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_12: I think you have a point, but I would go further. I think the problem is that we'd punish either of the students with failing the exam. We only do this because the administration is too lily-livered to do the right thing and seek civil charges against both of them. They are, in fact, committing fraud in attempting to get credentials under false pretenses. I believe that some countries do prosecute cheating under fraud laws, but not in the U.S. They should be doing some soft time in the county lock-up. Heck, getting a zero isn't even really a penalty, if you don't know anything. If you don't cheat, you get a zero. If you do cheat, you might not.
So we fall back on the only option left to us and make the penalty academic for both students.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: Consider a situation in which a student cheats only on a part of an exam.
If you caught the student cheating, examined the evidence, and found that they only cheated on a specific section, you would nonetheless fail not only the section they cheated on, but also the rest of their exam. Therefore, it is the breaking of exam rules, rather than simply receiving underserved credit, that gets them the fail.
By this logic, you should fail anyone who participated in cheating, regardless of where they chose not to cheat.
Moreover, breaking exam rules carries additional penalties that go beyond exam failure. These vary with the institution, but should be be equally applicable to both students no matter what logic you apply to the exam itself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: Seems like most of the responses answer *whether* the student who helped should be punished, and you are asking why *manner* of punishment is this instead of that.
The reason is pragmatism. Suppose it has been determined that A helped B achieve a much higher grade than otherwise, while A's exam score did not benefit at all. In the situation you regard as ideal, B would get a zero, while A's exam would be scored as if he or she had not cheated, but A would then also be disciplined by whatever process takes care of misconduct outside exams. The problem is that this "whatever process" really does not work well. It takes time and there's a lot of bureaucracy. It can easily punish too much, or too little, and there is often much ado about not much. Many professors feel that all of this is unnecessary, and being that they are the instructor of the course, they are the person most suited for both adjudication and determining punishment.
With the current system, all the instructor has to do is to type in "0" on their spreadsheet where they would have otherwise typed "78". It even saves them time because they don't need to actually grade the exams. The punishment is isolated to that specific course, and the student is allowed to "bounce back" by not cheating again.
With the ideal student, there must now be a lengthy and involved process\* where the matter is investigated and punishment meted out. This will drag on for weeks after the exam. When finals are done, people don't want to follow some lengthy cheating investigation. They want to type in the grades and move on to their other work. Meanwhile, the students both get a permanent "cheater" mark on their record which they cannot easily escape. As these things become more widespread, surely society would get used to it and understand that just because someone has made one bad decision once doesn't mean they can't change, but today being officially disciplined is rare enough that you can get an exaggerated negative perception from others.
Basically, giving a zero is an ad-hoc system in the time between cheating emerging as a problem and formal processes for dealing with it being put in place. The formal processes exist now, but they don't work well enough, so instructors prefer to revert to the seemingly better ad-hoc system. I suspect that they also like to have the authority of being the ultimate arbitrator of everything in their class, which they are reluctant to give up.
* Note, this isn't necessarily true. In principle, there can be an efficient and effective system for dealing with academic misconduct. In practice there often isn't.
---
Some remarks:
* Firstly, it is untrue that, as some have suggested, you can never know for sure who cheated and who "only helped". A common situation is that the cheating student sits behind another one, who holds their exam so as to be clearly visible. Another is if the first student finished answering a 2 hour exam in 50 minutes, and only after started helping a friend cheat, never once touching their pen or paper.
* The same logic could be applied to the student who *does* benefit from cheating: Suppose they cheated only on question 7, 8 and 10 but answered 1, 2, 4, 5 honestly and correctly. Why take away the points they earned fair and square? In this case it is even harder to determine which questions were answered honestly, but even if it were determined, the practical difficulties of punishing it remain such that giving a zero an even more practical option.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_15: I think you are making a fundamental mistake about what cheating is: cheating is an attempt to lie to people in the future: <NAME> has mastered Blah, as evidence here is a degree in Blah from X where he earned a GPA of 3.7.
If he is cheating, then he probably has not mastered Blah, and if he cheated (without being caught) he certainly did not EARN the GPA.
Helping someone else cheat is participating in that lie. While the helper may have mastered Blah, it is fair to devalue their mastery by the same amount as the actual cheater -- because that is how much they were trying to devalue the **evidence** that the cheater had mastered Blah.
Consider, would you want a degree from a university that you knew allowed students to set their own grades? As an employer how much would you value a degree from a university that you knew allowed students to set their grades?
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/06/18
| 2,899
| 11,951
|
<issue_start>username_0: Imagine you are minding your own business when you receive an email from someone who claims to have discovered the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything. He provides some "details" about his theory, then says he wants to meet you and / or arrange a time for a phone conservation to discuss it. What should you do?
The only thing I've seen is this 1983 article by Underwood Dudley about [what to do when the trisector comes](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225381383_What_to_do_when_the_trisector_comes). Dudley says not to examine the trisector's proof, and also not to direct the trisector to the proof that trisection is impossible. Instead one should send computer-generated results showing that the trisection is imperfect. Problem with this is that it only works for questions that can be attacked by computers - there was a recent question here on Academia SE challenging conservation of angular momentum which this won't work for.
What are some general guidelines for dealing with these situations?
**Edit**: ignoring an email is easy, but what if the crank calls or visits in person?<issue_comment>username_1: **Ignore the crank.**
Unless you are in some location where you are required by law to respond to communications (I remember reading here about one country where it was indeed the case that it was required to answer emails as part of "open records" laws), you are under no obligation to waste your time on a crank's musings.
If it amuses you to respond, feel free to do so, but you waste your time at your own peril!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Follow the peer-review model with some tweaks:
If the work is clearly flawed and so off the mark that nothing can come out of it, ignore. [Desk reject]
If the work may have some iota of sense, but it isn't worth your time to get into it, write back suggesting a different forum, like a blog post. [Reject and suggest transfer]
If you are marginally interested, but not sure whether it's worth it, ask them to try presenting it better/differently with more proof. [Reject and resubmit]
If you think it deserves a chance, but can't get into it yourself, lightly share with your colleagues/students over the coffee table and if anyone seems interested, let them take it up. Alternatively, as suggested by @jpmc26, you could ask them directly if they would be interested to detect preliminary errors that could be pointed out. Purely voluntary, of course.[Assign reviewers]
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: A general guideline for these situations is to communicate your message (whatever you decide) to this person in a polite and gentle way.
