date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2018/09/12
| 593
| 2,615
|
<issue_start>username_0: Many grant applications have page limits. They also often allow the writer to chose their preferred format for references.
Thus, I was wondering:
**What is a good concise referencing system that minimises the impact of references on page count?**
Equally, perhaps there are other considerations beyond being concise, such as readability or highlighting that an author on the paper is also an investigator on the grant. Or perhaps it's better to stick to the reference format dominant in your discipline?
My initial thoughts were:
* Use numbered references rather than author (date) format
* Use first author and then et al for other authors
* Use abbreviated journal names
* Show only first page number<issue_comment>username_1: Depending on whether the grant proposal is computer read only or not there is a possibility of hiding the References list from your MS Word (or some other word processing applications). Once clicked on, the References will pop up as a full list.
If the references have to be visible at all times, then the shortest way of referencing would be to use in-text numbered references. And in the end of the research proposal, you could change the font size/style to accommodate "more" space for your full references.
There are many different referencing styles (some more academic than others) but if the goal is to use up as little space as possible for the references then short form full references would work for you. A short googling session yielded this result for a short form citation style: <http://anton.cromba.ch/2016/02/07/a-minimal-citation-stylefor-grant-proposals/>
Another way of referencing to consider could be the under-line references on each page. That font style can be changed more before it begins to clash with the overall "style" of the document, making it possible to create very space efficient references. Although space efficient, some extra space is needed to accommodate the paragraph styles and readability.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Numbered references are probably the most concise format. With a page limit you are unlikely to need more than two digits for the reference number. Superscripted numbers1 or bracketed numbers [2] will mean you only need between one and four characters for the reference, that is from this3 to this [99].
Compare this with other styles that use names as they also then often need another indicator such as a year, and then you are already using more characters just for the year.
1 like this.
[2] or like this.
3 or this.
[99] you see where this is going...?
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/12
| 1,197
| 5,134
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a theoretical physics postdoc. A while ago I began collaborating with a certain group of experimentalists on a joint project. This group has a good reputation in the field and I regarded the collaboration as a good opportunity. They work at a different institution from me and I am the only person from my institution involved in the project. My boss knows about the project but was happy to let me pursue it without being involved.
I sent my collaborators some calculations a while ago, which I believed should more or less wrap up the project and bring us to a point where we could write it up. They were a long time getting back to me - so long in fact that I began to assume they had lost interest in the project - but then out of the blue they sent me a draft paper and asked for my comments.
On first reading the draft seemed good. It gives an accurate description of both the experimental and theoretical results from the project. But then I went back and read another recent paper from the same group (which I was not involved with). I then realised that several paragraphs from the draft paper were copied verbatim from this other recent paper.
The paragraphs in question are from the introduction and methods sections of the paper. The draft paper and the recently published one are closely related in subject matter and the experimental part of the work uses a lot of the same methods, so to some extent I can understand why they may have regarded it as efficient to simply copy certain parts of the text over. On the other hand, I feel uncomfortable about this degree of self-plagiarism.
Is it worth making a fuss about this? I am very much the junior partner in this collaboration and getting this paper in collaboration with this group would be helpful on my CV, at a time when I really need to find a job. So I have incentives not to rock the boat too much. On the other hand, I know some people regard self-plagiarism very badly and if my name is on the paper I will be as much to blame for it as anyone else.<issue_comment>username_1: You do not need to make a fuss, or mention "plagiarism". All you need to do is to recommend adding a reference to the copied paper for each paragraph in question. That is a legitimate review comment, proposing an improvement in the draft paper.
[<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506/andreas-blass), in a valuable comment, suggests something along the lines of "The following description of our methodology is taken from [17]" or "Our methodology is the same as in [17], described there as follows" is adequate, without needing to also put quotation marks around the quoted description.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the draft paper is addressing a new (though related to the previous work) research question, the background/introduction should be tailored to the new research question/objective, and as such needs to be original based on citation of a set of related previous works. However, the methodology may, for the most part, be the same as the methodology of the previously published work. In that case, it is worth stating that the details of the methodology have been published previously and to cite reference to the previous work and provide in the present paper a brief and pertinent summary of the methods. As per [this editorial](https://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(13)02813-7/abstract),
"simply referencing the earlier paper" regarding the methodology may suffice, yet providing the pertinent aspects of the methods with referencing to the earlier paper may be more useful.
By and large, as per [this article](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10805-009-9092-1), if a new academic work involves some form of "text recycling" from a previous work, there is a need to clearly acknowledge that through reference citation. Besides, "...being somewhat lazy not to have attempted to rephrase/rethink previously written passages," seems worth avoiding (ibid).
However, when communicating with your collaborators about the need to avoid "self-plagiarism", you need to be wary (as pointed out by @username_1) not to tend to tell them that they have committed plagiarism but provide your inputs and forward your suggestions on how you feel the draft work can be improved.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would say something like, “I’ve noticed some reviewers/journals reacting negatively to using text from previous work verbatim. Here, I have suggested a rewrite and citation to address that potential issue.” Then actually rewrite the paragraphs in question. If the original author was copying text, they were likely trying to write the paper quickly and would appreciate that you took the time.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: It's common to reuse text in a draft, especially when after all it will likely be similar whether it is rewritten from scratch or copied. I don't think it's a good approach because it affects the flow of the text, but I wouldn't mention it to the collaborator, I would just try to edit it into the same style.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/12
| 915
| 3,656
|
<issue_start>username_0: I found the following bibliography in a book:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lj9Iw.png)
Is there a website which generates this kind of references automatically, that is short references?
On google scholar there are only long references:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/WClQx.png)
---
EDIT: I tried to do it with endnote, but there is not the style that I want. I used all Nature styles.
Thank you so much for your time.<issue_comment>username_1: You do not need to make a fuss, or mention "plagiarism". All you need to do is to recommend adding a reference to the copied paper for each paragraph in question. That is a legitimate review comment, proposing an improvement in the draft paper.
[<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506/andreas-blass), in a valuable comment, suggests something along the lines of "The following description of our methodology is taken from [17]" or "Our methodology is the same as in [17], described there as follows" is adequate, without needing to also put quotation marks around the quoted description.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the draft paper is addressing a new (though related to the previous work) research question, the background/introduction should be tailored to the new research question/objective, and as such needs to be original based on citation of a set of related previous works. However, the methodology may, for the most part, be the same as the methodology of the previously published work. In that case, it is worth stating that the details of the methodology have been published previously and to cite reference to the previous work and provide in the present paper a brief and pertinent summary of the methods. As per [this editorial](https://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(13)02813-7/abstract),
"simply referencing the earlier paper" regarding the methodology may suffice, yet providing the pertinent aspects of the methods with referencing to the earlier paper may be more useful.
By and large, as per [this article](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10805-009-9092-1), if a new academic work involves some form of "text recycling" from a previous work, there is a need to clearly acknowledge that through reference citation. Besides, "...being somewhat lazy not to have attempted to rephrase/rethink previously written passages," seems worth avoiding (ibid).
However, when communicating with your collaborators about the need to avoid "self-plagiarism", you need to be wary (as pointed out by @username_1) not to tend to tell them that they have committed plagiarism but provide your inputs and forward your suggestions on how you feel the draft work can be improved.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would say something like, “I’ve noticed some reviewers/journals reacting negatively to using text from previous work verbatim. Here, I have suggested a rewrite and citation to address that potential issue.” Then actually rewrite the paragraphs in question. If the original author was copying text, they were likely trying to write the paper quickly and would appreciate that you took the time.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: It's common to reuse text in a draft, especially when after all it will likely be similar whether it is rewritten from scratch or copied. I don't think it's a good approach because it affects the flow of the text, but I wouldn't mention it to the collaborator, I would just try to edit it into the same style.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/12
| 536
| 2,392
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student of computer science ( senior year ). I have worked on problems given by my senior collegues in the past. Now I am at a stage where I have to pick a new research problem. I have tried to read as much as possible about particular topic, but still facing difficulty in picking a new problem. I have find out few research problem, but they seems to special cases. I am good with solving special case not a broad problem.
Question : Should I pick a research problem with broad or narrow one (special case )<issue_comment>username_1: A PhD is about specializing in many regards. Your dissertation should lead to a specialization.
I think you will also find it much easier to write about a narrow question as opposed to a broad one. Choosing too broad of a research question is actually one of the common reasons I see for PhD students languishing in the "candidacy" phase of the PhD. They can give a good overview in their prospectus/proposal, but then cannot pin down the specifics to a point where they actually can write a focused dissertation. Unless you are going to write a dissertation that is so revolutionary that it can encompass and change a broad discipline, I am of the opinion that a narrower research question is far more likely to lead to a successful dissertation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Real broad/general problems are of course nice, because they apply to many situations. However, what students consider broad/general problems are often ill defined problems or problems that would require an unreasonable amount of time and resources to answer. So beware, that your broad problem is really a broad problem and a realistic problem.
After that is just a matter of finding the most interesting problem you can come up with, that is solvable with the time and resources you have available. (Remember to multiply your best estimate of the time it will take by two.)
That is very broad advise, but we cannot give you more detailed help on that as we don't know your skill level, the resources you have, the time you have available, and most of us are not an expert in your field. Your advisor on the other hand (should) know all that. So come up with a couple of problems, list the pros and cons, your estimate of the time and resources needed to complete these, and ask your advisor for his or her opinion.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/12
| 838
| 3,535
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first year BSc student in pure mathematics. I like to continue my PhD studies in Sweden, directly after BSc or otherwise after having MSc. Unfortunately, not only free education for international MSc students has been stopped several years ago but also the living cost in Sweden is very very high. Only leaves PhD studies as a final choice as they pay for tuition fees and living expenditures.
I have heard that the only way to get a PhD admission (with scholarship) in a some university in Sweden is to do MSc in some Sweden university so that the professors will 'know' you; in other words, contrary to US or Canada, they prefer to know students in their classes than reading about them from the recommendation letters sent from other countries.
A friend of mine, planted this wishful idea in my mind that if I accomplish (much?) more in my BSc time that PhD students do required for their graduation (i.e. good published papers), along with other things [recommendation letters, GPA, etc] so it may make me more appealing candidate than a person whose professor knows him/her personally. [Q.1] Is this true? And if so, [Q.2] how much 'better' than minimum-required-papers-to-be-published-for-a-PhD-to-be-graduated I need to do? Is there any measure for 'better' papers at all and what are they?
PS I am sure a person who solves <NAME>, attaining an academic position let alone PhD is trivial; so obviously sky is the limit. I am wondering about the *minimum* of "impressive results" in research (capability to be a productive researcher) one needs to do for a guaranteed PhD position which should be achievable during 3-4 years time that I have.<issue_comment>username_1: A PhD is about specializing in many regards. Your dissertation should lead to a specialization.
I think you will also find it much easier to write about a narrow question as opposed to a broad one. Choosing too broad of a research question is actually one of the common reasons I see for PhD students languishing in the "candidacy" phase of the PhD. They can give a good overview in their prospectus/proposal, but then cannot pin down the specifics to a point where they actually can write a focused dissertation. Unless you are going to write a dissertation that is so revolutionary that it can encompass and change a broad discipline, I am of the opinion that a narrower research question is far more likely to lead to a successful dissertation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Real broad/general problems are of course nice, because they apply to many situations. However, what students consider broad/general problems are often ill defined problems or problems that would require an unreasonable amount of time and resources to answer. So beware, that your broad problem is really a broad problem and a realistic problem.
After that is just a matter of finding the most interesting problem you can come up with, that is solvable with the time and resources you have available. (Remember to multiply your best estimate of the time it will take by two.)
That is very broad advise, but we cannot give you more detailed help on that as we don't know your skill level, the resources you have, the time you have available, and most of us are not an expert in your field. Your advisor on the other hand (should) know all that. So come up with a couple of problems, list the pros and cons, your estimate of the time and resources needed to complete these, and ask your advisor for his or her opinion.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/12
| 458
| 2,005
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is age a hindrance of getting acceptance in a PhD program?
For instance, what if a student applies at the age of 45 for an admission?<issue_comment>username_1: A PhD is about specializing in many regards. Your dissertation should lead to a specialization.
I think you will also find it much easier to write about a narrow question as opposed to a broad one. Choosing too broad of a research question is actually one of the common reasons I see for PhD students languishing in the "candidacy" phase of the PhD. They can give a good overview in their prospectus/proposal, but then cannot pin down the specifics to a point where they actually can write a focused dissertation. Unless you are going to write a dissertation that is so revolutionary that it can encompass and change a broad discipline, I am of the opinion that a narrower research question is far more likely to lead to a successful dissertation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Real broad/general problems are of course nice, because they apply to many situations. However, what students consider broad/general problems are often ill defined problems or problems that would require an unreasonable amount of time and resources to answer. So beware, that your broad problem is really a broad problem and a realistic problem.
After that is just a matter of finding the most interesting problem you can come up with, that is solvable with the time and resources you have available. (Remember to multiply your best estimate of the time it will take by two.)
That is very broad advise, but we cannot give you more detailed help on that as we don't know your skill level, the resources you have, the time you have available, and most of us are not an expert in your field. Your advisor on the other hand (should) know all that. So come up with a couple of problems, list the pros and cons, your estimate of the time and resources needed to complete these, and ask your advisor for his or her opinion.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/13
| 4,800
| 20,649
|
<issue_start>username_0: A reviewer declines to review a paper because he wants to be paid. Some time later, this reviewer submits a paper to the journal (or to another journal who's aware of what happened – very possible with today's editorial management systems). How should the journal handle this?
Possible options:
1. Pretend we didn't notice and review as normal.
2. Write him an email to tell him we're aware of it, but are reviewing the paper anyway because we're a magnanimous journal.
3. Charge him a submission fee which we then use to pay the reviewers for that paper only.
4. Charge him a submission fee which we then use to pay the reviewers for that paper only, plus some extras which we use to pay the editor.
5. Desk reject because "our reviewers are on strike because they're not paid so we can't find reviewers for your paper".
I'm concerned taking retributive action will come across as petty and / or lead to a lose–lose situation. However, not taking retributive action doesn't feel right either – if the reviewer is not willing to review unless paid, then it's hard to expect other people to review (or handle) his paper unless paid either.
If it matters, only the first part really happened: The reviewer used the "decline to review" button with a reason that went something like: “Sorry, I don't review unless I'm paid. Feel free to contact me again to discuss rates”. Still, this decline reason is logged in the EMS, so it can happen in the future.<issue_comment>username_1: First of all: Is there a rule that you need to be available as reviewer if you want to publish in that specific journal? People decline reviews for all sorts of reasons (often lack of time, which may or may not be the case), and I never heard that somebody got "punished" for that.
Your reviewer wanted to get paid. It is very unusual to pay reviewers, but on the other hand, it is not per se unreasonable or offensive to ask for compensation for work.
I would see it this way: Either you establish a general rule that authors must be available as reviewers or you accept that some people do not review papers (although they publish).
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: The editors of a journal should be professional at all times. Like in any part of life, in academia there will also from time to time be annoying individuals. Don't get down to their level.