The most successful people in my university are those who are excellent in their field and extremely nice, respecfull and humble because they understand the best how much they don’t know.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with @username_1 that you should try to avoid the crank. That may not be possible though. Underwood Dudley wrote a book "Mathematical Cranks" (an MAA press book) about the subject. He has a chapter (Case Study of a Crank, I think; if not, The Making of a Crank) devoted entirely to a crank he refers to as G. K.. This person happened to be an alum of the school at which I taught. When I assumed the Chair of the Mathematics Department, I began to receive "stuff" from G.K., which I stuck in my files and ignored. My luck ran out one day when he happened to reach me by phone in my office (we did not have caller ID at the time). He asked me what I thought about the things he had been sending and I told him that I thought his ideas were without mathematical merit. He proceeded to call me all sorts of vile things and eventually hung up. I have no idea what he said about me in subsequent writings, and don't really care.
Interestingly enough, he had called my residence some time before this and my teenage daughter fielded the call. She reamed him out about it and invited him never to call my home again, which he never did.
Along the way (cranks can be very persistent) he asked me for a recommendation for the national medal of science or something. I ended up calling the organization for advice on what to do. They asked me who the person was and I told them. The person on the phone laughed and told me to throw the form away.
Among G.K.'s mathematical achievements were the "discovery" of "subzero pi," and the recognition that since $e=mc^2$ we must have $e=m(a^2+b^2)$ via the Pythagorean theorem.
I corresponded with Dudley and <NAME> about my encounters with G.K., which they found quite amusing. Although I found G.K. to be harmless, a colleague of mine in the department, who had been a classmate of G.K., was afraid he would come to school and use his military commando background to harm members of the department who didn't praise his dubious achievements. That didn't happen, but I cannot say I dismissed his concerns completely.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: This happens far less frequently than inappropriate requests for postdocs that have absolutely nothing to do with your area, invitations to participate in conferences that have nothing to do with you, invitations to serve as section editor on predatory journals, .....
Handle them all the same. Use your delete button.
A call or visit is harder to deal with. A polite "... very interesting, but I don't have the time to follow up on this" might get you off the hook. If the person shows up at your door more than once, I recommend calling security.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: I read somewhere that a professor dealt with this issue by introducing such cranks to other cranks. "You might want to talk to Bob about your theory, I'll introduce you."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I knew a very eminent astrophysicist who would receive hundreds of these emails claiming to disprove Einstein and relativity, discovering life on Mars, alien visitations, space mirrors, critiques of the big bang, flat earth, etc.
He would respond in a vaguely positive way, *"This is very interesting work, but I don't know the answers to these important points you raise. Let me point you to someone who can help:"* and **give them the email address of another random crank** that had previously contacted him.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: #### Don't treat someone as "a crank" to begin with
I'm going to put forward a slightly alternative take on this than the other answers. While I agree with some of the practical suggestions for a polite dismissal of interest in work that is not fruitful, I think it is a bad idea to begin with the dehumanising premise that a person is "a crank". People described in this way can more accurately be described as *amateur analysts* with substantial gaps in their knowledge, which lead them to attempt to solve problems that they are ill-trained for, or use methods they misunderstand. Sometimes (though not always) this is combined with a skepticism of existing authorities in the field.
I agree with the general view that one should ignore non-meritorious contact, and in most cases a deleted email is the solution. However, if academics *do* choose to engage in discussion with amateur analysts of this kind, I think it is incumbent on the academic to show the same kind of basic humanity, decency, patience and politeness that would be used with an undergraduate, grad-student, etc. If the work at issue is extremely poor, it will not generally be frutiful to wade into its details, though one might outline some basic errors or false premises if that is simple to do. Irrespective of this, a reasonable thing to do here (if you choose to communicate at all) is to direct the amateur analyst to resources that they can follow to allow them to discover the problems with their method on their own. If the analyst is operating at a level where those resources are too hard (e.g., they lack sufficient training in a particular field), you might instead recommend courses or books that will give them more training in a particular subject.
One of the things that can be observed about extreme cases of so-called "cranks" is that if they are cut off completely from academic feedback, particularly in the early years, this may lead them to proceed hermetically, and some can work for many years ---or even decades--- developing a long and detailed theory without merit. I suspect that early cases of hostile or condescending rejections from the academic world (combined with the snarky dehumanising attitude exhibited on forums like this) sometimes leads such people to believe that academia is corrupt and insular, which makes them more inclined to proceed without any effective check on their work.\*\* I'm not sure if anything can prevent this, but it seems like it might be worthwhile if such people were directed *early on* to useful learning resources, in a way that grants them some dignity, and some sympathy for the fact that they are trying their best to solve problems with the skills they have at their disposal (not unlike our students).
The final helpful thing in dealing with such cases is to highlight the benefits of *blinded peer review* as a useful tool for amateur researchers. We all know that peer review has its problems, but whatever its faults, it is an extremely useful source of assistance in academic writing, particularly for researchers who are inexperienced in publication of work in academic journals. Use of blinding protocols should put amateur researchers somewhat at ease if they are concerned that academia is an exclusive club that discriminates against outsiders. Helping such researcher simplify and clarify their work, and present it to the rigours of blinded peer review, is something that could potentially be very valuable for any researcher with the patience to assist. As professional academics, we are extremely patient with our own students (many of whom are appallingly ignorant) so let's extend that patience and courtesy more broadly.
---
\*\* And let's be honest; academia sometimes *is* corrupt and insular.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Introducing a crank to another crank is always a grand idea. They never have any trouble accurately diagnosing the *other* one.
In any given field, there are lots of enthusiasts out there in the gen pop that lack the competence (formal training, background, or just the intellect) to play a role at the top professional level. In sports, we have "grass roots" activities - amateurs who are not anywhere near major leagues but still spend their time meaningfully. In art, lots of people paint and sculpt without necessarily believing they are the next Michelangelo. In astronomy, we have the star gazers who can make a real contribution. Birdwatchers - ditto.
But in maths and physics, we somehow do not manage to have a healthy relationship with a broader population of enthusiasts, and in the final analysis we must admit that this is unfortunate.
Very rarely I come across an enthusiast who is at least vaguely aware that he (almost always a he) is but a dabbler and willing to admit that he has probably made a mistake or two. Such an enthusiast is not a true crank, by Dudley's criterion that *a crank is someone who will not consult* (this also applies to academics, at times!). But most will not be told, and simply cannot be told, because of the Dunning-Kruger effect (often aggravated by some sort of paranoid-megalomaniac resentment that eerily surfaces before too long in almost all conversations).
Before the internet, cranks would utilise purple ink and mimeograph and mass mail and complain about being ignored. These days, they can put their stuff out there and stand a good chance that a professional (often a young one) will bite and patiently explain that, e.g. limits just don't work the way the crank believes they do.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/19
| 1,061
| 4,556
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a first year Master's student that works under the supervision of my thesis chair. At first, I was really excited to work with my chair because she is known as one of the nicest people & best profs in the department. However as time went on, those rose colored glasses have come off and I have seen her for who she truly is.
While I by no means dislike the woman, I have felt extremely dissatisfied working with her as she has canceled countless meetings, made empty promises, and never follows through. She told me she'd help me with my speech for my very first poster presentation but never did. She told me she'd help me set up my poster and be there for me, but never showed up until right before I was about to start presenting. She promises me thesis edits will be made within a certain time frame but always falls through with no email to explain.
My thesis is a branch off a multi site grant study and I've had to be in personal contact with the head of the grant because she has not been present although the head of the grant is also relying on her. I've done all the preparations for the data collection although she could have definitely helped if she wanted to.
Because there's been a lull in my recruitment; instead of focusing on that, she's trying to get me to do her dirty work for a former project that has nothing to do with me. Although her former thesis student has already graduated and been accepted to a PhD program, she'll still prioritize that student over me by helping that student publish her thesis.
She's not transparent at all and never gives me her opinion (even on things that do matter), so I often feel alone in making decisions. She also doesn't know how to talk to people. Just last week, out of the blue, she told me she is moving to another state for another job offer in about 2 months but has made no real attempt to help me decide how to deal with my thesis... it's all non novel ideas (like start over) lip service disguised as help. I guess my point is--despite my dissatisfaction, she has NO clue I feel this way and would be quite surprised if she ever found out.
**I'm wondering if I should fake it long enough and even get her a card/buy her going away lunch to ask her for a recommendation letter before she leaves?**
I know it sounds conniving and that's normally not like me, but I am very frustrated with her and feel like that's the least she could do for me, considering she's screwed me over multiple times already in the 4 short months we've been working together. I could really use one from her since I've worked for her the longest so far, and people are telling me that's what I should do.<issue_comment>username_1: I understand your frustration but let me explain a supervisor’s point of view. It is your research, your examination, not mine and you are probably doing fine! I would break in only if I would detect problems.
My university, officially gives me 10 hours for supervising a master thesis student. I have 5 master thesis students under my supervision, I teach, I have piles of examination work, I have students approaching me with all kinds of request (assisting in finding internships). The other part is my own PhD research, publishing and reviewing. All part-time. I also have a regular and demanding job outside the university.
Your supervisor is just extremely busy. I agree with you that your supervisor should follow-up promises or not raise expectations. I suspect her intentions are well meant but reallity and work pressure catch up with her.
My advise would be to have an open conversation with her to share your disappointment. But also be open for getting feedback because everybody has blind spots. The ideal supervisor doesn’t exist, the ideal student neither. If it still doesn’t work out between the two of you, you could consider changing supervisors.
Good luck with your thesis. I am convinced you will be graduated in a few months ;-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's not "conniving" not to dump your frustrations all over someone. Unless she asks you for your honest opinion, you are not obligated to go out of your way to share any of your feelings, especially if all the negative consequences would land on you. The professional way to handle someone you deeply dislike is with (cold) politeness.
You don't need to buy her lunch (as your superior she shouldn't accept that anyway), but do ask her to write you that recommendation letter and don't do anything to torpedo her opinion of you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/19
| 3,862
| 15,667
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a computer scientist at the point in my postdoc where I will have to decide soon whether to apply for faculty positions this fall or go to industry, in the US/Canada/UK/maybe Europe.1
But I've also recently come to the realization that spending half of my waking hours fervently wishing I had been born a girl could be a sign that maybe I should be doing something about that.
My situation is such that I doubt I would be able to really "pass" anytime soon, if ever. Even if I went all-out on transition immediately – which I'm not sure I'm ready for anyway – I can't imagine that I wouldn't be quite obviously physically trans at interview time and at least for a while afterwards.
I'd be fine presenting male through the faculty interview process and so on; my dysphoria is not particularly acute, and I have not yet started on hormones or anything. But I am certainly not willing to wait until tenure! I'm old enough already. (~30, but losing hair fast....)
Transition will obviously make life harder either in industry or in academia. But assistant professorships are not like normal jobs. Getting students, perhaps getting grants, perhaps teaching, and probably a million other things will all be harder in the midst of transition. It would also be combining two quite stressful experiences at the same time, and early-stage assistant professorships are not necessarily the most friendly job to the possibility of required medical absences / etc.
By contrast, my assumption is that a job as a researcher at some tech company will only provide the "usual" amount of discrimination and inconvenience, with probably better capability to handle potential medical issues, much more financial support for a potentially expensive process, and maybe fewer people I'll need to convince I'm a real person. A greater portion of these jobs are also going to be available in a major liberal city with the support structure for this process (and near my existing social networks for support).
And yet, ideally I think I'd want to be on the faculty market anyway.
So: how infeasible is transitioning as an early-career faculty member? Should I abandon this path for now and go to industry research instead, and maybe come back to it after a few years?
I'd particularly love to hear from anyone who's been in a similar situation, or to be pointed to examples of academic scientists who've transitioned before being well-established in their careers.
([This](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/10266/94047) seems to be the only relevant question on the site, but is broader, and the examples of trans academics there seem to have all transitioned after already being quite established [except <NAME>, who (a) did this in the 60s/70s and (b) had to completely restart her career in "stealth mode"]. There are also a few on workplace about related situations for "normal" jobs, but I'm looking for academia-specific thoughts.)
---
1 I don't really want to do another postdoc; I'm in the second year of my current one, with a professor who's relatively prominent in my subfield, and though it's been great I can't help but think that a second one almost anywhere else would be seen as a "step down." Doing multiple postdocs is also quite rare, though not unheard of, in my area. My current position is "term-limited" before another faculty cycle comes around.<issue_comment>username_1: From my point of view I wouldn’t see any objection for a transition early in your career. I would be open about it. My university promotes to be all inclusive and has a diversity policy. On the other hand, we would not have such programs if there wasn’t a need for it. So you could be right about your underlying feelings that it may obstruct your career in this stage.
However, what is mainstream nowadays? Looking at my department I see a lot of diversity. That is what makes a university such a vibrant place.
I guess it all comes down to your future department and the people in it. I just want to say that for me, your qualities as an academic and your personality would count, and not your gender (before or after).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I am aware of one faculty member at my institute (in Germany) who transitioned between interviews and starting her assistant professorship. I don't know her personally so I have no idea about her experiences, but I thought it might be a useful data point anyway.