Your point 5. would be simply acting out of vengeance. Regarding points 3. & 4. – is a fee a regular thing for this journal? Because if not, it would be a vengeful misconduct. If there is a fee, is it usually used to pay the reviewers? If yes, why wasn't this author paid for his review? If not, why are you considering an exception? This won't be a one-time incident: if you write again to those reviewers, they will want to be paid again, because you set a precedent. If they tell colleagues they were paid, you will be short of reviewers because everyone will want to be paid and will refuse to review otherwise.
Point 1. is the only right thing to do; if you want to be malicious, maybe also 2., but that's still a bit unprofessional to me.
In general, the author's and reviewer's role (even for the same person) should be separated. Being a reviewer is mostly voluntary, and it's just agreed/expected in the community to act as a reviewer from time to time. You cannot force anyone to do it. But you are obliged (as an editor of a publisher's journal) to consider for publication papers that you receive. Just get over this, and maybe consider avoiding working with this person as a reviewer or other such roles in the future. But don't dismiss him as an author. Don't be vengeful.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The policies of any journal should be public and consistently applied. Having a policy that you have to be a reviewer before you can be reviewed is irrational, I think. There are many rational reasons to refuse any particular paper for review. But if you have a policy that the complete refusal to review for any reason, including that you want to be paid, could lead to desk rejection is a different matter.
One large problem here is how to state such a policy so that it isn't too narrow. A policy that complete or consistent refusal is not acceptable is difficult to state specifically. It needs, in my view, to be stated as an expectation. *We expect that our authors are available to review the works of others.* That is (approximately) what you want, but applying it too rigidly is a mistake.
But then, the question arises about how to handle such situations in practice.
Actually, the journal should handle a problem like this much earlier than the situation described. It may be that the "reviewer" just doesn't know how the game is played and that reviewing is seen as a contribution to one's peers. To be a professional is to offer this service and, by cooperating, others will, hopefully, do the same.
Therefore, send a letter to the person when they first refuse for this reason, explaining the process and the fact that reviewers are never paid and that paying them would increase the costs to readers as well, given that there are more reviews done than articles published.
At that time, let them know that, while it is possible to refuse any given paper for review, if they refuse to participate in the process at all, then their future work won't be accepted as a matter of policy.
I have refused to review papers for a variety of reasons, often because I felt I didn't know enough of the subject to do it justice. No one should have to make reviewing their first priority. But if they refuse to participate in a society as constituted they won't be welcome in it.
They are, of course, welcome to work for a more rational system if they like. The current system has many practices that should be addressed, but we have, so far, presented only partial solutions, and most have their own negative consequences.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Any potential reviewer with appropriate expertise who declines to review for a journal is effectively saying "my time is worth more than that". This individual is trying to find an equitable middle ground. Sure, paid reviewership very uncommon and totally outside the norms of academic review, but it's completely indefensible to take vengeance on this person because he feels that journals don't appropriately value reviewers' time.
Anything other than accepting the submission and reviewing it like any other is petty, discriminative, and potentially damaging for your journal's reputation. I know I would have serious reservations about submitting or subscribing to a journal that rejected papers irrespective of their content and based solely on personal vendettas with the author (option #5).
Peer review isn't a mechanism to get back at people.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: I'll go a little outside the box here and say:
You should pay him and all the other reviewers for reviews.
While certainly paying the reviewers is not a common practice nowadays **does not mean it should not be.**
In the current world, where each and every scientists is needlessly overloaded with bureaucracy, the amount of students in classes, numbers of those classes and students one has to mentor grows bigger and bigger, and the competition for the very survival - the grant money, requires more and more effort and submissions and work - time is a very precious resource.
It therefore is completely reasonable that a person is not willing to give that resource away for free.
Academic publishing is already one of the best ratios of income to money invested of all businesses in the world.
Maybe the journals could do the right thing here, and give something back to the scientific community. username_2 which produces the product they sell and give it to them for free.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: A journal accepts articles because it depends on publishing articles.
People don't pay for publishing by reviewing.
People review for whatever reasons and are paid with fame or a good feeling.
There is no connection between reviewing a paper and submitting one.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: As a reviewer, I would be happy to treat this paper just like any other.
I consider that I do get paid to review papers, in the sense that my employer expects that I do a small amount of reviewing. If this person is refusing to review on the grounds that reviewers don't get paid, perhaps they don't currently have a position where reviewing is encouraged.
People who can't use work time to review (perhaps because they are outside of academia) should still be able to publish papers, and IMO they shouldn't be expected to review in return - though of course they can still be asked!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I agree with the answers that say that it's unethical to single out a submitter for retaliation because they annoyed you when you asked them to review. If you want reviewing papers to be a requirement for submitting papers, then you need to have a clearly articulated policy that says so up front. This is the case irrespective of whether they refuse because they want to be paid, or for some other reason.
The question you need to ask yourself is, are you sure you want such a policy? Crafting such a policy in a way that would be fair to all people involved would be hard. You have to answer questions like, how many review requests can you refuse and still remain in good standing? Are there valid reasons that might excuse a refusal? How do you verify them? How do you ensure a fair distribution of review requests? What do you do about people who want to submit but have never been asked to review? The list goes on and on.
Equally importantly, are you sure you want people writing reviews grudgingly? Reviewers who are only doing the review because it's a requirement for getting published are likely to do a mediocre job. You can expect such people to put forth the minimal effort required to meet whatever standard you set. Some won't do even that, and so now you have to find a way to review the reviews. The end result is likely to be that the quality of peer review in your journal will go down because poor reviewers will no longer be self-selecting out of the reviewing pool.
It stinks that some people free-ride on the peer review system, but any effort to punish them or force them to participate is likely to backfire. The best thing you can do is to treat them like any other author and leave it to community norms to encourage people to do their share of reviewing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: **Follow the journal’s publicly advertised policies.**
I assume that the journal has a web page with a text titled “Instructions for authors” or “Journal policies” or something similar. This is the place where the journal indicates that the journal will not accept already published papers, double submissions, papers that aren’t typeset in Comic Sans font, or whatever. The journal is free to make its own rules about what papers it is willing to consider, but needs to advertise them to prospective authors, since it is unprofessional to waste people’s time.
If the journal’s advertised policy is to refuse to review papers from authors who previously asked for money to do a review for the journal (or something more general that includes that situation as a special case), then you not only can, but in fact you *must* follow that policy and let the author know you cannot consider their submission.
Otherwise, you have no legitimate reason to treat the submission any differently from any other one.
As for whether it would make sense for the journal to have such a policy: well, no. Like others who posted answers this seems terribly pointless and petty to me.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: All options except 1) and 2) seem completely unprofessional to me. 5) is, strictly speaking, a terrible lie. You imagine that the author will figure out that you are being sarcastic rather than actually dishonest, but they may not. 4) is perhaps yet more unethical: as an editor of the journal you punish the author by paying...*yourself*??
As for 3), you are offering a selected individual author the right to pay for their refereeing -- what if they take you up on the offer now and in the future? What if you get other offers by authors to pay for their refereeing? How will you maintain fairness and prevent conflicts of interest? What a mess.
Lots of people turn down referee requests all the time, generally without giving reasons or giving reasons that don't really explain anything ("Sorry, I'm too busy.") This particular academic seems a bit naive about how the refereeing process works and that came out in their reply. But they'll learn if they stick around. You could take it upon yourself to offer friendly advice -- i.e., some version of 2), although the text you give reads as pretty snarky to me -- or just assume that the data point of your experience will be filed away.
Selectively enforcing what you perceive to be ungenerous refereeing practices just doesn't make sense to me because you have so little information about who the good and bad referees actually are. Don't you think there are much more senior academics that refuse most or all requests because they are "too busy" or pawn them off on their students (possibly without giving credit, which I feel is *really* problematic) or spend way too long with requests gumming up the works or contribute totally superficial, unhelpful reports or only contribute reports to settle their own scores or......There is way too much here for any one editor or journal to wade into, I think.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_11: I think it's *tremendously hypocritical* of the author to submit to a journal knowing other reviewers will do uncompensated labor for his work, but not to do the same for theirs.
That being said, "being a good person" is not typically a submission requirement.
Option 1 is really the only appropriate option. All of the others seem vindictive and petty, and if I found out a journal was doing that, even if it wasn't to me, I would be much less likely to submit to that journal in the future, consider reviewing/joining the editorial board, etc.
The potential damage to your journal's reputation isn't worth it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: I don't know that an editorial decision to not accept the paper is necessary here. I also don't think sarcasm is appropriate.
I would accept this paper for review, and send the author a strong email suggesting that future submissions will not be welcome if he or she agrees to participate in the publishing model of this particular journal.
This way at least the author will shut up about reasons for turning down a review request, and just say "I'm too busy".
Alternatively, if this seems too harsh, I wouldn't say the papers are unwelcome, but I would clearly let the author know that to submit a paper to a journal for which he has philosophical objection to reviewing for seems like hypocrisy.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: **Variation of #2? Wouldn't go any further than that.**
Deviating from your normal review guidelines is unprofessional, and it's possibly an ethical issue if it ends up affecting the published content. If the paper is good enough for review and there is normally no fee, then send it for review.
However, given his qualms about unpaid reviewers, it might be reasonable to warn him that he's submitting to a journal that does not pay its reviewers. It is entirely possible he may want to withdraw his paper due to ethical concerns over your practices.
This may be unprofessional in some eyes, but it's the only ethical way to needle him over his hypocrisy (he's essentially demanding a service he refuses to provide)---and the communication should remain entirely confidential regardless of his response.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: I agree with the many other who think #1 is the way to go. Or rather, a variant that I'd call #0: there shouldn't be any pretending you didn't notice. Acceptance of a paper should IMHO solely depend on scientific merits and content (includes whether the subject fits scope of the journal) plus possibly pre-specified fees. Pre-specified fees could also be a payment in kind, i.e. saying that for every manuscript you submit, you have to do so many reviews.
As for reasons not to review, I don't see how "I cannot afford to put in the time" is worse than saying "I don't have the time" or just not giving any reason. If you consider "I cannot put in the time without being paid" not a good reason, then surely neither is no reason a good reason.
---
In my field, academics are usually employed. And the employment contracts I had in academia always considered not only writing up research into manuscript form but also reviewing as part of the professional duties. In that sense, **I've been paid for the vast majority of reviews I've done**. Just not by the journal. BTW, there are macro-economic estimates of these costs (STM report 2012, p. 21 last paragraph
If I were journal editor receiving such a request, I'd be tempted to say "Please send us your/your employer's billing address and VAT number otherwise we cannot prepare a reverse invoice. If you act self-employed, we'll need your VAT number or VAT exemption and tax number. We'll then be considering what we can offer."
And I do see the point that a publication system that pays reviewers, collects fees for submission and reading and pays out royalties to the authors (or their employer, in case of employment contracts) may result in almost a zero-sum game in terms of money (even if we'd divide all the profits of Elsevier, Springer and Wiley) - at the additional cost of huge burocracy. But it would lead to an immense increase in common academic knowledge about international tax rules... Even though you can count me as one of the very few people who are not immediately scared off by the fact that receiving fees does cause tax payment and reporting duties, I'm not sure the gain in fairness of even an ideally fair system of those fees is worth the hassle.
---
I'm freelancer now, but still have some projects that are very close to academia, and still do some research. Let me add a point of view from that perspective, because that's where **I can see me being the reviewer in your question**. I'd have explained, though, that as opposed to people being paid by grant money I'm freelancer and do not have any project covering the review of your manuscript - and that at present I cannot afford volunteering the time for the review. Taking the scenario further, as an author getting response #2 I'd answer that I feel at least as magnanimous as I'm not paid by any project for preparing the manuscript\*.
I'd like to point out that I'm fine with the current system if there is a project that at least somewhat covers these activities (I do have one such research project right now). And I'm fine with volunteering time even if there is no such project, but within limits.
But I do have to say that I have some disquieting experience with academics on permanent employment contracts who do not see any more the difference between having and not having an employment contract. (If I'm the one in question, that's fine - I can deal with that professionally. But I do get upset if this attitude hits former students who are out of job and are expected to work for free.) And that alarm is triggered by seeing many responses here on academia.sx that claim pretty much noone is paid for reviewing when my estimate is that the vast majority of academia.sx users do have academic employment contracts which include publication duties (please comment that you are not paid by projects if that's the case so I can update my world-view).
\* I'd rationalize to myself some of that time as going into marketing. And in fact, I would not try to haggle for payment, but do foresee me haggling with journals whether if I volunteer my time for writing the manuscript, they could throw in open access. Or leave me more rights than usual.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_15: Why not
6. Reject his paper, informing him that your journal's QA process works by having its potential authors do unpaid peer reviews, and hence, willingness to do unpaid peer reviews is a condition for being an author.
Only do this if this is actually your policy, and you uphold it strictly.
Other than that, only your first option seems reasonable. Never make it personal.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/13
| 4,519
| 19,424
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied for a phd position in a Austrian university. Then I got a mail which said "We will soon contact you for an interview" and I have been waiting for four days now.
Is it appropriate if I ask an update about the interview?<issue_comment>username_1: First of all: Is there a rule that you need to be available as reviewer if you want to publish in that specific journal? People decline reviews for all sorts of reasons (often lack of time, which may or may not be the case), and I never heard that somebody got "punished" for that.
Your reviewer wanted to get paid. It is very unusual to pay reviewers, but on the other hand, it is not per se unreasonable or offensive to ask for compensation for work.
I would see it this way: Either you establish a general rule that authors must be available as reviewers or you accept that some people do not review papers (although they publish).
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: The editors of a journal should be professional at all times. Like in any part of life, in academia there will also from time to time be annoying individuals. Don't get down to their level.
Your point 5. would be simply acting out of vengeance. Regarding points 3. & 4. – is a fee a regular thing for this journal? Because if not, it would be a vengeful misconduct. If there is a fee, is it usually used to pay the reviewers? If yes, why wasn't this author paid for his review? If not, why are you considering an exception? This won't be a one-time incident: if you write again to those reviewers, they will want to be paid again, because you set a precedent. If they tell colleagues they were paid, you will be short of reviewers because everyone will want to be paid and will refuse to review otherwise.
Point 1. is the only right thing to do; if you want to be malicious, maybe also 2., but that's still a bit unprofessional to me.
In general, the author's and reviewer's role (even for the same person) should be separated. Being a reviewer is mostly voluntary, and it's just agreed/expected in the community to act as a reviewer from time to time. You cannot force anyone to do it. But you are obliged (as an editor of a publisher's journal) to consider for publication papers that you receive. Just get over this, and maybe consider avoiding working with this person as a reviewer or other such roles in the future. But don't dismiss him as an author. Don't be vengeful.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The policies of any journal should be public and consistently applied. Having a policy that you have to be a reviewer before you can be reviewed is irrational, I think. There are many rational reasons to refuse any particular paper for review. But if you have a policy that the complete refusal to review for any reason, including that you want to be paid, could lead to desk rejection is a different matter.