Looking for jobs in a large and liberal city might be useful for faculty positions as well as for industry; obviously job supply is less in academics than in industry but you could still look for positions in those kind of cities.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> How infeasible is transitioning as an early-career faculty member?
>
>
>
I transitioned as a postdoc back in 2013, so I did it. Whether or not it's a terrible idea **depends on many factors, and just plain luck**. I don't have experience in industry, so I can't comment much on that. But I'm sure it's the same situation: it depends on many factors, and plain luck.
### Travel
One thing that would likely be distinct between academia and industry is traveling: conference travel is the norm in academia. This has two important consequences:
1. Surgeries for transgender medical procedures are not performed in most places, e.g., in Canada, there's only [one clinic](https://www.grsmontreal.com/en/surgeons/dr-brassard.html) that performs [GRS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genital_reassignment_surgery) (in Montreal). Different surgeons have different styles, and have different levels of experience. To be able to choose one's desired surgeon (and get the most suitable results), one needs to be able to travel, which I expect is far easier in academia than industry.
For surgery, I organized to attend conferences nearby, which helped ease the travel costs. My hormones are prescription-free in Turkey, so I stock up when I'm there.
2. Traveling is more difficult for transgender people, including security inspections, applying for visas, carrying medicines, facial hair growing during long flights, dilation, shared accommodation, and so on. In fact, some countries have anti-debauchery laws.
I highlight some other important factors below.
### 1. Transitioning is personalized.
Everyone's transition is different. For many people, transitioning is essential: they choose between transitioning or killing themselves. Other people find it suitable to not transition full time. Many people are between these two extremes.
Whether or not what you have in mind is "a terrible idea" depends on you: (a) how critical it is to transition, (b) your financial situation, and (c) your family situation. And many other factors: religion, friends, disability, race, local laws, and so on.
### 2. At no point is transitioning convenient.
I doubt there will ever be a point where you feel *now is the optimum time to transition*. At the very least, a huge amount of time gets eaten up with updating one's documents and medical care, along with simply learning how to dress and behave.
One point: *If you wait, are you going to publish under your dead name?*
My experience is that students mostly don't get involved in the transition. If you stay focused on the material, so will they. I would say family is probably of greater concern than students. However, there's inevitably some complications: your reputation (good or bad) rubs off onto your students, and writing letters of recommendation can be a bit awkward.
Some people take medical steps (such as sperm donations, hormones, facial hair removal, etc.) prior to socially transitioning. However, WPATH standards of care for **various medical treatments have [real life tests](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-life_experience_(transgender))**, which is relevant if you're intending to seek medical treatment down the line. You need to establish yourself as your gender to get medical referrals.
When I've asked older transgender people, they only ever say they regret not transitioning earlier. In your case, if you end up losing your hair, it could have significant and irreversible negative impact on your quality of life; you may want to consider starting medical treatment soon.
### 3. Transitioning takes place with incomplete information.
Whatever decision you make, you're going to make it without all the information. You won't know how people will react in advance. **You'll make a decision without knowing which path is best.** And, regardless of what you do, you'll probably spend a fair chunk of your life thinking you made the wrong decision.
### 4. Don't overvalue being passable.
Being passable helps everyday activities proceed smoothly. However, my impression is that if someone is making an effortful attempt to present and behave as a certain gender, one's gender will almost uniformly be respected (despite not being passable).
Setting a goal of being passable is risky; it is often not achievable, and it can be devastating to accept that oneself is not passable.
I'm mostly passable nowadays, but people still find out about my past through my prior publications. Generally even if they find out, they act like they don't know.
Hormones make a big difference to passability (but they take time). There's also surgery, such as [facial feminization surgery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facial_feminization_surgery), which is a major improvement, but it's expensive and a referral may be required, depending on the surgeon(s).
### 5. Unpredictability.
Transitioning takes time, and over time people's values change. There's also a roller-coaster of emotions, a "second puberty" when one undergoes hormone therapy, and often dieting becomes important (which may mean a lack of energy to be productive).
Particularly difficult for me was belonging to a "boys club" (mathematics/computer science) while I was desperate to establish and assert my femininity.
**People are unpredictable.** Just because someone has liberal values, and so on, doesn't mean they're going to be accepting. Likewise, just because someone is conservative, doesn't mean they're going to be hostile. The people you work with make a difference to your quality of life in general, and it's impossible to predict.
**Task difficulty is unpredictable.** There's going to be things that turn out far easier than expected, and things that should be simple which are complicated.
**Mental health is unpredictable.** It's difficult to maintain mental health as a transgender person. It's possible to end up with depression and/or anxiety, eating disorders, and engaging in self-harm or suicide attempts. (Every transgender person I've asked has a clear plan on how they would kill themselves.) And even without being transgender, academia can be a rough ride mentally.
**Relationships are unpredictable.** In addition to transitioning having unpredictable effects on your current relationships, hormones (if you choose to go down that road) are known to affect people's sexuality, which may impact if and who you marry, which may impact your career options. Moreover, if you end up marrying a man, by default a husband's career is socially considered more important than the wife's, and it's considered the wife's responsibility to look after children (perhaps through adoption).
### 6. Other points.
1. *Don't get lost in your transition.* It's common for transgender people to end up only thinking about their transition, and that becomes who they are as a person. My impression is that this causes others to perceive you as "a transgender" rather than "a woman". I feel it's best to develop non-transgender-related interests.
2. *Work harder than expected.* Job security is a big deal for mental health, but on top of this, medical treatment is expensive. So I encourage you to make sure your colleagues have instances in their mind where you have gone beyond what's expected.
3. *Have ambitions beyond merely surviving.* It is hard to have goals when you feel like you're merely surviving on a day to day basis, but it's good for one's mental health. Don't just constantly perceive yourself as a victim, but do something with your life.
4. *Expect hiccups.* While deeply hurtful, you're inevitably going to be misgendered and deadnamed, have people comment on your appearance, have people scheming behind your back, and so on. When this happens, it makes me paranoid (*Is this what people truly think of me?*). Somehow, you need to continue to be productive despite this. As you become more established, these hiccups become less frequent.
Upvotes: 9 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: <NAME> has already given a [great answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/111439/9553) that got my upvote. But allow me to offer some personal perspective based on my experience here in US.
I transitioned about 20 years ago. The world is a much less hostile environment for trans people today than it was then. I think you will find academia, at least here in the US, to be an especially supportive environment.
Transition is difficult and scary for everyone. None of us ever starts out expecting we will ever pass. But there's a wide variety of people's appearances anyway and hormones, hair removal and [facial surgery](https://hamiltonlabs.com/FacialSurgery/) all really work. Within about a year or two, most people have learned the role, they look the part, they've moved on with their lives and they blend in mostly unnoticed. It happens faster than people expect and almost everyone comes out looking much better than they expected. (Transition really does *cure* transgenderism.)
Whether to begin transition before or after you find an appointment is your choice. If you've literally *just* begun transition and haven't yet figured out how to choose an outfit or apply makeup without looking like a cross between a circus clown and a pole dancer, well, yes, that could be distracting and unhelpful. But if you can present as a serious professional person, albeit of somewhat ambiguous gender, I think you will be fine. Early in transition, you might have some difficulty getting your name right on all the documents, however.
Good luck.
***Added:*** On reflection, it occurs to me to point out there is an advantage to transitioning *before* the job search. When you transition, everyone around you also has to transition. They have to learn your new name, break old habits of what pronouns to use and change how they think about you. Transition is stressful for them, too. When they're uncomfortable, you'll be uncomfortable, too. If you start transition before looking for a job, even if you're not that far along, your new colleagues will only know you as your new self.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: I think it depends a lot on the institution. When I joined my Mathematics & CS department in 1998, there was already a transgender faculty member. Since then, that person has retired, but at least one other faculty member has transitioned, and my institution has [explicitly welcomed transgender students](https://www.kqed.org/forum/201408210900/new-policy-for-transgender-admissions-at-mills-college), of whom [there are many](https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/05/transgender-students-find-open-door-at-more-womens-colleges/).
Perhaps when considering a school (after getting an offer?), you (or a friend, if you wish to be anonymous as long as possible), could contact the campus LGBTQ group, Queer Studies, or Women's Studies department to find out if there are any out transgender faculty whom you could contact.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/06/19
| 522
| 2,046
|
<issue_start>username_0: My friend is soon to obtain her doctoral degree in applied physics and start postdoc. She is **provided by the department a chance to choose what to be displayed on the degree (between D.Eng. and Ph.D., but both in applied physics)**. She is actually doing purely theoretical physics although the department is named applied physics. She says that she will try to stay in the same academia, but not excluding the possibility of moving out if not going well.
She asked me and it's not quite clear to us what the difference might be and what might be affected in the future.<issue_comment>username_1: At different time periods and in different countries / academic cultures, either one or the other was more popular to denote (essentially) the same thing.
I won't go into the historical details (in which I am not too well-versed), but here's an example: In my own Alma Mater, for example, they used to award D.Eng. and D.Sc.'s, and no (?) Ph.D.'s until the 1980s or so, but at some point they switched, and these days everybody gets a Ph.D.
Did this matter to anyone? By and large, no. I've never heard anybody complain about the latter or the former having caused him/her any trouble being recognized. So while it is theoretically possible there will be some kind of issue, it doesn't matter.
My *personal* opinion is that it's a shame we are losing these discipline-group-specific titles and going with something generic - even if it has older historical roots. So I would go for D.Eng.
Also, if your friend has a signed official letter saying something like
>
> We can award you with either a Ph.D. or a D.Eng. and we consider them equivalent in your case
>
>
>
then she can use *that* specific letter with whatever degree she is awarded, if any questions come up.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Select Ph.D. over D.Eng. In a job application, you want to make it as easy as possible for the reader to understand your qualifications. Ph.D. is well known. D.Eng. Is obscure.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/19
| 1,280
| 4,885
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a PhD student suffering from extreme anxiety after finding some mistakes in my scientific paper 7 months back. I've talked to my supervisor about it and he said that those were simple errors that would not affect my conclusions... Something that triggers for my anxiety is the fact that we issued a formal statement to correct them, hence this will be forever on my record. Furthermore, I discovered a ridiculous calculation error in the estimation of one of the parameters that I'm comparing in my paper that would change the looks of three points in my graph (which has around 30 points in total) -and this wasn't corrected in the statement because the estimation I used, even though originated from a silly mistake, can still be valid depending on how you consider the system. I suffer from constant fear of people thinking that I'm a dishonest researcher and that I fabricated data, because the data that I got from a mistake looks better than the "correct" one, even though the main parameter we show in this particular figure doesn't change in either case... I'm really against dishonesty of any kind, so this is a huge deal for me.
I know that my supervisor assured me that everything was ok and that he is happy with my performance regardless of those mistakes, however I can't help but think that my record is "stained" and that I'm a bad person that does not belong in academia. I was doing pretty well so far, but then my entire life fell apart after this. I feel like I lost the ability of feeling excited about my research... I think I've failed my life goals and my moral values.
Have someone gone through something comparable in academic life? How did you cope with the constant feeling of unworthiness?
Thanks in advance...
Edit: Differently from the question pointed out as duplicate, I would also like to know how researchers view my mistakes and how can I regain my confidence to carry on with my work..<issue_comment>username_1: Sure, we all want to publish error-free papers, but mistakes happen sometime, and when mistakes happen, the best you can do is be proactive to get the correct information out there (and do better next time so you don't make the same mistakes again).
I know of one particular case in my area of research that sort of matches what you are experiencing. In 1997, <NAME>, who, at the time, was a PhD student at Stanford, published a [paper](https://doi.org/10.1109/4.568846) with his advisor, <NAME>, in the *IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits*. Then, due to some errors in the original paper, not [one](https://doi.org/10.1109/JSSC.2005.848626), but [two](https://doi.org/10.1109/JSSC.2006.882679) correction papers were published to correct the mistakes of the original paper.
Things apparently turned out OK for Derek: he is now the Director of Engineering at Apple in Silicon Valley.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm going to suggest you attack this on three fronts:
1) As you progress as a researcher, I think you will come to realize that *minor* errors in published research are actually quite common. I define minor errors as those that don't affect the conclusions of the paper. See this question/answers: [How common is it for submitted papers to have minor errors?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/68707/how-common-is-it-for-submitted-papers-to-have-minor-errors)
2) Understand that corruption is actually about intent and secrecy. High profile cases of corruption and ruined careers only generally happen when the researcher or the study is famous and the problem involves purposefully lying. You can easily avoid this type of situation by putting a corrected version of the paper on your website. See this question/answers: [How does an Erratum on one's own paper affect one's career as a researcher?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/110965/how-does-an-erratum-on-ones-own-paper-affect-ones-career-as-a-researcher)
3) Get a handle on how you think about problems like this, which are relatively common in the life you have chosen. I would suggest that there is a long way between "reasonably cautious"/"feeling embarrassed" and "extreme anxiety"/"failed my life goals and my moral values"/"bad person that does not belong in academia." I am going to strongly suggest seeking out your university counseling services, if available. See my answer to this (only somewhat related) question: [How do I know that I have truly lost interest in research and should drop out of a top CS PhD program?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/95747/how-do-i-know-that-i-have-truly-lost-interest-in-research-and-should-drop-out-of/95751#95751) Or similar: [How to deal with fear of failure as a PhD student?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/83059/how-to-deal-with-fear-of-failure-as-a-phd-student)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/19
| 1,932
| 8,308
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a graduate student, and for a course I gathered hundreds of thousands of records (not confidential, but difficult to access if you don't already know about them and know who to talk to) and spent several months cleaning, combining, and organizing them into a usable dataset, upon which I then performed statistical analysis. The project is complete and produced interesting results, but likely I won't turn it into a paper anytime soon.