One large problem here is how to state such a policy so that it isn't too narrow. A policy that complete or consistent refusal is not acceptable is difficult to state specifically. It needs, in my view, to be stated as an expectation. *We expect that our authors are available to review the works of others.* That is (approximately) what you want, but applying it too rigidly is a mistake.
But then, the question arises about how to handle such situations in practice.
Actually, the journal should handle a problem like this much earlier than the situation described. It may be that the "reviewer" just doesn't know how the game is played and that reviewing is seen as a contribution to one's peers. To be a professional is to offer this service and, by cooperating, others will, hopefully, do the same.
Therefore, send a letter to the person when they first refuse for this reason, explaining the process and the fact that reviewers are never paid and that paying them would increase the costs to readers as well, given that there are more reviews done than articles published.
At that time, let them know that, while it is possible to refuse any given paper for review, if they refuse to participate in the process at all, then their future work won't be accepted as a matter of policy.
I have refused to review papers for a variety of reasons, often because I felt I didn't know enough of the subject to do it justice. No one should have to make reviewing their first priority. But if they refuse to participate in a society as constituted they won't be welcome in it.
They are, of course, welcome to work for a more rational system if they like. The current system has many practices that should be addressed, but we have, so far, presented only partial solutions, and most have their own negative consequences.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Any potential reviewer with appropriate expertise who declines to review for a journal is effectively saying "my time is worth more than that". This individual is trying to find an equitable middle ground. Sure, paid reviewership very uncommon and totally outside the norms of academic review, but it's completely indefensible to take vengeance on this person because he feels that journals don't appropriately value reviewers' time.
Anything other than accepting the submission and reviewing it like any other is petty, discriminative, and potentially damaging for your journal's reputation. I know I would have serious reservations about submitting or subscribing to a journal that rejected papers irrespective of their content and based solely on personal vendettas with the author (option #5).
Peer review isn't a mechanism to get back at people.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: I'll go a little outside the box here and say:
You should pay him and all the other reviewers for reviews.
While certainly paying the reviewers is not a common practice nowadays **does not mean it should not be.**
In the current world, where each and every scientists is needlessly overloaded with bureaucracy, the amount of students in classes, numbers of those classes and students one has to mentor grows bigger and bigger, and the competition for the very survival - the grant money, requires more and more effort and submissions and work - time is a very precious resource.
It therefore is completely reasonable that a person is not willing to give that resource away for free.
Academic publishing is already one of the best ratios of income to money invested of all businesses in the world.
Maybe the journals could do the right thing here, and give something back to the scientific community. username_2 which produces the product they sell and give it to them for free.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: A journal accepts articles because it depends on publishing articles.
People don't pay for publishing by reviewing.
People review for whatever reasons and are paid with fame or a good feeling.
There is no connection between reviewing a paper and submitting one.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: As a reviewer, I would be happy to treat this paper just like any other.
I consider that I do get paid to review papers, in the sense that my employer expects that I do a small amount of reviewing. If this person is refusing to review on the grounds that reviewers don't get paid, perhaps they don't currently have a position where reviewing is encouraged.
People who can't use work time to review (perhaps because they are outside of academia) should still be able to publish papers, and IMO they shouldn't be expected to review in return - though of course they can still be asked!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I agree with the answers that say that it's unethical to single out a submitter for retaliation because they annoyed you when you asked them to review. If you want reviewing papers to be a requirement for submitting papers, then you need to have a clearly articulated policy that says so up front. This is the case irrespective of whether they refuse because they want to be paid, or for some other reason.
The question you need to ask yourself is, are you sure you want such a policy? Crafting such a policy in a way that would be fair to all people involved would be hard. You have to answer questions like, how many review requests can you refuse and still remain in good standing? Are there valid reasons that might excuse a refusal? How do you verify them? How do you ensure a fair distribution of review requests? What do you do about people who want to submit but have never been asked to review? The list goes on and on.
Equally importantly, are you sure you want people writing reviews grudgingly? Reviewers who are only doing the review because it's a requirement for getting published are likely to do a mediocre job. You can expect such people to put forth the minimal effort required to meet whatever standard you set. Some won't do even that, and so now you have to find a way to review the reviews. The end result is likely to be that the quality of peer review in your journal will go down because poor reviewers will no longer be self-selecting out of the reviewing pool.
It stinks that some people free-ride on the peer review system, but any effort to punish them or force them to participate is likely to backfire. The best thing you can do is to treat them like any other author and leave it to community norms to encourage people to do their share of reviewing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: **Follow the journal’s publicly advertised policies.**
I assume that the journal has a web page with a text titled “Instructions for authors” or “Journal policies” or something similar. This is the place where the journal indicates that the journal will not accept already published papers, double submissions, papers that aren’t typeset in Comic Sans font, or whatever. The journal is free to make its own rules about what papers it is willing to consider, but needs to advertise them to prospective authors, since it is unprofessional to waste people’s time.
If the journal’s advertised policy is to refuse to review papers from authors who previously asked for money to do a review for the journal (or something more general that includes that situation as a special case), then you not only can, but in fact you *must* follow that policy and let the author know you cannot consider their submission.
Otherwise, you have no legitimate reason to treat the submission any differently from any other one.
As for whether it would make sense for the journal to have such a policy: well, no. Like others who posted answers this seems terribly pointless and petty to me.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: All options except 1) and 2) seem completely unprofessional to me. 5) is, strictly speaking, a terrible lie. You imagine that the author will figure out that you are being sarcastic rather than actually dishonest, but they may not. 4) is perhaps yet more unethical: as an editor of the journal you punish the author by paying...*yourself*??
As for 3), you are offering a selected individual author the right to pay for their refereeing -- what if they take you up on the offer now and in the future? What if you get other offers by authors to pay for their refereeing? How will you maintain fairness and prevent conflicts of interest? What a mess.
Lots of people turn down referee requests all the time, generally without giving reasons or giving reasons that don't really explain anything ("Sorry, I'm too busy.") This particular academic seems a bit naive about how the refereeing process works and that came out in their reply. But they'll learn if they stick around. You could take it upon yourself to offer friendly advice -- i.e., some version of 2), although the text you give reads as pretty snarky to me -- or just assume that the data point of your experience will be filed away.
Selectively enforcing what you perceive to be ungenerous refereeing practices just doesn't make sense to me because you have so little information about who the good and bad referees actually are. Don't you think there are much more senior academics that refuse most or all requests because they are "too busy" or pawn them off on their students (possibly without giving credit, which I feel is *really* problematic) or spend way too long with requests gumming up the works or contribute totally superficial, unhelpful reports or only contribute reports to settle their own scores or......There is way too much here for any one editor or journal to wade into, I think.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_11: I think it's *tremendously hypocritical* of the author to submit to a journal knowing other reviewers will do uncompensated labor for his work, but not to do the same for theirs.
That being said, "being a good person" is not typically a submission requirement.
Option 1 is really the only appropriate option. All of the others seem vindictive and petty, and if I found out a journal was doing that, even if it wasn't to me, I would be much less likely to submit to that journal in the future, consider reviewing/joining the editorial board, etc.
The potential damage to your journal's reputation isn't worth it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: I don't know that an editorial decision to not accept the paper is necessary here. I also don't think sarcasm is appropriate.
I would accept this paper for review, and send the author a strong email suggesting that future submissions will not be welcome if he or she agrees to participate in the publishing model of this particular journal.
This way at least the author will shut up about reasons for turning down a review request, and just say "I'm too busy".
Alternatively, if this seems too harsh, I wouldn't say the papers are unwelcome, but I would clearly let the author know that to submit a paper to a journal for which he has philosophical objection to reviewing for seems like hypocrisy.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: **Variation of #2? Wouldn't go any further than that.**
Deviating from your normal review guidelines is unprofessional, and it's possibly an ethical issue if it ends up affecting the published content. If the paper is good enough for review and there is normally no fee, then send it for review.
However, given his qualms about unpaid reviewers, it might be reasonable to warn him that he's submitting to a journal that does not pay its reviewers. It is entirely possible he may want to withdraw his paper due to ethical concerns over your practices.
This may be unprofessional in some eyes, but it's the only ethical way to needle him over his hypocrisy (he's essentially demanding a service he refuses to provide)---and the communication should remain entirely confidential regardless of his response.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: I agree with the many other who think #1 is the way to go. Or rather, a variant that I'd call #0: there shouldn't be any pretending you didn't notice. Acceptance of a paper should IMHO solely depend on scientific merits and content (includes whether the subject fits scope of the journal) plus possibly pre-specified fees. Pre-specified fees could also be a payment in kind, i.e. saying that for every manuscript you submit, you have to do so many reviews.
As for reasons not to review, I don't see how "I cannot afford to put in the time" is worse than saying "I don't have the time" or just not giving any reason. If you consider "I cannot put in the time without being paid" not a good reason, then surely neither is no reason a good reason.
---
In my field, academics are usually employed. And the employment contracts I had in academia always considered not only writing up research into manuscript form but also reviewing as part of the professional duties. In that sense, **I've been paid for the vast majority of reviews I've done**. Just not by the journal. BTW, there are macro-economic estimates of these costs (STM report 2012, p. 21 last paragraph
If I were journal editor receiving such a request, I'd be tempted to say "Please send us your/your employer's billing address and VAT number otherwise we cannot prepare a reverse invoice. If you act self-employed, we'll need your VAT number or VAT exemption and tax number. We'll then be considering what we can offer."
And I do see the point that a publication system that pays reviewers, collects fees for submission and reading and pays out royalties to the authors (or their employer, in case of employment contracts) may result in almost a zero-sum game in terms of money (even if we'd divide all the profits of Elsevier, Springer and Wiley) - at the additional cost of huge burocracy. But it would lead to an immense increase in common academic knowledge about international tax rules... Even though you can count me as one of the very few people who are not immediately scared off by the fact that receiving fees does cause tax payment and reporting duties, I'm not sure the gain in fairness of even an ideally fair system of those fees is worth the hassle.
---
I'm freelancer now, but still have some projects that are very close to academia, and still do some research. Let me add a point of view from that perspective, because that's where **I can see me being the reviewer in your question**. I'd have explained, though, that as opposed to people being paid by grant money I'm freelancer and do not have any project covering the review of your manuscript - and that at present I cannot afford volunteering the time for the review. Taking the scenario further, as an author getting response #2 I'd answer that I feel at least as magnanimous as I'm not paid by any project for preparing the manuscript\*.
I'd like to point out that I'm fine with the current system if there is a project that at least somewhat covers these activities (I do have one such research project right now). And I'm fine with volunteering time even if there is no such project, but within limits.
But I do have to say that I have some disquieting experience with academics on permanent employment contracts who do not see any more the difference between having and not having an employment contract. (If I'm the one in question, that's fine - I can deal with that professionally. But I do get upset if this attitude hits former students who are out of job and are expected to work for free.) And that alarm is triggered by seeing many responses here on academia.sx that claim pretty much noone is paid for reviewing when my estimate is that the vast majority of academia.sx users do have academic employment contracts which include publication duties (please comment that you are not paid by projects if that's the case so I can update my world-view).
\* I'd rationalize to myself some of that time as going into marketing. And in fact, I would not try to haggle for payment, but do foresee me haggling with journals whether if I volunteer my time for writing the manuscript, they could throw in open access. Or leave me more rights than usual.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_15: Why not
6. Reject his paper, informing him that your journal's QA process works by having its potential authors do unpaid peer reviews, and hence, willingness to do unpaid peer reviews is a condition for being an author.
Only do this if this is actually your policy, and you uphold it strictly.
Other than that, only your first option seems reasonable. Never make it personal.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/13
| 757
| 3,271
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently saw a paper (biological sciences, genomics) that had such poor figures that made consider if I as a reviewer could have suggested rejection based on that. Issues in said paper:
i. 3D-barpplots;
ii. Multi-layers 3D donut [plots](http://6.anychart.com/products/anychart/docs/users-guide/img/Samples/sample-multi-series-3d-doughnut-chart.png) ;
iii. red-green color schemes;
iv. inconsistent plots with poor labels.
This goes on for the 8 main figures, add nothing to the paper, and is so distracting that makes reading it and interpreting the results quite difficult. I assume the authors (two) know how to make decent figures because in some panels they used stacked barplots which in my view would have been used as replacement for the 3D donut plots.
So in an hypothetical scenario, is it ethical or acceptable for a reviewer to recommend rejection of a paper because of poor figures? Assumptions:
* the authors were asked to improve the figures but ignored the request or did not improve enough;
* the quality of the research is otherwise acceptable.<issue_comment>username_1: Of course a reviewer can point out poor figures, and if they get not improved he or she can surely state that he doesn't recommend the paper for publication in this state.
However, a reviewer does not reject a paper, that is the editor's job, based on multiple reviews and possible other information (e.g. how many papers are needed to fill the journal).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_1: In principle **yes**. However the situation is, as always, more complex. Usually a paper does not get rejected due to a single thing that is wrong, e.g. if there are problems with the abstract, the references, the figures, the organization, the language… and if it is just one of them, but the overall contribution of the paper is good, it may still get published A few exceptions: If the findings of the paper are wrong, the methodology is flawed, or the premise of paper is false it should be rejected. In the other cases it depends on a combination of the shortcomings and if they are fixable or not.
So I would say that the quality of the figures should play a role in the review to the point that a reviewer should write that they cannot recommend acceptance of the paper paper unless the figures are improved (same applies to the list "abstract, references,…" from above).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think that it is fairly reasonable to ask reviewers to comment on any technical fault they find. It will be the editor's decision how serious these faults are. In this case it sounds as though the problem is not substantive and that the improvements should have been added to one of the stages of revision.
In some cases convoluted figures could prevent proper review of the paper by misrepresenting the results. In this case they should be fixed at an early stage in the review process, and of course if the standardized figures no longer support the arguments presented in the paper this can lead to rejection.
Most journals have clear standards for figures and the editor and/or editorial staff should make sure that the paper conforms to these standards even if the reviewers don't mention it at all.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/13
| 932
| 3,965
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my close collaborators passed away last year and since then I have become curious about the question of attributing work to deceased authors. Each journal has its rules but there doesn't seem to be any consensus what the ethical ground of these decisions is. Recently a different collaborator of mine published a paper with a co-author who passed away 3-4 years ago, which struck me as strange.
On the one hand, work should always be attributed. If someone contributed ideas, funding, manual labor, or wrote the manuscript, they should be mentioned somehow. On the other hand, most journals ask to confirm that all authors have seen the final version of the paper.
Of course, in reality contributors are often over- or underrepresented. For instance, should someone who edited the manuscript be a co-author or appear in an acknowledgement? Does it depend on whether their edits change the content of the paper or just the presentation? On the other hand, if a deceased author contributed the main ideas of a paper but was not around to edit the manuscript, who can decide whether they would not object to the content of the paper?