I found out yesterday that the professor supervising the course spoke to one of his friends and mentioned my project, and the friend asked for my dataset (the cleaned one I produced, not the raw records) to perform his own analysis. Should I share it with this friend? If so, is there a way to ask to be acknowledged in any publications that result?
The data were originally public records, but I did a lot of work that required years of specialized subject-matter knowledge to compile them appropriately. Are there other risks I haven't considered? I feel a little uncomfortable being asked to share a large amount of work with an academic I don't know at all, and while I would like to help advance the field in general, I don't know what's reasonable to expect here.
**Update**
As suggested here, I emailed the advisor saying I was not comfortable giving the data to someone I did not know (he wanted me to upload it to a file system I was shortly to lose access to), but that I'd be happy to discuss with his friend directly if he wanted to put us in contact. He responded saying that he would look for a different dataset.<issue_comment>username_1: Your decision is based on:
1. Is it ok for you to share your work, in general?
2. Is it ok for you to share your work and be acknowledged for that?
3. Would you like to work with your advisor's friend?
4. Do you have any personal grudge against your advisor?
If it's not ok for you to share your work or if you have some personal grudge against your advisor, then simply don't give your data to them. You could find any excuse in order to not do so.
If you would like to join in a project with your advisor's friend then you could exchange your data for it.
Finally, and I think this is your case, if your only problem is that you want to be acknowledged for your efforts but you don't have the opportunity to publish anything soon then simply publish your data under license. You could do it on GitLab, GitHub, Bitbucket, etc. You don't need to make your repo public, the important thing is that you put your license. Then you can give your advisor's friend access to your data and he's obliged to acknowledge you in his papers or you can sue him.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Why would you not want to share the data you have collected and prepared, collaborate with an experienced scientist, and finally make a paper from months of work you put into this project already?
I would rather see a good opportunity than a risk here. The highest risk is that someone else receives all the credit for your hard work. Well, while that is certainly not nice, you could probably live with it, especially when you are not interested in publishing the work on your own anyway.
However, it is much more likely that the fellow researcher will respect your work and give appropriate credit (like a co-authorship). Make sure to send a description of the data preparation you have done along with the data, so he is aware of the amount of work it has taken. You should also show clear interest in writing the corresponding sections of the paper (or whatever publication is planned).
Collaboration is one of the key ingredients to excellent research. Go ahead!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **TL;DR - talk to your supervisor (which to be honest is the answer to about 90% of the questions on here, but hopefully this answer helps structure that discussion).**
First of all, you might need to check whether you are even in a position to make this decision. The ownership of intellectual property arising from student projects [can be a complex subject](https://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/rdm/2015/12/who-owns-my-data-what-happens-when-i-leave-the-university/) and you might want to check with your Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation office or equivalent before sending a large dataset to an external partner. In most cases this is likely to be a formality and there will be no issues unless the dataset might be used commercially, but they may want to put a simple Material Transfer Agreement in place to define how the recipient can use or further distribute the dataset.
Assuming it's up to you, essentially you have three options:
1. **give them the data without restriction**. Best-case scenario: co-authorship, worst-case: nothing.
2. **refuse to give them the data**. Best case scenario: nothing. Worst-case scenario: you and your supervisor look bad and you damage a potential future relationship with a collaborator or employer.
3. **give them the data after taking some actions to increase the likelihood of acknowledgement**. There are three real options here:
3a) (mentioned by @username_1) ***upload the data to a public repository***. The preferred repository varies by field but I'd use an academic data repository like [Figshare](http://figshare.com). You get a citeable DOI but this is not a publication, so if you're looking for publications, this doesn't help (it should, but that's another discussion).
3b) ***publish the dataset in a data journal like [Nature Scientific Data](https://www.nature.com/sdata/)***; then everyone can use it but has to acknowledge you by citing the source.
3c) **set up a [material transfer agreement](http://www.research.pitt.edu/ccc-material-transfer-agreements)** that defines how the recipient can use the data and what you get in return, which can formally include the option of coauthorship in some form if a manuscript is produced.
With option 1, the most likely outcome depends on their character. Are they a good person to collaborate with? Do they have a good reputation as a collaborator? This is probably the most important question, since if they're a good person to work with then I honestly can't see them *not* including you as a co-author anyway in this situation, although this could vary by field. Another, related consideration is whether might you potentially be working with (or for) them in the future, and if so if this might increase your visibility or chance of a job. If you don't know them, the only real way to assess this is by asking your supervisor, who knows them and also has an interest in supporting you.
Option 2 - refusing outright - really isn't likely to end well.
Option (3a) - a data repository - guarantees acknowledgement but not necessarily in a form that's useful to you, and option (3b) - a data paper - is the most work and guarantees acknowledgement in a form that's likely to be useful to you, but both (3a) and (3b) mean you're less likely to get a co-authorship.
Option (3c) is trickier. In my field MTAs are increasingly common but also very unpopular with some researchers. As the provider of the data, having it covered by an MTA is the safest option but negotiating one can be intimidating. Fortunately, most institutions have offices to handle this sort of thing.
You also need to consider a few other questions:
* how helpful are the different possible outcomes going to be for your career? In my field you are assessed primarily on publications in peer-reviewed journals so 3b is preferable to 3a. However, if the friend is able to acknowledge the data by citing it, they are less likely to include you as a co-author unless you make further substantial contributions to the analysis (which they don't have to give you the opportunity to do).
* Does their proposed analysis sound exciting? If it has a good chance of resulting in a really, really good paper and relies heavily on your dataset, then a chance of a co-authorship on a really high impact paper might be better than a lead authorship on a data-only paper.