As there are different reasons for citing a deceased collaborator, I think there are (at least) two questions here: (1) what should an honest person do to honor their collaborators, without adding to their name papers they may have disagreed with; (2) what should a dishonest person be prevented from doing in terms of citing deceased collaborators as a form of name dropping (even if there is some justification for adding them).<issue_comment>username_1: I don't see any dilemma here. If a person would be a co-author if alive, then they should still be a co-author if they die before submission. But if they contributed less and so wouldn't be a co-author if alive, then it may be appropriate to acknowledge their contribution in an appropriate section or footnote.
Even if I disagree with your conclusions in a paper, it may be appropriate to ack me, even if you don't mention the disagreement. But that is a judgement call you need to make.
I don't have a general solution for the last part of your question (name-dropping). I worry that it might require an investigation into the provenance of a paper that we seldom do as a matter of course. But it would be pretty obvious in some cases. I could try to publish a paper with <NAME>, for example, but it would be immediately recognized as a scam.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: (My personal take on this matter - which is only based on intuition/opinion rather than experience):
When you're about to publish such a paper, ask yourself: "How certain am I that the deceased would have put their name on the paper?"
* If the answer is "certain", go ahead and name them a co-author. But - explain that the attribution is posthumous, both in a footnote from the person's name (the same kind of footnote used for affiliation) and in one of the opening lines (perhaps a note as *the* first line.)
* If the answer is "not certain", but the deceased's contribution was significant, don't make them a coauthor, but devote a few sentences to emphasize the significance of their contribution or their involvement, and clarify that the work had progressed or diverged beyond what you had worked on with the deceased (or some such explanation).
* If the answer is "would probably not", and the deceased's contribution was not significant enough for co-authorship, then you just mention them in a thank-you note somewhere in the paper, same as if they were alive.
---
As for "preventing dishonesty" - if you're an editor or non-blind reviewer, and notice the name of a deceased person on a paper, without an explanation of the deceased's contribution within the paper - reach out and ask the corresponding author for a side-note (outside the paper) explaining the deceased's involvement with the submitted work.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/13
| 836
| 3,432
|
<issue_start>username_0: My PhD (I have 1 year left in it) started out at institution A with supervisor A. For reasons not worth going into, I am now, in most practical senses, being supervised by supervisor B at institution B. It is the case, for example, that supervisor A asked if supervisor B could be the external examiner of my thesis, but supervisor B declined because they felt they were "much too close to the project".
I once asked to move my PhD entirely to institution B, but was told my funding was attached to institution A. This wasn't the end of the world; the arrangement we have is working pretty okish, and there's nothing acrimonious going on. So ***I am fine not changing anything practically***
However: institution B is, frankly, much more prestigious than institution A. When I finish my PhD I'd like to be able to put institution B on my CV. I am thinking of doing some private tutoring after I get my PhD and the difference could genuinely be an extra 10% of my pay.
Can I get something official associating my PhD with institution B?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't see any dilemma here. If a person would be a co-author if alive, then they should still be a co-author if they die before submission. But if they contributed less and so wouldn't be a co-author if alive, then it may be appropriate to acknowledge their contribution in an appropriate section or footnote.
Even if I disagree with your conclusions in a paper, it may be appropriate to ack me, even if you don't mention the disagreement. But that is a judgement call you need to make.
I don't have a general solution for the last part of your question (name-dropping). I worry that it might require an investigation into the provenance of a paper that we seldom do as a matter of course. But it would be pretty obvious in some cases. I could try to publish a paper with Paul Erdős, for example, but it would be immediately recognized as a scam.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: (My personal take on this matter - which is only based on intuition/opinion rather than experience):
When you're about to publish such a paper, ask yourself: "How certain am I that the deceased would have put their name on the paper?"
* If the answer is "certain", go ahead and name them a co-author. But - explain that the attribution is posthumous, both in a footnote from the person's name (the same kind of footnote used for affiliation) and in one of the opening lines (perhaps a note as *the* first line.)
* If the answer is "not certain", but the deceased's contribution was significant, don't make them a coauthor, but devote a few sentences to emphasize the significance of their contribution or their involvement, and clarify that the work had progressed or diverged beyond what you had worked on with the deceased (or some such explanation).
* If the answer is "would probably not", and the deceased's contribution was not significant enough for co-authorship, then you just mention them in a thank-you note somewhere in the paper, same as if they were alive.
---
As for "preventing dishonesty" - if you're an editor or non-blind reviewer, and notice the name of a deceased person on a paper, without an explanation of the deceased's contribution within the paper - reach out and ask the corresponding author for a side-note (outside the paper) explaining the deceased's involvement with the submitted work.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/13
| 492
| 2,085
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just had a student inform me that software solutions to my labs (I teach a course in microcontrollers using the ATmega328P) is available on Chegg. She was uncomfortable giving me any further details. She's a very trustworthy student and I don't have any reason to doubt the veracity of the information that she gave me.
I did a lot of searching and was unable to find anything relating to my labs. I searched for my class number, my last name, the name of the course, the name of the college, and didn't find anything. I even tried searching for strings of text that contain the problem statement for a couple (but not all) of the lab questions.
How can I confirm this?<issue_comment>username_1: You can't tell if solutions to your problem sets are posted online. The internet is HUGE and some things are hidden behind paywalls or other login forms.
But what you can do is:
* design your own exercises and modify them enough each year to make it harder to re-use solutions.
* quiz students about their solutions to (easily) find out if they did it themselves or at least understand the code.
* wish your students good luck with their exams, where they will not have internet access.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Since your labs are given to students as assessments and constitute a significant fraction of their final grade, it's not really surprising they will try to share the solutions online. You can't control things on the internet. Even if you shut down one channel, the same information will reappear on other sites, check [Streisand effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect).
You can make your labs completely formative exercises, and publish the solutions yourself.
If you really need to attach summative weighting to them, you need to re-design this assessment each year. Writing fresh assessment tasks each year is a norm in higher education. It does require a lot of time and effort to re-write exams, tests and courseworks, but there is simply no other way to ensure the task is fair and uncompromised.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/13
| 507
| 2,212
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it allowed that someone use the same paragraph in two submitted articles for two different journals? Note: both of these articles are unpublished still so it's not possible to cite one in another one. Also, those articles are submitted concurrently. If it is considered self-plagiarism, it should be really avoided or not? Because when someone works on a topic rigorously may introduction or even materials and method section will be relatively the same as his/her previous works. Any idea or suggestion is appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: To be safe, assume that it would be self plagiarism rather than making the opposite assumption. Cite the "other" work by author, name, etc and list it as "unpublished" or "under review" or whatever is fair.
It is just a good policy, protecting your own reputation, to be scrupulous in such things - even over scrupulous. Some people take it as a serious issue, others do not, but you don't have control over that.
---
So, whether it is "allowed" or not, I suggest you avoid the practice.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If the method is taken from elsewhere you should cite the protocol, and use block quote if necessary. If the method is novel, then pay attention during the submission, you should see one common question asking if the work has been presented or circulated elsewhere, you may use that to declare the potential repetition and let the editors decide. If no such slot exists, it's better to inform the editor in the cover letter.
Moving forward, consider cascading your publications: while paper A is under review, paper B should be being finalized, paper C being drafted, paper D's experiment being done, paper E and on being conceptualized. That way you can avoid problem like such and still maintain a reasonable output level.
To be honest, if I saw two papers from the same author saying "education data were broken down into 3 levels: less than high school, high school completed, and college or above." I will not jump off my chair and scream "plagiarism!!" But people's ideas about this issue are not all the same, I'd agree that assuming the worst would be a good approach.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/13
| 1,981
| 8,383
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was a first-year PhD student but was forced to quit although hard-working day and night! I am disappointed, I am now 27 and did not create family, left my home country. Problems from the past in my family hugely affect my mental health. I have OCD and some other health issues.
Everyone admires my personality in presenting my work, however I am now shocked as I dreamt of doing good research to really help people and imprint a memory before leaving this earth. But I found it does not look like that. When I was a little girl, I used to tell my late mother: "I do not want to be an ordinary person, I want to add this world, to become an important person".
However, while writing now I would burst in tears and feel deeply alone. I suffered from complaining, so I would forget to speak and grew used to keeping every thing inside. I am afraid for my family as I feel responsible and I would like to make their lives better. Maybe the problem was that I did not do as well as the others? I thought I could do something new and meaningful, but I ended up being kicked out.
I would be grateful if someone tell me how can I overcome this harsh period?<issue_comment>username_1: What you state here is something that many do indeed feel coming into academia. The image of research as being something greatly impactful on an individual level is a bit of an illusion. We only hear of the famous researchers, and not of any of the hundreds of thousands overshadowed in every field. Further, the process of research can actually alienate you from the fruits of your labor. Even if you do impactful work, you likely won't feel it or see it in a favorable amount of time. Those that seem to fare well in academia are those that are content with the reality of the dynamics involved, and enjoy what they *really* do.
I will say that from what you describe, however, your mentality towards work and life in general seem to be quite unhealthy. Indeed you have tragic circumstances that led to this, but its something you should work on with a therapist. The will and need to change the world for the better is definitely a common motivation, but not one that should be above all other reasons for a persuit, because its a goal that is almost by definition impossible to achieve to one's degree of personal satisfaction.
I doubly recommend therapy to help with loneliness, and making steps towards reaching out to friends and forming support groups, because the work load involved in grad school can be isolating. As a second year PhD student, I really recommend going out of your way to find people.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **You are not alone.**
From my understanding of your post, you felt forced to quit after holding great expectations about yourself and in spite of making a significant effort for one year. If this is the correct interpretation, *I believe your **supervisor** has failed miserably*.
Unfortunately, modern day academia is not focused on human development and resources. It is mainly about politics and power, and increasingly infested with egoistic manipulators.
I suggest you do a great deal of self-assessment and seek professional help. Also focus on networking, improving transferable skills, and meeting capable change-driving individuals. Consider the following points:
* I do not know which is your home country, and what is your family condition. But realistically assess whether spending 4-6 years on a PhD would *really* help your family in any meaningful way. Most young PhDs in *my* home country are either unemployed or underpaid, thinking they ought to have started working earlier.
* Being successful is as relative as being lucky. Based on your description you seem to have joined an awful place for pursuing a degree, and was denied support from the beginning. Are you sure you would have fared any better in staying there for any longer? It seems to me you have spared yourself of years of lost time and internal pain.
* Do understand that decision-makers and highly influential individuals are typically **not** academics. Seek to invest in your skills, contacts, and look deeper into the private sector and entrepreneurship.
* As a 27-year old I think you are still very young, and I do not advise anyone to start worrying about "making a family" prior to 30s. But, of course, I do not know the social norm in your culture and your own life goals.
Breath deeply, don't look back, start afresh. You are free.
Good luck!
Upvotes: -1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In most universities, there should be some supports for students. For example:
Meet with the office that is responsible for international student services and make sure you understand your right and your responsibility. If you student visa status will be terminated you may only have a short grace period before being considered as staying illegally.
Meet with the office that provides wellness and mental health support. If you can't find one, talk to the school clinic or your doctor for referral. You are under extreme stress and have no one to talk to. Having a meeting with the service provider will help you put things into perspective.
Let your family know if they have been supportive.
I am not sure what is so significant about being 27, many people received their doctorate much later than that. When it comes to learning and doing research, age really does not matter as much as, say, being a runway model. And if your original plan was to get a PhD and then get married by 27, then this plan is outdated, you'll need to weigh the options and revise it. Some plans work out some don't; as long as you have tried the best in your part, no shame in changing course.
Remember that circumstances come with a label of good/bad, fortunate/unfortunate, etc. mostly based on how we emotionally look at it. It seems you're currently drowning in self-pitying, anger, anxiety, and confusion. While I can't ask you to simple "snap out of it," you'll need to heed to our advice and put together a help network. That is the first step to healing.
Academia is just like any other features in this world, there are good and bad sides. I value your experience, but you should hold on to the judgment for now. If you're really good at what you do, the hands of one "unreasonable" supervisor cannot cover a student's brilliance. Don't let go of hopes.
Good luck! Try to sleep and eat. Schedule meetings as soon as possible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I can tell you that a lot of PhD students also go through such frustrating experiences. Fundamentally there are 2 reasons for this 1. difference between expectation and reality 2. you are learning about research in your PhD, but you are not really knowledgeable to make extremely significant contributions
1. **Difference between expectation and reality**: I think media tends to distort the nature of a PhD, its a lot of grunt work. And from the outside it seems that everybody who gets a PhD is a god. Unfortunately, the reality is that most of the time the work you do in your PhD is not going to be shake the world, but that is the nature of research. You stand on the shoulders of giants and make a small dent. Heres a good visual analogy: <http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/>. Its only over a lifetime of extremely long hours and thought do, the giants become giants.
2. **you are learning about research in your PhD, but you are not really knowledgeable to make extremely significant contributions**: You will realize after a while that most of your initial experiments and hypothesis will fail. This is the nature of really pushing the boundary of a field. That doesn't mean you should give up on your goals. It can be kindof devastating. I had one time, when I lost 6 months of work, because a very finicky device that I had painstakingly made, stopped working because of some random unexpected reason.
You seem like you have high ambitions, but if you have high ambitions, you should also realize that you will also have larger failures than most people, and probably have to make more sacrifices.
As @Penguin\_Knight mentioned remember to do the simple things like eating/sleeping/exercising well and keeping in touch with people. Personally, for me, these things have been what have carried me through the hard days.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/14
| 213
| 639
|
<issue_start>username_0: I often see in a CV that certain papers are labelled as ‘communicated’. What does that mean? (Not ‘communicated by’.)
E.g. [this document](http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/172148/3/03_list%20of%20papers%20of%20the%20candidate.pdf) which is a list of papers including entries like:
>
> 5. ***"On complicated things and related stuff"*** (with A. B. Coauthor) (***communicated***).
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: I think these are conference papers.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: "Communicated" means the manuscript is submitted to a journal and is currently under review.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/14
| 1,419
| 6,192
|
<issue_start>username_0: When I was looking for jobs, my website and Curriculum Vita (CV) were more or less updated in real-time, since I needed to make sure recruiting committees were aware of my latest work. Since landing a position, I have become a lot more lazy about putting up my latest papers on the website/CV. I was wondering if there are any compelling negative consequences to my tardiness. For context, I am in a field where everyone uses the arXiv, so I would imagine anyone interested in my latest work will just look there.<issue_comment>username_1: You may update your CV and website on time just in case there was a work application that you only have short time to apply for before its deadline. now you maybe free a bit to do that but you may become busy later and not have the time to get the update done. you may do it in hurry and forget one important project you would include if you did it on time. Organization is wonderful skill and this is one way of enhancing it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: A CV in academia is useful to you and others in many different contexts. Applying for jobs is a very small component of that.
CVs are useful to you and others. Keeping an academic CV up-to-date will often make your life easier, other people's lives easier, and may also open up opportunities for you.
Here are a few ways that having an up-to-date CV is helpful:
* **Communicating achievement to others**: The decision of others in relation to you may be influenced by perceptions of your experience and achievements. Your CV documents this (although google scholar profiles and personal websites can also serve this purpose). There are many examples that could be given: (a) another academic is working out whether to invite you onto a paper and wants to understand your expertise, (b) potential phd students are looking for a supervisor and are trying to understand whether you've supervised before or how much and how well you are publishing, (c) your colleagues at your own university are trying to understand what you do.
* **Grants:** When you apply for grants, you will need to incorporate information about your track-record and achievements. Your CV can be an up-to-date source of this information. Furthermore, you might be part of a grant that others are leading. The grant will often require a lot of information about the investigators on the grant. These other people may be able to fill out relevant sections directly from your CV.
* **Annual performance review**: If you have an annual performance review, it is often helpful to share your current CV.
* **Internal promotion**: Systems for promotions and levels vary throughout the world. In Australia/NZ/UK you typically have levels A to E. If you want to move up a level, you need to document your achievements. Having an up-to-date CV can help.
* **Course accreditations and related matters**: In some cases, your department or university might be seeking accreditation as an educational provider in a particular area. These often require documenting number of staff, educational attainment of staff, evidence of research active status.
* **Annual or other reviews of programs**: In addition to performance reviews, programs, larger research groups, and departments often compile documents reviewing annual (or other timeframes) achievements (e.g., publications, grant funding, outreach, etc.). Administrative people can go to your CV to get this information. Or it may be that you open up your own CV and copy and paste a bunch of things.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think Jeromy’s answer is very good, but that there’s a second angle worth considering as well: it’s easier and better to update your resume regularly than all at once.
Let’s say you have a job for 5 years and then think about leaving and so update your resume. Are you really going to remember everything you’ve done? The dates of the awards you’ve won, the details of the projects? It’s far easier to update it when you make the accomplishments than have to remember or look up everything.
It’s also less burdensome. If you go five years without updating a resume, updating it would take several hours at a minimum. Counting refreshing, looking things up, and fact checking it can take a day of work even! I know a lot of people who don’t update their resume because it seems like a massive hassle. And for people who go long periods of time without doing it, it is a massive hassle. Amortizing that work over longer periods of time makes it easier.
Finally, I want to challenge your idea that everyone will just look you up on arXiv. I would generally rather read your list of papers on your website. I just don’t love the arXiv interface. That said, many people have terrible academic websites. Do put effort into making your website usable and pleasant to look at. At the end of the day, people who get discouraged are far more likely to go “whatever I’ll stop” than “maybe I should try a different website to get this info from.”
Also, making a google scholar profile and listing your publications on your website in addition to having them on arXiv makes it way easier for someone to come into contact with your body of work. Just because you exclusively find things through arXiv doesn’t mean that the people reading your work do too. The more places it’s published and the more coordinated those places are the easier time people will have finding your stuff. Again, make it too hard and people will just pass you by.
Finally, think about students. Students and wannabe-students look up professors all the time. In my experience, the first place to go is a personal website, and generally the second is Google scholar. GS is particularly popular because the “sort by citation count” feature makes it easier to find the major work you’ve done for someone who doesn’t know how to tell which papers/journals are impressive. Heck, many wannabe PhD students don’t know about arXiv, or aren’t very familiar with it. Less so in math, but even then there are people who never hear about it by the time they graduate undergrad. Again, putting yourself in the most places is key.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/14
| 1,350
| 5,357
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a 60 hour work-week due to work/school/commuting/homework, so I've had to make sacrifices -- usually this is attendance of mindless gen-ed classes. I'm worried that the university may revoke my degree if this comes to light.
Described in the answers to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/54807/can-a-university-retract-a-degree-for-actions-taken-after-the-degree-is-awarded), a university can revoke a degree if it is found that the student broke the code of conduct during the course of the program. [My university's code of conduct](http://catalog.kennesaw.edu/content.php?catoid=19&navoid=1563) specifies that it is up to the instructor to determine attendance policies, and AFAIK none of the classes I have skipped had clauses that resulted in a failure of the class due to poor attendance (just grade penalties). Despite this, would it be unprecedented for the university to claim I was in violation of an attendance policy anyway and revoke my degree? I'm worried the school may see this as an insult and retaliate.
If it matters which classes and how severe, I skipped 50% of Physics II and only attended 4 days of Calc II (test days). I plan to do the same with Chem I this semester. I was not at risk of failing the courses. I am pursuing a bachelors degree of Computer Science at a US university. I have never broken any laws or cheated. I am in good academic standing and on-track to graduate at the end of the semester.<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming you haven't been awarded a degree yet, you can't have your degree revoked.
As for whether the university can refuse to award you a degree because you didn't attend class - key point to note is that university isn't high school. University students are generally treated as adults, and adults are free to do what they want, including miss class. It comes down to whether you can meet the stated requirements for the course even if you miss class. If you can, then sure, go ahead. Missing class isn't the same as the situation in the question you linked - that involves cheating by not actually meeting the requirements, but giving the impression that you did.
Caveats: by not attending class,
* Your lecturers can't write you recommendation letters since they have no impression of you.
* You miss anything that's said in class, e.g. the lecturer might mention an interesting fact that's never examined for, but would've helped you five years in the future.
* Some lecturers might have attendance requirements.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It is part of the cultural norms of American universities that your attendance or lack thereof is an issue for each individual course instructor to pursue or not pursue as they choose. At my university the administration is involved precisely insofar as to have the following policy:
>
> Students are expected to attend classes regularly. A student who incurs an excessive number of absences may be withdrawn from a class at the discretion of a professor.
>
>
>
This states the situation well: the *administration* empowers the *instructor* to penalize the student for poor attendance, including withdrawing them from the course. Thus whether and how your lack of attendance in a course is problematic is between you and the instructor of that course. You seem to be worried about attendance that is acceptable to the instructor -- more precisely, not resulting in failure or withdrawal -- but is somehow unacceptable to the university as a whole, since you write
>
> Despite this, would it be unprecedented for the university to claim I was in violation of an attendance policy anyway and revoke my degree? I'm worried the school may see this as an insult and retaliate.
>
>
>
In a word: **yes**, this would be completely unprecedented and moreover implausible. First of all, how does the university even know about your attendance? Even if they somehow found out (maybe you write an editorial in your school paper advocating attending class as little as possible?!?) it would widely be viewed as a violation of the instructor's rights to penalize you for lack of attendance when the instructor did not. Finally, you speak of a degree being *revoked* which means that first you get it and then they take it away from you. Degrees are only revoked for the grossest forms of academic misconduct. It would be outrageous for a university to revoke a degree due to lack of attendance -- frankly, that would reflect very badly on them and would invite censure and possibly even legal action, as it seems manifestly unfair to conjure requirements retroactively.
Summing up: you should clear your attendance plans with each course instructor in advance. To do otherwise is really not safe, as you can see that e.g. my university (which is not so far away from yours) empowers me to withdraw a student for sufficiently poor attendance. If your attendance plan is okay with the instructor, it will be okay with everyone else too.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: FWIW, at all the service academies, attendance is mandatory.
For your specific college, if a professor makes it mandatory to attend and you don't than he can flunk you. If you need the class, than no degree.
You might like it, but that is likely how it would play out.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/14
| 399
| 1,772
|
<issue_start>username_0: How valid is to refer to previous literature reviews in other papers to 'create' a thorough review?
The thing is that I am working in a new methodology, which I will compare with the current state-of-the-art (published in 2017). In there, the authors have done some literature review, which is not thorough. Hence, I want to focus only on the work that they didnt cover. In addition, there is older work what has been reviewed by others. Putting my literature review contribution, together with the paper from 2017, and together with the two oldest papers, then we have a 'thorough' review. Is this a valid approach?<issue_comment>username_1: If the issue you are referring to is important, then it really is worth tracking down the original work to see what was *really* communicated, as opposed to what some review author offered. I would not consider anything less to be thorough.
Too many times, the message gets garbled in the process. If you misinterpret the original work based upon a flawed interpretation of the review author, that's on you.
One possible exception is if you require a costly translation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I would suggest that you include the work you have read, as well as the works that the other papers mention. The purpose of the literature review in a paper is to describe related pieces of work, and showcase how your work complements, surpasses and stands out. This strengthens the narrative of your research and helps the reader understand what makes your paper valuable, compared to other approaches. In order to achieve that and build a more complete image, you need to include as many related papers as you can find and study in the literature review part.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/14
| 4,144
| 17,855
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was a post doc at a large US university for a year and after took another postdoc position in my home country. My mentor was a tenure track assistant professor. It pretty soon became clear that working together was going to be difficult due to different ideas on how to approach and manage projects. Furthermore, I might eventually not have been the best fit for that position given the somewhat different topic of my PhD work. This ended in a complicated work relationship, in which several requests on my side calling for meetings to discuss ways to improve the situation were ignored.
All the while, in my opinion, I was treated abusively: in group meetings in front of the whole lab, I felt humiliated by unconstructive discussions and was called out for the too little progress I made. In smaller meetings with up to two other lab members, I was shouted at by my mentor and told I didn't deserve my PhD etc. Sometimes, reasonable questions of mine were answered in a passive-aggressive way. Furthermore, the significant amount of time I spent in helping more junior lab members in their (very ambitious) projects was not appreciated.
At the time, I asked a university official in charge of postdoc affairs for advice. I was being told that a formal complaint at HR or the department head would most likely have no direct consequences. I furthermore feared retaliation, mostly because my J1 visa and housing depended on that position. For these reasons, I did not take any further action.
At one point, I decided to quit the lab after the initial agreed-upon one-year duration of my stay. Two and a half months before I wanted to inform my mentor in a one-to-one meeting about my decision, but two e-mail requests for that meeting ("to discuss the fact that my contract ends", which is how I worded it) were ignored. I eventually managed to get hold of my mentor after a group meeting and in the following conversation, after asking me why I think the whole thing didn't work out, they did not acknowledge any wrongdoing or unprofessional behavior on their part, even after I brought up several examples.
Other, more junior lab members (PhD and master students; I was the first and only postdoc) reported similar incidents of unprofessional behavior, but also didn't speak up. My guess is that they, too, were fearing retaliation and didn't want to jeopardize the relationship with their supervisor.
My question now is how to achieve the following (in decreasing order of importance):
* have my former mentor improve their behavior so that they treat future students and employees better
* if that doesn't happen, make sure their propensity for unprofessional behavior is known to the tenure committee
* be sure the other professors in the department know that **both** sides are to blame for what happened; that is, restore my reputation
* find closure: I'm going to leave academia for industry soon, but feel my academic career could have been more successful and my stay in the great city this lab is located in even greater had it not been for the terrible time at work (although this might possibly be hard to answer and / or worth of its own question)
While I am aware that there are several questions on this site about similar issues, I believe mine is different because **I left that lab a year and a half ago**. I fear that, after such a long time, simply contacting the department chair will come across as bitter and and as wanting to retaliate at the end of my academic career.
**edit:**
As per <NAME>'s suggestion: I'm not only interested in advice how to achieve the above goals, but also **whether this is actually adviseable**. Also, as the time span of 1.5 years indicates, this isn't a super urgent matter for me. But I've been thinking about this question for a long time and I really appreciate all of you answers, most of them taking very different point of views! I don't know which one to accept - a natural choice would be to follow the suggestions I find most promising and see how it works out. Although not being accepted, this wouldn't make the other answers less valuable.<issue_comment>username_1: First, there is probably little that you can do to change anything. It has been too long. People won't remember, and as you say, it will sound like sour grapes.
Second, find a way to heal yourself and put the experience in the past. Seething anger, even when justified, will probably hurt you more than resolve the past abuse. Make sure that you go into future positions with open eyes, after exploring the environment before you dive in.
Third, while this doesn't excuse the behavior, your mentor was then very likely under a huge amount of stress and had no experience with the situation he was in. A tenure-track assistant professor is under a lot of pressure to produce for himself. That pressure alone, combined with inexperience might explain (not excuse) blow ups and inappropriate behavior. It may be that his own fear of failure was such that any provocation, no matter how slight, caused an overreaction. Perhaps he knows more now and is in a different place in which abuse of colleagues isn't his first response anymore. You can hope that is the case, but you can't affect it much. There *are* jerks (and worse) in academia.
There is no excuse for the situation you faced, of course. But if the institution isn't willing to address it, there is little you can do *effectively* and without blow-back on yourself.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Academia is built on professionalism and goodwill. In academia people are expected to be experts of highest possible calibre, excellent in both teaching and research, capable of managing both funds and people, communicate complex ideas to various audiences, predict and mitigate risks, meet and exceed expectations of colleagues and stakeholders, achieve impossible and remain calm and smile all the time. This is a glamoured picture of academia, produced by the success-centred culture of modern society.
Reality, of course, is somewhat different: academics are people, too. We have strengths in some areas, but we need time to pick up the other skills. Your PI was good in securing external funding but not so good in managing meetings. You were good in helping other students but not so good in achieving the goals set for you. From what I see, you both under-performed in your roles.
I understand that you are frustrated and want to make sure there are consequences for your former PI for not standing up to your expectations. I assure you, not meeting the publication goals of the first grant is going to result in quite real consequences for your PI. It will be very difficult for them to secure another grant, which very likely will result in not having a tenure. Your PI's actions were possibly explained (but not justified) by this pressure.
Some years later, this brief encounter with your former PI will be only a small insignificant episode for you. I am not sure what you want to achieve for yourself by going after your former PI in the way you described. You want to hurt their career? — arguably, you already did quite well in it.
I would suggest to reflect on this episode and think about your future career. What could've you done better to reduce the unprofessional criticism and tunnel it into a more constructive way? How would you respond if a similar situation happens in industry? What procedures does your future company have to help resolve such issues? What makes a better professional and how you can become one?
I wish you good luck in your future career.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: **tl;dr: Don't waste your life on this but do take some action against the abuser.** It will help you inside and also do a greater favor to the field.
As other answers stated, you faced a tutor pressured by a tenure track, and chances are your actions will result in little more than largely wasting precious time. However, **I do believe something ought to be done** about that.
What you describe is a typical situation in modern academia: staff abuses power and everyone else takes it, for fear of career & reputation retaliation, and the rotten ambiance keeps growing. The typical result is: almost everyone who was afraid of "having their careers ruined" by their abuser *drop out* anyway, leaving to the others staying a message that *abusing others is totally cool*.
I find this circle both irrational (i.e. why not stand for oneself if dropping out was a plan anyway) and pathetic (a system sustained by passive-aggressive fear of feeble workmates).
Mind that a fighter should be ready to getting hurt. If you expect to harm others without any consequences, you've just become like your abuser.
Provided you're willing to stand up and send the message to this person, think carefully what are your options. From your post, I think the shortest path to achieve your goals is to somehow neutralise this person. You cannot expect him/her to mend ways after so many having confirmed that abusing others is the sure way to the top. *You should aim at having this person seriously exposed and if possibly **sacked***. If you're thinking of taking this affair merely lightly, just be bold enough to call and/or meet directly the maggot and spell out your best swearwords in the face.