Ultimately, most of these questions will be things your supervisor is able to help you with. So I'd arrange to **talk to your supervisor**, explain your concerns, and ask which option they suggest.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/06/19
| 1,427
| 6,570
|
<issue_start>username_0: For the first time, I had to review a revision of an academic paper (I have already reviewed several other papers, but they were all rejected after the first round). While the authors had clearly improved the paper (after the first round, major revisions were requested by the editor (and myself)), several major issues mentioned in the first round of reviews were still not (or not correctly) addressed. Furthermore, due to the improvement in writing and structure, the paper was easier to read, and I was able to identify several flaws or strong limitations that I did not report in the first round. Consequently, I, again, recommended major revisions (while I hesitated with rejection due to the major flaws).
After having submitted my review, I received the reviews of the two others reviewers. To my surprise, both were positive (1 line comment such as "Issues have been addressed and I have no further comment") and the editor requested minor revisions.
In view of this, I am wondering if I have misunderstood how I should review a paper after revision as I did not make a real difference between round 1 and 2. Therefore my question is how far can/should we go in reviewing a paper? If at each round, improvements are made but new flaws or mistakes are spotted, should we stop mentioning them at some point?
This process might be theoretically infinite. Furthermore, as an author, I know that several rounds of reviews are exhausting and stressful so I do not want to be "that reviewer" (the one who is too picky and who completely slow down the publication process).<issue_comment>username_1: This has also happened to me, so I appreciate this question. I think this situation occurs, in large part, because a totally sloppy first draft is sent out for review rather than desk rejected. So in some sense this is not your fault.
In the end, I gave a review including all the issues I had identified and then asked the editor for feedback regarding my (second and third round) reviews. He explained that he was pleased with my approach, although in the end he ended up telling the authors that some of my comments from the third round were optional.
The feedback I received makes me believe that a reviewer should continue to point out issues in the second and third rounds, even if they are new. Then alert the editor to the fact that you are finding new issues (perhaps note that it is due to the substantial rewriting). Final decisions are up to the editor and usually they are happy to be able to consider the points, even if (in the end) they tell the author that some points can be ignored at the later stage.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: (1) The comments of other reviewers should not bother you; often reviewers will be from mutually exclusive fields, so as to provide better representation. You should stand by your professional opinion irrespective of the others.
(2) I firmly believe that you should spend a lot of time on first and second review. If you are finding new and significant errors beyond these rounds, it means you didn't do your job rigorously before.
---
EDIT: Several comments highlight the valid point that sometimes revisions are required just to make the paper readable. My position on this is that if more than 2 'readability-reviews' are required, the authors are either unable to use the language adequately (and should be directed to a suitable resource- a reviewer is meant to check technical content, not be a style coach), or are unwilling to make these suggestions; in which case there is no point asking once again.
---
Comments/questions regarding your previous objections are ok, but entirely new objections in third or subsequent rounds leave a bitter taste and lead to a lot if time being wasted.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I appreciate the fact that you are asking this questions with sensitivity to the authors' feelings. Although we should be professional and objective in doing our reviews, we should also respond in ways that take the authors' human feelings into account.
In this case, I think you should indeed present the new concerns you have at each round, especially if they were hidden earlier do to poor writing. However, when you do so, I recommend that you send a note to the editor explaining your concern that it might be unfair to the authors to bring up new major issues so late, and so ask the editor to use their discretion in making the recommendation. That way, you fulfill your responsibility to objectively identify the problems with the article, but you absolve your conscience of any possible guilt for giving the authors an unfair experience--it is the editor's responsibility to make the decision, not yours.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Thank you for raising this question. In my view, (new) valid and constructive issues can always be brought up, irrespectively of the number of review rounds. Authors will appreciate the help for improvement.
However, me and my co-authors received three pages of new issues after a major revision and acceptance by two reviewers. These issues, in our opinion, were non-coherent, far from constructive, some factual wrong (but stated as facts) and we subscribe them to a lack of knowledge of the reviewer in this field. We rebutted most of the issues as we do not consider these as improvements.
Because of the quality of the review, we consider these new issues as inappropriate. Otherwise we would have welcomed new issues.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Stand on what you believe is most correct and do not leave the paper with flaws like that. Your decision matters before it is published. After publication it would remain online and others may not be able to figure out these flaws. In fact others may follow these errors and publish papers in the future. Your obligation to the paper takes precedence over that of the journal i.e if the paper is published elsewhere and the comments are well addressed it is better than publishing it in the journal with those flaws you have identified. However, it is important to mention that you should try at the first few rounds to read the paper thoroughly.
* Give every detail and proof you have concerning the paper while being polite to the authors. Instead of saying 'the authors' say 'the paper' etc
* Apologize and make it clear that you have not seen these issues in the previous round.
The point is that the reviewer is like a Judge, whenever he finds new evidence, his judgement could change
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/19
| 1,241
| 5,627
|
<issue_start>username_0: A guest editor at a peer-reviewed academic journal solicited me to write a paper. I initially hesitated for lack of time. But the editor's invitation was courteous. So I sent an abstract, which was accepted by the editor.
I submitted the 6k-word paper a few weeks later, taking care to comply to the submission guidelines (I downloaded the journal's CSL file for bibliographic references, for example).
I just received a rejection letter. I know an invitation is not a ticket to bypass the reviewers. Still, I am rather stunned. I'll get over it, but I was wondering how common it is for academic journals to reject solicited papers?<issue_comment>username_1: This has also happened to me, so I appreciate this question. I think this situation occurs, in large part, because a totally sloppy first draft is sent out for review rather than desk rejected. So in some sense this is not your fault.
In the end, I gave a review including all the issues I had identified and then asked the editor for feedback regarding my (second and third round) reviews. He explained that he was pleased with my approach, although in the end he ended up telling the authors that some of my comments from the third round were optional.
The feedback I received makes me believe that a reviewer should continue to point out issues in the second and third rounds, even if they are new. Then alert the editor to the fact that you are finding new issues (perhaps note that it is due to the substantial rewriting). Final decisions are up to the editor and usually they are happy to be able to consider the points, even if (in the end) they tell the author that some points can be ignored at the later stage.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: (1) The comments of other reviewers should not bother you; often reviewers will be from mutually exclusive fields, so as to provide better representation. You should stand by your professional opinion irrespective of the others.
(2) I firmly believe that you should spend a lot of time on first and second review. If you are finding new and significant errors beyond these rounds, it means you didn't do your job rigorously before.
---
EDIT: Several comments highlight the valid point that sometimes revisions are required just to make the paper readable. My position on this is that if more than 2 'readability-reviews' are required, the authors are either unable to use the language adequately (and should be directed to a suitable resource- a reviewer is meant to check technical content, not be a style coach), or are unwilling to make these suggestions; in which case there is no point asking once again.