There are several ways of exposing bad behaviour. Take a look, for instance into the following websites, tailored for academicians: (i) <http://www.qcist.com>; (ii) <https://www.ratemypi.com>. Contact his prior advisees, and gather their complaints, stories. Organise a meeting or online group to discuss these; ask them whether they'd like to speak out. Offer them help, blog about the joint experience. Tweet about it, give interviews, raise some drama! -- there's a lot of open support offered to harassed ex-academics nowadays. Do you think there might be any **published** misconduct in this person? Carefully read his/her publications and look for any glaring issues (plagiarism, data manipulation, apparent conflicts of interests). A scientific retraction is guaranteed to leave a permanent blemish, and attracts a lot of bad publicity. Suit up and go back to your institution, and formally complain to the administration; leave a written letter and rate the place online (e.g. Glassdoor.com ).
Take one thing for a fact: abusers are usually greater cowards than any fighter. In reality they *should*, as they have way more to lose than you. Test it out and you will find that. Also, what is the worst this person could feasibly do to you? Are you sure an academic has any actual power or relevant contacts outside of their department corridor? These people (and perhaps you) pretend to believe the world is contained inside their small ivory tower.
I am sure s/he will freeze to the bones when seeing you coming back from the past ready for a fight. On the other hand you will be feeling swell. **If you will play this act, you will have to show your face.**
Good luck.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I'd just like to add something that stuck out to me:
>
> I felt humiliated by unconstructive discussions and was called out for the too little progress I made. ... Furthermore, the significant amount of time I spent in helping more junior lab members in their (very ambitious) projects was not appreciated.
>
>
>
From a different perspective, this could be seen as spending a lot of time on something that wasn't your responsibility and that was taking time away from things that were your responsibility. Your priority is to fulfill your specified duties first, then help others as much as possible. If their work not getting done or not getting done correctly was causing you problems, you needed to communicate that to your colleagues so that a solution can be found. Perhaps it would have been that your duties would have been shifted to include what you were doing; perhaps some other solution would have been found. Maybe it was their hope to decrease everyone's workload by getting those students to narrow their project into something more manageable; if so, your enormous assistance may have torpedoed that goal. Regardless, by communicating about it, you wouldn't be unilaterally deciding your priorities are different than your explicitly stated ones.
To put it bluntly, perhaps this other person became frustrated and acted out because they perceived you as shirking your responsibilities and interfering with theirs. Combined with the difficulties you mention coming to agreement regarding project management, they may have decided you were a sort of "trouble maker," so to speak. And perhaps even more frustratingly, they didn't feel they had the authority to be the one to confront you about it. Of course, none of this would excuse any of their behavior (least of all ignoring meeting requests), and I do not wish to defend the behavior. However, it would make the behavior a little bit more understandable, even if it was a totally wrong view.
This is all speculative, of course. We're only outsiders with limited details. But there's more often than not two sides to a conflict, so it's worth considering if the other side might have a point. I get the impression that you know that no one was perfect in this situation, but perhaps there are still important lessons about working with others that you need to be more aware of. So maybe asking yourself the question, "What could I have done better?" is in order. Doing so doesn't mean believing the other person was in the right. It just means accepting the reality that you can only really control yourself and the responsibility of doing the right thing as much as you are able.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I’m very sorry you were treated badly and wish you the best of luck with your career.
About your question, I don’t feel I can advise you on how (or whether) to proceed with your plan, but a couple of things I think you need to consider very carefully are:
1. You say part of your motivation is to “restore your reputation” among the professors in your former department. However I think the actions you are contemplating may carry a real risk of *damaging* your reputation, both in the department and potentially outside of it (especially if some sort of public scandal ensues as a result of your accusations). Unless your accusations are 100% based on facts rather than opinions and all the facts are impeccably documented, you will be exposing yourself to accusations of lying, exaggerating, making things up etc. Even if you tell the truth and have the evidence to back up all your claims, some people (in addition to the mentor, who obviously will become your enemy for life) may resent you for damaging the career of their colleague and think that your actions reflect poorly on you.
2. Another very real risk is that the mentor might sue you for defamation, and maybe even win. I suggest famialiarizing yourself with defamation law in the US (and any relevant local jurisdictions). Given how serious the topic is and how much is on the line, I would also recommend that you consult a lawyer before you take any actions that might expose you to a defamation claim.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I believe that this is a very general problem, and that there is little one can do. When the criticism comes from outside, there is no reason for anyone to take any action within the institution. When it comes from inside the institution, unless the behaviour is criminal, probably nothing will be done. It's a sad fact that there is almost no open criticism of tenured academics, especially once they have embedded themselves into the system.
I agree with you that we are propagating this system by not commenting, but I couldn't blame you if you don't. I think the chance of further harm coming from commenting is reason enough not to. And of course if you publish the name of the PI online, or reference them somehow, you could be sued for libel.
I like to think that eventually these people will be forced to "change their ways" when people decide that they can't work in these conditions. Unfortunately this is rarely the case, and so there are many PIs just like the one you described.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Most academic fields have at least ten people competing for each position. (PhD programs are notorious for accepting and training far more people than their fields can employ.) This is an unfortunate system, because you, and your misbehaving supervisor (not yet tenured), are both without power. Both of you can be replaced at the whim of the department's leadership.
Why do I mention this? Becausse you propose to engage in a power struggle to make this supervisor face consequences. A power struggle is not going to work, because, unfortunately, you have no power. (In USA in a commercial workplace you might have some leverage: mistreating people gets companies, not just individuals, in big trouble.)
You know, other people, with more power than you and longer-term relationships with this person, have surely taken note of this kind of bad behavior. You were only there a year. By giving your input you may be bringing peat to Newcastle.
If someone asks you, "should I do a postdoc there?" you can certainly recount your experience, and advise against it. But don't do it by email or in writing.
Otherwise, you have more to lose than you have to gain by trying to bust this guy. Chalk it up to experience, don't look back, and resolve never to treat people who work for you that way.
You will most likely find commercial colleagues much easier to deal with than academic colleagues. There's a company somewhere that will benefit from your rigorous training and expertise. All the best in your career.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/14
| 412
| 1,868
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an electrical engineer with basic programming skills in C, C++, Python and Java. I wish to pursue my masters in computer science to pursue research (PhD) after working for a couple of years in the IT industry (preferably product development).
So what are the programming languages one must master before starting graduate school - MS in CS?<issue_comment>username_1: You don´t need any specific languages.
Try to get your "basic" skills in (some of) the languages you already know to an "advanced" or "expert" level. Doing this you will automatically understand and internalize the concepts behind the programming languages.
All the rest is just syntax and you will be able to pretty much learn many other languages "on the fly" if needed.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: While no particular language is necessary, but good programming skills are, the languages you know are from a very narrow range. Therefore the thought processes that go into the programs you now write are also from a very narrow set of skills. It is a big world.
If fact, it is possible to program in most of the languages you name by writing barely disguised C code. Python is a bit better for avoiding that trap, of course.
But if you want to expand what you know, then build something significant in one of the languages you already know. Something big and complicated. If you haven't done that before it will greatly develop your skill.
But in the language area, since you ask about that, I would suggest learning at least one functional language, such as Scheme or Haskell. Both of those require quite different thought processes from the languages you know and you will benefit greatly from the (initial) struggle of getting your mind around that. The difference won't be "just syntax" but a different mental model.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/14
| 1,143
| 4,809
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have written a paper all by myself,the research problem and its solution all were formulated by me.
As a result I wrote the paper and submitted to a journal citing only my name.
As I told my advisor today that I have submitted my work,he is insisting that I should include his name in the paper as he is my supervisor and he has every right to own it.
I knew that if an author makes some significant contribution then only his name should be cited.
But I fear that if I dont agree,he may spoil my career.
Shall I ask the editor that I want to withdraw my paper citing this as a reason?
or What shall I do to include his name as the paper has already been submitted?
I think I should not submit my paper for publication at all.<issue_comment>username_1: If your advisor didn't help you on the paper, other than by fulfilling his normal duties as instructor, then he is abusing his power over you if he demands authorship on the paper. He should be ashamed to try that.
He can ask, of course, and provide reasons, but not demand.
However, it would be entirely appropriate for you to acknowledge him in the work itself for the general help he gives you in your education.
Yes, you can ask to have the paper withdrawn, and you can revise it to include an additional author or acknowledgement section.
But if his general attitude is as bad as it sounds, then he can still damage your career if you withdraw and don't publish it at all. If you can avoid that outcome, and are close to completion, you could, perhaps, publish the paper later when he no longer has power over you.
But, sometimes, in an extreme imbalance of power situation with a bad actor, the wisest choice is just to go along and work toward better outcomes in the future. Maddening choice, but safe.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Shall I ask the editor that I want to withdraw my paper citing this as a reason?
>
>
>
**Resolve the co-authorship dispute with your advisor first, before doing anything with your paper.**
Let's give your advisor the benefit of the doubt. It is possible that they actually *did* contribute significantly to the development of your paper, but in ways that *you* may not recognize.
So I would recommend asking them, directly but calmly, what they believe they contributed to the paper. And then **LISTEN**.
If their only answer is "I'm your advisor", start looking for a new advisor.
Same for "I pay your salary" or "I need it for my tenure/promotion case" or "It's a department/university rule". The only ethical justification for co-authorship is a novel and significant intellectual contribution to the paper. The requirements are the same for your advisor, your department chair, your office mate, the bartender at your favorite pub, or some random stranger on the internet.
But your advisor might remind you of activities that *they* consider significant intellectual contributions, even if you don't. For example, if you and your advisor discussed your research results as they evolved, those discussions *could* be enough of a contribution for co-authorship *even if no concrete ideas from those discussions appear in the paper*. In particular, steering you away from tempting bad ideas is definitely a contribution.
Whether their contributions really are significant enough for co-authorship is something the two of you will have to negotiate, but I recommend erring on the side of generosity. Not because they're your advisor, or because you "owe" them, but because generosity pays off more in the long run.
Alternatively, they might have expected to be more involved—as a colleague and mentor—in the research and writing process. After all, their job as your advisor is to help you become a better researcher, but they can't do that job if you don't let them. That's *not* a good argument for retroactively making them a coauthor of *this* paper, but it is a strong indicator that you and your advisor need to discuss your expectations for *future* research much more clearly.
If you are seriously worried about your advisor overreacting ("spoiling your career"), you should discuss the situation first with your department chair, graduate program director, department ombudsman, or one of your other faculty mentors. (You **do** have at least one other faculty mentor, don't you?) Again: **LISTEN**. Given the high emotions involved, it might be appropriate to invite the other faculty member to mediate the discussion between you and your advisor, or at least act as a neutral observer. Hopefully, your worries are unfounded.
And if you can't trust your advisor enough to have the discussion at all, I'm afraid your relationship with your advisor is broken. Start looking for a new advisor that you can trust.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/09/14
| 634
| 2,638
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have written a thesis seeking to analyze the ideological thinking of a newspaper through its editorials in a political situation during a certain period of time (1985-1991). I couldn’t count on my advisor and I have written my thesis by myself. My advisor approved my thesis and I must defend it in three weeks.
I have been reading other similar theses. I have realized that most of them use a chapter for “Discussion”. My thesis does not have such a chapter. I wrote a chapter for “Methodology”, another for “Results” and after that one for “Conclusions”. I am afraid that in my defense someone will ask me why I did not write a chapter for “Discussion” and I don’t think I have a very convincing answer. How would you answer to that kind of question?<issue_comment>username_1: Do you discuss the results and their implications? Do you present the insights and conclusions? Do you make your argument and present your evidence in a logical, persuasive way?
I find that chapter/section headings are much less important than the overall document strength. If your thesis fits the following, the I'd defend it. Worst case you may be asked to restructure; best case you make your point and it is accepted as is.
Key Points:
Thesis should
- be organized and logical
- clearly articulate the main points and supporting evidence
- discuss any conclusions and insights
I'm sure there are others. Section/chapter headings are author's choice - use what you need to accomplish your purpose.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Even though your advisor hasn't been helpful, perhaps he or she can give you advice on this. Possibly s/he didn't think of it. But the only sections you need in a thesis are the ones that you and your advisor think you need.
Of course your concern is valid in general - how do I defend the thesis in the face of questions.
But ask yourself what would you say in such a section. If you can't think of anything, you are done. Ask yourself what kinds of things others in your field say in such a section. If you have covered those elsewhere, or don't need to say anything, you are done.
A Discussion section *might* be used, however, to explore alternate approaches to your problem that you haven't taken (and aren't in the literature) and why your approach is likely better. But perhaps you have covered that. Even if it isn't there, you should be prepared to answer questions about that.
The questions you get aren't likely to be about section titles, but about content. If you can point to where in the thesis all of the essential points are covered, you are done.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/14
| 337
| 1,319
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I've done plenty of APA papers, but I have never done one with two authors, so I came here since it's the fastest source for information, in my opinion. I would like to know or see an example of how to present both authors on the cover page.<issue_comment>username_1: According to the APA 6th Edition, you list all the authors in order of contribution, or in alphabetical order if their contribution is equal. They should be on the same line unless it does not fit.
Example: `<NAME> and <NAME>`
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I think things vary based on whether affiliations are the same or different for the two authors. I.e., if they share an affiliation, then you'd put them on the same line, but if they have different affiliations, then you put them on different lines with their affiliation below each.
It's also worth noting that I've seen quite a bit of variation in exactly how the title page is presented (e.g., numbered footnote for affiliations versus text at bottom of page). Journals seem to be able to work it out as long as what you provide is unambiguous.
Here's an example of an APA cover page with two authors from my own work:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/87llf.png)
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/15
| 2,052
| 8,610
|
<issue_start>username_0: Well, this is kind of embarrassing for me and I am judging myself as well.
I have just started my PhD. And there is another woman who has started in the same lab as me. Over the first week, I found out that she does not know how to program well. She does not understand many basic terms and had no publication before while I had several publications. On top of that, she is being paid several thousand dollars more than me.
Now, why I am judging myself? Because of my gender (man). Before starting my PhD, I used to believe that sexism was mostly created by insecure men.
Over the past weeks I have been having difficult feelings:
* Did I not work hard enough for my PhD admission?
* Could I be in a better university?
* Or, is the system biased toward women?
* Am I becoming sexist?
I do not know how to get over this. Any suggestions?<issue_comment>username_1: It seems as if you have two major issues.
1) This person doesn't know how to code
2) This person asks a lot of questions.
First, it would benefit you to remember that there are many skills required to be a good researcher. Examples include the ability to come up with good research problems, to develop theory, to read results in a way that makes connections/insights. This person may have been admitted because they are highly skilled at one of these other areas. The committee may believe that the person can pick up on the skills they lack. I myself started my PhD with horrendous gaps in my knowledge (my friends tell me that they were horrified by the questions I asked first year), but my letter writers were able to assure the committee that I was a quick study (and I was).
Second, you should remember that learning styles vary, and some people learn best by asking questions. It may not be your learning style, but one of the reasons study groups exist is that many people learn well by walking through problems and questions with others. This is the sort of thing that the askees seem to either love or hate. I had faculty tell me that I was their favorite student because I asked great clarifying questions during their courses/departmental seminars. I had other faculty tell me that I would never succeed in academia because "no one likes people who ask questions." If you are in group two, the best thing you can do is put in some headphones so you don't appear to be available for questions.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I would factorize this into two separate issues.
First, fairness. You seem to think this person is much less qualified than you, and yet she got admitted and is even paid more. A few points to consider:
* Your are not privy to the reason(s) she was admitted. She may be strong in other areas. You do not have enough evidence to say that admitting her was a mistake / unfair.
* In many departments (particularly non-top-tier ones), candidates are admitted in the hope that they will show more aptitude for graduate study than they did as an undergraduate. Sometimes this bet works out, sometimes it doesn't. It may simply be that admitting her was a gamble that didn't pay off (or simply a mistake). In this case, the professors are likely also unhappy, but not much can be done at this point.
* I'd like to think that most departments wouldn't purposefully admit someone who is unqualified. That said, many departments have too many qualified candidates, and choose to give preference to candidates with different backgrounds. For better or for worse, academia in many countries operates this way, and you will have to get used to it at some level.
Second, concern about your own performance. My guess is that you have been concerned for some time about whether your university is "good enough," and this poorly-qualified person has caused you to revisit this fear. These are separate issues, and you should treat them as such. However, it may be that there is real reason for concern about your school (in which case you should reconsider your options there), or it may be that this is an irrational but persistent fear (in which case the way to "get over it" may involve counseling, etc.).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Focus on the fact that *perfect* fairness doesn't exist on the job market.
She could be there because of her outstanding talent and abilities which you improperly assess. Or she could be there because of personal connections, or as eye candy, or to balance the gender ratio, or because of a well timed (lucky) application, or because the person hiring her simply failed to see through her flaws, or, or, or. All of these are unfair to those who have to work hard to get the job, but happen to either gender.
The point that matters in your question is this one:
>
> * Or, is the system biased toward women?
>
>
>
You found a single individual in a position you assume they are under-qualified for. If it was a man, would you assume the system is biased against men? Maybe. But if you train yourself to look around yourself, you'll notice that every profession holds 10-20% incompetent and/or hopelessly under-qualified people (the exact number depends on the optimism/pessimism of the observer), and that the gender ratio is pretty even.
---
But there's good news: while *perfect* fairness doesn't exist, good workers do, on average, progress their carreers faster than bad ones.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: My impression is that your problem is not about "sexism", it is about that her wage is higher than yours.
Ignore it. Don't compare your success to others, compare it to what you want. It is the decision of your department, what is the value of someone's work for it:
1. If her work is over-valued, it is their problem and not yours.
2. If your work is undervalued, yes it is a problem, but it is independent from her wage.
It is very unlikely that you would earn lesser because you are a male. Typically, such organizations have a fixed or roughly fixed wage table.
Yes, she might have some "downwind", but you have probably no way to know, what is it exactly.
Check, how people typically earn with your skills and experience in the region and field. It can help to determine, what is the case about (2). And leave (1) to others.
P.s. I think, the most probable cause of this scenario is that the department needs your work, but they don't have budget for that. As the woman was employed, it wasn't so yet. Now it is already impossible to decrease her wage, and they can't increase yours. It is also quite possible that they overvalued the competence of the woman. Any department/company leader knows the danger of such scenarios very well, their name in my region is "wage tension". Typically they try to avoid them, but it can't always happen.
P.s.2. People tend to undervalue the worth of the knowledge on fields which is not so well known for them, and overvalue the worth of the ones where they are familiar. There is nothing bad in it, it is simply because if you know more about something, you also learned, how complex/hard is it. Check the woman, maybe she is not so bad, only different.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I've observed several similar cases in academia. Most of them were men, whose fathers were friends of department members or members of other departments who held significant positions in the university.
In my country, it's very often the case, that you're being assigned to do some research for money, while you're working on your Ph.D. topic (Ph.D. funding is very low, so you don't make a living out of it). And it's indeed a very frustrating experience being assigned repeatedly to some boring work with no chance to have good publications, while somebody gets an interesting position and subsequently is evaluated as much more productive, as he has better publications.
On the other hand, I've seen several professors/teachers, who favored women solely because of their gender. I've seen letting them hand their projects late, spending time explaining them the difficult topic or improving their test scores, while male students were treated completely differently.
In my university, there's also one female researcher, who got very close with a very high-positioned faculty member. Subsequently, she got wildly promoted to the point, where she, being just Ph.D. student, was leading the whole laboratory with doctors and associate professors.
That being said, I understand your frustration, but I don't think, that there is anything you can do besides being focused on your work and maybe trying to get better social connections in your institute.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/15
| 1,531
| 6,714
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a hypothetical question inspired by a flip side of [the situation described here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/116916/1-5-years-later-how-to-make-sure-unprofessional-behaviour-by-former-mentor-has).
Consider a PI on tenure-track position, facing tenure / promotion panel in a few years. The PI has just got their first significant research grant, allowing to recruit one postdoc (research fellow) and maybe buying out a few hours per week of PI's time to administer and manage the grant.
After careful selection and recruitment process, following the regulations of the University HR Department, a shortlist was composed, the interview was held, the best candidates were identified and finally one of them accepted the offer and arrived to start the post. Suppose the project and the funding is for one year only.
Following the usual induction process, a program of research has been agreed and weekly meetings has been set to monitor the progress. A few weeks later, the PI is worried that the progress is slower than anticipated. The majority of time is spent by the postdoc on reading the literature, discussing the problem with other PhD students in the group, formulating strategic suggestions on how to solve the problem and possibly also problems of other students in the group. However, when it comes to writing publications (and scientific code when appropriate), the progress is insufficient.
Suppose that the PI has tried to focus the postdoc on their area of responsibility by making verbal remarks, but it did not improve the situation and only made the relations a bit tenser. The PI feels that the postdoc is under-performing, but the postdoc denies such discussions and in discussion with other students describes them as non-constructive and abusive.
**The question**: Assuming the restrictions and processes of your current University (or other places your are familiar with), what would you do as the PI in this situation?
I assume that the short-term goals of the PI in this situation are to produce enough high-quality publications to successfully complete their grant, secure the following grants and increase the chances of successful tenure. However, if there are also long-term goals which are more important and should influence the chosen strategy instead, please describe them. I also assume that 3-4 hours per week is just about how much time the PI has to manage this grant, and the rest of the time is spent on teaching, working with PhD students, etc, so the strategies requiring let's say 2 hours of PI's time per day are not very realistic. This is based on the typical breakdown of time for EPSRC First Grant scheme in the UK — please feel free to point out if it's not applicable in other places.<issue_comment>username_1: This really depends a lot on the contract situation. In some countries, such as Germany, there is a “probationary period” of several months wherein either side can choose unilaterally to end the contract. This lowers the risk from a bad hire. Saddled with a hire gone wrong, I’d try to get what output I could from the postdoc during the period and start a new hiring process right away (or see if anyone from the previous search was still available!).
In countries like the US where contracts may not include probationary periods, you have to try to figure out how to best help the postdoc out, since you’re stuck for a potentially much longer period. If it’s some sort of missing knowledge you figure out how to provide that. If it’s some other issue, you try to work around it or solve that problem. Without a more specific example, it’s hard to draw up a good “plan of action.”
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Answering this question highly depends on the institutional situation and context. BTW: very interesting initiative in adding a flip side to a conflict of interests.
I will consider the following scenario: the "competent" postdoc was screened based mainly on CV ticks, such as expertise and # publications & impact; the postdoc salary is paid by the university or government directly; the contract is for 12 months; the postdoc needs to publish 1 Pubmed paper in order to finish his duties.
First of all, let's admit that 12 months for demanding a published paper is a straightjacket. As a PI I would have emphasised and focused on this obstacle/requirement since interview selection. The postdoc should focus entirely on getting *any* published Pubmed paper as a first priority. (I would not pressure hard on authorship and IF in such case.)
Second of all, I state my view of a postdoctoral fellow. A postdoc relationship is a chance to establish a long-lasting collaboration with an experienced peer (and associated collaborators) and secure interdisciplinary/diversity in one's group. I am sure that if these two main points are successfully met during the temporary stay, a lot of mutual advantages (e.g. better research) should ensue for an indeterminate period of time.
This is why I'd face the first publication as the obstacle (imposed by the department or contract) and thus main potential point of dispute. Let us say it turns out like that: 7 months into the contract and the postdoc hasn't submitted a paper to meet the sole requirement of any publication remotely related to the topic of research without the need to include me as a coauthor, in spite of a known record of publications. Now, *this* **is** big bummer, isn't it?
*There isn't too much I can do, if I am not directly responsible for the payments.* Probably I misjudged the hire and/or the guy is failing to meet a fair agreement which should be trivial. However, still the postdoc is interacting with other group members well (post description) so it looks like the two main goals of the relationship can be met.
I'd be upset and would state it directly. I would state in written that no funding is to be allocated to the postdoc while the publication isn't met, **as previously agreed**. This should be put very professionally. Perhaps there are clear penalties in contract in case of failure to meet this requirement. I'd state this will be communicated to colleagues but also the fact that I appreciate any technical & sensible input to my lab group members during and after the stay. I would **not** isolate this person and would probably be forced to allocate my available hours **writing** the damn postdoc paper, which wouldn't please me.
But it is the best way around the situation I can see. I would reconsider what I can learn from the experience to avoid such issue in the future (e.g. negotiate the requirement with department and/or adjust project with next postdoc)
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/15
| 306
| 1,306
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am finishing my Ph. D. in physics and I have a degree in mathematics. Currently, I am planning to apply for a lecturer position in Australia. Will it be more feasible to apply for a lecturer position in mathematics or in physics?
Update: Thank you all for your advice. Currently, my papers are still under review. I think I shall try applying for the positions in both subjects.<issue_comment>username_1: You can apply for any position for which you are qualified. Read the person specification for the advertised post. Usually it specifies which degrees are required and which area of PhD the candidate should have. If your profile fits the description go for it and apply. You can apply for as many positions as you like.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Physics will be more likely as that is the more recent and the higher degree. In particular, this would be the case for more top tier research positions.
All that said, you should (a) blanket the waterfront and apply in both areas--jobs in academia are scarce and (b) look for positions where your particular blend of knowledge is most wanted (e.g. I dated a lady who was a professor in comp sci, but really had a math background and teaching load...but close enough to CS so she fit there).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/15
| 247
| 1,070
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have written an article (2-column type), and would like to put an acknowledgement to acknowledge the non-substantial contribution of a colleague in the analysis of some data.
The structure of the article is
```
Introduction
Main body
-> chapter with the data
Conclusion
References
```
Where and how should I put the acknowledgements?<issue_comment>username_1: The acknowledgement is usually placed between the conclusion and the references.
You should write a sentence mentioning how the other person or persons contributed to the paper or your work.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should not worry about this. Add it wherever you believe it fits. The editors of the journal will move it to the place where *they* like it (or tell you to do so). It is widely considered a matter of journal style, similar to the question of whether the Preface counts as Section 1 or as an unnumbered extra section. (I'm speaking for mathematics, but I have no reasons to think this is different in other subjects.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/15
| 744
| 3,279
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am reviewing a survey paper in a good journal, where the paper missed important papers in the field including my previously published articles. I plan to suggest a rejection due to this serious lack, but I want also to encourage the authors to resubmit it again by pointing out the weaknesses of their paper.
In addition, I want to recommend them to cite some papers (since it is a survey paper) including my own. I don't know whether this is ethical (because I am one of the authors and it is clear that I found them interesting).<issue_comment>username_1: My personal rule for this is that I go ahead and suggest the paper in my review, and in the "Notes to the Program Chair/Editor" I disclose that I am suggesting a paper of my own.
That way, I am covered on both fronts: I am suggesting papers that are relevant to the authors and I let the Editor decide whether it is a fair suggestion.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It is absolutely fair to expect the authors of survey and review papers to conduct a proper literature search of the field. Then they can either limit their scope in a way that excludes certain papers, or be prepared to respond to questions why they didn't reference them. Note that if the scope is limited they might be justified in leaving out your papers, but they should make it clear what their intended scope is.
Suggesting one's own papers during peer review is fine, assuming they're actually related, and not just an attempt to fish for citations. username_1's recommendation to be upfront to the editor about which papers are yours is helpful here. You also want to be careful not to write a report that comes across as petty, e.g., *"You didn't cite my paper X? Reject it is."* Instead, I generally prefer phrasing my objections as questions: *"Could the authors clarify why they didn't consider (list of papers)?"* rather than demands: *"The authors should cite these papers otherwise the manuscript can't be accepted".*
This way it's up to the authors to convince me that what they're doing is reasonable. It's possible they have good reasons after all - maybe there is a sentence mentioning their scope that I somehow missed? If they can't provide a good reason, it is still a friendlier message, and allows them an easy way out. (The tactic is even more useful for technical issues, where it lets one avoid "the referee is wrong" responses.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I generally hate the "cite this" remarks of the reviewers, they are also mostly fully obvious in breaking the review blindness.
That one time when I absolutely had to highlight my own paper in the review (I was not aware of other research doing things exactly as I needed to make the point), I briefly restated the claim ("you state confidence of 90% with technique A, but there was research that did it with 99% confidence with technique B") and then went on to say that the reference is available to the editor.
In the confidential notice to editor I stated the full citation, mentioned that it is obviously co-authored by me, and that I leave it to their judgement whether to communicate this citation to the authors.
Probably not the best way to boost my citation count, but definitely ethically clean.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/15
| 1,050
| 4,144
|
<issue_start>username_0: While teaching a class last week, I made the widely-recognized hand gesture (an open circle with the thumb and index finger, with the other 3 fingers loosely or sharphy extended... I'm not sure exactly how mine looks, as it's like muscle memory and I don't consciously think about the exact shape I'm making) while simultaneously saying "okay...". I can't remember the full sentence but it was something related to the math course I'm teaching.
Now I suddenly learn that it means "white power" to some people (some Americans). To make matters even worse, I'm white, and I make a very similar-looking symbol while indicating 3 things (some use the middle 3 fingers for this; but I've always done it the other way) or counting to a number between 3 and 5 with my fingers. Good heavens!
Would I possibly get into administrative trouble for doing this, if a student were to report it?<issue_comment>username_1: It's fine. Don't keep such track of the latest silliness. Let it pass.
I do think it is a bit informal. That is if the teacher calls on you, you should answer him directly. But signalled across a laboratory or the like, I would have no issue with it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The whole "White-power" hand sign started as a joke from 4chan or something like that. It was kind of a ploy to get the more gullible liberals all worked up for nothing. It was kind of laughable at first. However, it would seem that it's becoming more and more accepted as an actual WP symbol. I believe that some white-supremacist groups have even ended up adopting it. Still, I wouldn't worry about it as long as it doesn't seem as if you are actually pushing the agenda.
You could always swap it for "thumbs up" or, my favorite, good ol' finger guns.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: As you are teaching maths, then it’s fine when used in conjunction with the material, ie having just completed an exercise with simultaneous equations and asking if it was understood.