---
Comments/questions regarding your previous objections are ok, but entirely new objections in third or subsequent rounds leave a bitter taste and lead to a lot if time being wasted.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I appreciate the fact that you are asking this questions with sensitivity to the authors' feelings. Although we should be professional and objective in doing our reviews, we should also respond in ways that take the authors' human feelings into account.
In this case, I think you should indeed present the new concerns you have at each round, especially if they were hidden earlier do to poor writing. However, when you do so, I recommend that you send a note to the editor explaining your concern that it might be unfair to the authors to bring up new major issues so late, and so ask the editor to use their discretion in making the recommendation. That way, you fulfill your responsibility to objectively identify the problems with the article, but you absolve your conscience of any possible guilt for giving the authors an unfair experience--it is the editor's responsibility to make the decision, not yours.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Thank you for raising this question. In my view, (new) valid and constructive issues can always be brought up, irrespectively of the number of review rounds. Authors will appreciate the help for improvement.
However, me and my co-authors received three pages of new issues after a major revision and acceptance by two reviewers. These issues, in our opinion, were non-coherent, far from constructive, some factual wrong (but stated as facts) and we subscribe them to a lack of knowledge of the reviewer in this field. We rebutted most of the issues as we do not consider these as improvements.
Because of the quality of the review, we consider these new issues as inappropriate. Otherwise we would have welcomed new issues.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Stand on what you believe is most correct and do not leave the paper with flaws like that. Your decision matters before it is published. After publication it would remain online and others may not be able to figure out these flaws. In fact others may follow these errors and publish papers in the future. Your obligation to the paper takes precedence over that of the journal i.e if the paper is published elsewhere and the comments are well addressed it is better than publishing it in the journal with those flaws you have identified. However, it is important to mention that you should try at the first few rounds to read the paper thoroughly.
* Give every detail and proof you have concerning the paper while being polite to the authors. Instead of saying 'the authors' say 'the paper' etc
* Apologize and make it clear that you have not seen these issues in the previous round.
The point is that the reviewer is like a Judge, whenever he finds new evidence, his judgement could change
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/06/19
| 1,453
| 6,321
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question is based around a hypothetical, but realistic, scenario.
>
> The situation revolves around a group-based course in which the main deliverable is a report. Every group member is responsible for the report. The report is graded as a whole and counts for the entire group but individual adjustments in grade can be made by the supervisor based on peer reviews and other considerations by the supervisor.
>
>
> The *issue* arises when part of the group fails (due to the report grade) and another part passes the course. Let's assume the failing students did their part, just not enough to pass.
>
>
>
I am particularly wondering about the fairness or ethics of part of the group passing on contributions by the failing of the group.
I have taken part in many such courses and luckily the issue never arose in any of the groups I was part of. Thinking about it, I have mixed feelings about the situation the failing students (in this scenario) find themselves in.
On the one hand, you could say the failing students did not contribute enough to the report for them to pass the course. On the other hand, placing yourself in the failing students' shoes, their contributions are used to pass the other part of the group.
Concrete questions:
>
> From a supervisor's point of view, should only those parts written by the passing students be considered to grade them so they don't fare on the work of the failing students?
>
>
>
This is almost impossible, you would first have to consider all the work (how else do your know some students won't pass?) then *unconsider* (if that's even a thing) part of it.
One option would be to either pass or fail the entire group, but that might be unfair on the hard-working group members (who do enough to pass if they were in a group of people who as hard as them).
>
> From the failing students' points of view, it might seem unfair because their work is used to pass the others. Should those having received a failing grade be entitled to any compensation on the grounds that they did some work?
>
>
>
I'd compare it with starting a company, suppose three people build a company, two people do 40% of the work each, the other does the remaining 20%. While any two people in this case do over 50% of the work, I don't think they can just decide to *dump* the other person (this might depend on how the company was founded, but it seems unethical).
**How this type of assignment works in my experience**
A group of students is assigned a problem for which they need to write a report. The students get a list of requirements and it is up to them to divide the work and make sure everyone does their part.
If a student does very little work, the others can report that so a solution can be found (student has to make up for lack of work or quits the course). It's mostly encouraged to report bad group dynamics early so something can be done about it (that becomes harder as the project progresses).
The projects often have a tutor assigned to them, sometimes academic staff, sometimes a (more) senior student. Students also review their peers on how they felt the others participated. The tutor advises the one(s) responsible for grading the reports. Based on the report, the tutor's advice and the report itself, each student gets a grade (according to some rubric).
The courses I have in mind are mainly aimed at this report. The report will be the main deliverable and make up over 50% of the course's grade. The remaining part of the grade is made up by a combination of individual work and other group deliverables (e.g. presentations or computer code).<issue_comment>username_1: I assume you're asking about a situation where different members of a group are given different amounts of credit for a report that they all worked on. (For a different assumption, see the next paragraph.) The only way I can see this happening is if the professor has, in addition to the report itself, some information about the individual students' contributions to the report, information that forms the basis of the variation in the grades. In such a case , the students who pass are not doing so on the basis of the work done by the failing students but rather on the basis of what the professor knows about their individual work.
Another possible (though less likely) interpretation of the question is that all the students in the group got the same grade on this report but their other work (other assignments, exams, class participation) were different, so that some passed the course and others failed. In this case the ones who passed didn't benefit any more from the failing students' work than the failing students benefited from the passing students' work. The difference would be only that this work was, for some but not all students, enough to bring their overall grade for the course up to the passing level.
(Contrary to what you might infer from this answer, I'm not a fan of group work, except insofar as it makes grading easier. But my concern about its fairness is not the concern raised in this question.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I run, with 5 other colleagues, a group project across 6 subjects.
The grading is part written project and part presentation with common parts such as introduction, quality of slides, effectiveness etc and subject specific parts such as referencing, tasks etc. The presentation is graded individually, looking for eye contact, professional language, delivery, enthusiasm, as well as individual questions.
There is also a peer evaluation element to get feedback from the group for each individual.
This works very well, as we have between 120 to 220 students depending on the semester and groups of 5 (we don't do groups of 6 as then the students do 1 student / subject and this does not contribute to all their subjects - they need all 6 subjects).
Some groups that do poorly on the written element, who then do poorly on the presentation as well can be borderline where some pass and some fail. This is influenced by the individual's personal performance in terms of peer, presentation and answering questions. The peer mark (as some will decry peer marking) is only 10% based on 3 contributing parts : the workshop, the hand-in and the presentation.
Upvotes: -1
|