However, if you are teaching politics or examining causes of racial tension in a sociology type subject then I would suggest no.
Also, in some countries the "Thumbs up" gesture is not considered polite either... "sit on this..."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Quite aside from the ridiculous white power thing, you might want to consider not using that gesture, as it's easily misinterpreted. [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK_(gesture)#Negative_connotations) says:
* it's offensive in parts of central and southern Europe;
* it can mean "zero" or "worthless" in France and Belgium;
* in various Mediterranean, Middle-Eastern and South American countries, it denotes the anus generally, can mean "You're an asshole!" and can be homophobic;
* it also has associations with the female genitals;
* in Arab countries, it represents the evil eye and is used as a curse;
* Wikipedia's a bit vague about its use in American Sign Language, where it seems to have a number of different uses, some of which are claimed to be offensive.
Sure, any hand gesture has the potential to be offensive to *someone*1 and most people will realise you're not trying to be offensive if you make one of these gestures in a non-offensive context while not looking offensive, you're probably not being offensive. Still, the okay gesture does seem more likely to cause confusion ("Why is he looking happy and saying 'asshole'?") than other gestures.
1 Thumbs up has negative meanings in some places; gesturing "two" by extending the first and second fingers vertically with the back of the hand towards the viewer means "f\*\*\* off" in the UK, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It's just an 'okay' sign. Unfortunately, it seems the reality is that it may be increasingly inappropriate to convey this gesture.
At the very least, it opens the opportunity for misinterpretation and perhaps should be avoided for this reason alone.
In this day and age, it can be wagered that someone will jump on the chance to be offended by the continued use of this gesture.
It should be okay to make the okay sign, though. It should be.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/16
| 1,994
| 8,254
|
<issue_start>username_0: I took a semester where a professor was teaching Statistics. He gave out **no lecture materials** nor the name of any text books.
When I asked him for a text book name, he gave me a name of a 900+ pages' book.
I could not find anything relevant in the text book which matches his lectures.
Finally, I quit the course.
The same thing happened whilst undertaking my Numerical Analysis course.
See this YouTube video named [*Introduction to Computer Graphics*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01YSK5gIEYQ&list=PL_w_qWAQZtAZhtzPI5pkAtcUVgmzdAP8g) at 16:31. This is okay may be for 3D computer graphics. But, I guess, not good for math.
**Why don't some professors recommend a text book for a course?**<issue_comment>username_1: For individual courses and professors you need to ask the professor. However, there are a number of reasons why someone *might* want to make no recommendation.
Least likely is that the prof feels that any book is as good as any other.
A bit more likely is that the prof feels that any book is as bad as any other.
Up the scale a bit is the sense (possibly misplaced) that the prof's lectures are all the student will need. If this is the case, the student's are strongly advised to attend every lecture and take lots of notes. For some this is a valid position if the professor also puts extensive materials online or otherwise makes them available. However, it can also be a trap if the professor thinks that lectures deliver the needed information and skills perfectly to every student. That is a serious error of judgement.
Another reason is that the prof wants the students to actually seek out answers to questions online or in the (gasp) library. Some professors don't answer questions with answers but with a strategy for finding the answer. This, of course, disadvantages lazy students.
Still higher on the (my) list is that the course is intended to use active learning and so more passive approaches (reading, watching, listening) are discouraged and the student is expected to do most of his or her learning by doing exercises and projects. For Statistics and Numerical Analysis, this seems to me to be a worthy goal. I find it useful also in much of computer science.
Given that one learns by practice and reinforcement, this last strategy can be very effective. Active learning gives you an operational knowledge of a subject that reading (or even reading and underlining) a book won't.
---
I have, on occasion, "recommended" a book, not for help on the things in the course, but for things that *won't* be covered. There was no obligation to buy the book. I've also made such recommendations about a pair of quite different books for the same reason.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Reasons could be anything, down to personality preference. If you had an advanced statistic course, there might not be a book that covers your materials.
But this is 2018. You have Google, digital library, Amazon... Why can't you do some searching yourself?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Reasons why I do not use textbooks:
* Most textbooks in my experience are bad.
* Most students do not read them (probably because they are bad).
* They are expensive.
* They do not align with how I want to teach the course.
* I can provide the relevant subset of content myself.
I can't see a reason to use a textbook in my courses other than for supplemental material (even then, I would much rather point them to some free PDFs/slides from various faculty that are online).
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: I think it is the idea that they want to design the exact content (topics covered).
I disagree with this stance because I think that many different courses can have benefit and that the biggest issue is not the exact topic list but how well you learn. And I think textbooks are an excellent pedagogical aid (and also helpful for future reference, since you studied THAT book). I think almost all courses would be better off picking a text and sticking closely to it. But obviously some people disagree with me.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: Regardless of any perceived advantages of textbooks, they usually have many disadvantages for the student. By some decision-making process, your professor has decided that no combination of textbooks has enough advantages to outweigh the disadvantages.
* They're **expensive**.
* They take a **kitchen sink** approach to have a wider market.
* They're **difficult to read**.
+ Often lacking explanations, intuitions, and visuals for the complicated concepts they're spouting as obvious and important.
* They **take time away** from homework, reviewing and consolidating your lecture notes, discussions with peers, attending office hours, and other things that are generally much more beneficial to your learning and career.
* They're **outdated** in many fields. Parts of statistics and numerical analysis are advancing rapidly and have been for years.
* They're **difficult to use** correctly when they don't map perfectly to the lectures.
+ As a bit of an aside, some of the greatest value from a textbook is gained when they don't map perfectly to lectures. It username_8ws you to supplement the lectures with a completely different perspective.
* They're **inflexible**. For any given textbook, some students won't learn well from it. A professor can tailor their approach to a degree, but a textbook is fixed. That presents a risk in choosing a book.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: I took a class in kinematic astronomy where the first thing the professor asked was, "Do any of you read German?" Sometimes a field is so highly specialized that there just isn't a good textbook available that covers everything the professor plans to discuss.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: It might also be cultural. I studied (mostly math) in France. I have never been given a textbook to read for any higher education class. It just isn't done, and I think the idea of paying for a book would have been a non-starter for me and most of my classmates. Now that I teach myself, recommending a textbook isn't even something that crosses my mind, and I know it's the same for many of my colleagues. (Some do; but it's never required for the students to even glance at the list... And there may be a few copies in the university library, but they certainly won't buy it.)
What is done in *some* courses is that the teacher will have written (or inherited) some lecture notes – colloquially known as a *polycopié* or *poly* – and hand it out for students or even just post on a webpage. Of course, when the notes keep being passed on from prof to prof, they basically become an unpublished textbook. Some of them are of the highest quality. But it's always understood that it's a mere memory aid and that was is important is what's said in class. And there usually is no claim of completeness like the word "textbook" implies (I think).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Probably there *is* no text book for his course.
I would think, probably he actually used the 900 page book and cherry picked the topics for his course.
Probably not last month, but over the years he held the lecture. Recommending any text book would mean that it contains stuff you do not need (for the course) and may lack topics covered by the course, so he cannot recommend any book. Any but the 900 page book, which is not suitable for reading, but contains the topics which will be covered together with a lot of others.
So to satisfy you demand, he would need to write a book covering his course. Some professors do so sooner or later, but many do not. Others may use an existing book, but not everyone agrees with the existing books on the topics which are important for the lecture.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: In my opinion, the reason is that most professors wish that students attend the lessons, in order to capture some particular explanations, and technical details you can't find in any book. My statistics professor, when we asked her what where the reference books on which to study for the examinations, answered us: "Would you like to know what are the reference books?? Follow the course!!!!".
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/16
| 1,492
| 5,848
|
<issue_start>username_0: Co-authors are increasingly required to report their individual contributions to a research paper. But can they report their (internal) disagreement?
Co-authors may disagree on parts of a final draft. Each may have own interpretation of (parts of) the results or view of their implications.
The different views can be of course expressed in the publication without attribution, e.g.:
>
> Our results may mean x, but they may also mean y.
>
>
>
But some co-authors may find others' interpretations/views controversial, or they may wish to get "exclusive" credit for their own ideas.
In such cases, is it appropriate for co-authors to explicitly attribute certain interpretations/views in a paper to their owners? Should they do that?
>
> Co-author A thinks results mean x, whereas co-author B thinks they mean y but not x.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: It is rather unusual, but it has occurred before. In the paper
>
> <NAME>, and <NAME>. "[Equilibrium in the Jungle.](http://arielrubinstein.tau.ac.il/papers/77.pdf)" The Economic Journal 117.522 (2007): 883-896.
>
>
>
each of the authors has their own conclusions, marked "4.1. Concluding Comments by MP" and "4.2. Concluding Comments by AR." It should be noted though that the writing in economics tends to be less structured (no such thing as a "method section") and this is a somewhat unconventional paper to begin with.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This might not perfectly fit your bill, but the paper [Trialogue on the number of fundamental constants](https://inspirehep.net/record/564748) by <NAME>, <NAME>, and <NAME>
basically consists of three co-authors disagreeing.
Abstract:
>
> This paper consists of three separate articles on the number of fundamental dimensionful constants in physics. We started our debate in summer 1992 on the terrace of the famous CERN cafeteria. In the summer of 2001 we returned to the subject to find that our views still diverged and decided to explain our current positions. LBO develops the traditional approach with three constants, GV argues in favor of at most two (within superstring theory), while MJD advocates zero.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: In theoretical cryptography, we have [a major paper by Canetti, Goldreich, and Halevi](https://eprint.iacr.org/1998/011), showing that in general cryptographic systems which are proven secure in the so-called random oracle model are not necessarily secure in the real world. At the end, they each offer different opinions about what this means regarding the usefulness of ROM proofs. (Basically, Goldreich says they offer no evidence whatsoever of real-world security, while the other two say they're not ideal but better than nothing.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Yes, but I guess that this would usually set the tone of the paper, i.e. the paper would focus on a debate between the co-authors. For instance:
<https://www.nature.com/news/does-evolutionary-theory-need-a-rethink-1.16080>
But that is something different.
I don't think mentioning author names in the manuscript is a solution. All authors should take responsibility for everything that is written in the manuscript. So I would say present both interpretations as possibilities without committing to either.
An alternative solution (and one which I try to use) is to avoid views/interpretations that your co-authors don't agree with, and instead write your interpretations in a follow-up opinion paper. This looks much better than the authors disagreeing with each other, I believe, especially if this is a basic research paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Presumably, both possible conclusions have arguments backing them up. (If they don't, then neither "Co-author A thinks results mean x" nor "co-author B thinks they mean y but not x" belongs in a published paper.)
All co-authors should agree that these arguments are valid, even if they disagree about which ultimately carries the day. If they disagree that an argument makes sense, this is not a problem that can be fixed by having only one co-author sign their name to part of a paper. If you see a flaw in your co-author's work, you should point out the flaw, and work with them until it is fixed!
I will give an example from mathematics, which I feel most comfortable talking about. Perhaps there is heuristical evidence for Conjecture X: it can be shown to hold for almost all randomly chosen objects. Co-author A is convinced by this; co-author B points out that such and such obstacles could appear in very unlikely cases. Maybe each author can point to examples of other problems where the equivalent conjecture turned out to be true or false.
Both co-authors should agree that the argument about random objects holds water. Both co-authors should agree that a certain kind of obstacle could invalidate the conjecture. Both co-authors should agree that the examples of other problems are referenced correctly. So there is no reason why both co-authors can't stand behind both sides of the argument, even if they disagree about which conclusion is likelier.
It might make sense to mention that the co-authors disagree about the conjecture, because this makes it clear to the reader that the issue is very far from settled. Which author thinks what shouldn't be persuasive to the reader, but it might be worth mentioning anyway; maybe the reader will write to one of the authors to debate the conjecture.
It would be inappropriate for a co-author to put their name down on one side of the argument in an effort "to get exclusive credit for their own ideas". This is no different from writing "although this paper is by authors A, B, and C, author B didn't help at all with proving Theorem 3."
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/09/16
| 425
| 1,668
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is in reference to my previous question:
[How to mail the editor asking to withdraw my submission?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/116927/96599)
I wrote to the editor regarding my problem for 2 consecutive days.
I sent 4 mails to him regarding the withdrawal of my manuscript.
But I have not received a single reply from him.
How long should I wait? I know he is busy too but I need to do it fast as my Masters (Research) course will end in 2 months and I need to have it at least communicated if not published within this duration.
Otherwise I won't get my degree.
But why is the Editor not replying to my e-mails?
I need to resubmit it fast to either this journal or another journal.
Please help me, I don't understand what should I do.<issue_comment>username_1: Giving someone 2 days to respond to an email, especially about a submission, is **no where near long enough**. I wouldn't expect a response that fast for virtually anything. 4 emails is definitely excessive.
For a journal, I would expect 2 weeks to be a reasonable amount of time on this. Generally, anything of this nature is not urgent. You can certainly go ahead and begin preparing to submit the paper elsewhere (e.g., find a journal, correct your paper's mistake, and reformat the paper), but don't submit it yet.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You don't need to wait for confirmation of the withdrawal note if you are going to send it to a different journal, now. (Your withdrawal note, whenever viewed is enough to stop the publication process.) If you want to resubmit to same journal, you will need to wait a while.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/16
| 886
| 3,927
|
<issue_start>username_0: This summer I was involved in a long distance collaboration with a researcher at an institution for clinical research. I was essentially CC'd to this person via an old colleague who currently works with this professor as a faculty member when the professor I collaborated with apparently expressed to my colleague that they needed more manpower to finish writing a manuscript given their busy schedule.
Anyways, this researcher had me conduct a literature review for a series of rare, clinically related human disorders to serve as the base of a case report for a series of patients who presented at this institution for a clinical trial, as well as some basic statistical analyses. I essentially typed what would be the base of this paper. This institution is a top 20 NIH funded institution and my old colleague is very trustworthy, so I was very ecstatic to work on this project during the summer. This researcher even speculated on specific journals we should target for publication. The researcher and I had good interactions via e-mail and after I was finished with "baking the cake" so to speak with the review, the researcher praised my work and said all that they had to do was pull up the patient demographics and specific presentations of the patients to input. I do not have access to that sensitive information as I am not affiliated with that institution, so I was dependent upon them for that.
The researcher did not reply for what was around a month, so I sent an update e-mail kindly inquiring on the status of the project, thanking the researcher for allowing me to work with them, saying I learned a lot conducting the literature review, etc.
Ignored for another month. At this point I am frustrated because at the time I did all this work in about 3 days with very, very little sleep knowing I had personal familial commitments to attend to and I would be away from a computer for an extended period of time (around a week or two) and I thought this researcher was adamant about needing the "manpower" as per my old colleague.
What do I do now? I'm assuming there's nothing much I can do. I live pretty far from this institution so it's not like I can drive up there for a meeting. Moreover, to walk in unannounced sounds very vulgar. I can't tattletale to my old colleague because why would I drag him into something he isn't a part of? I wanted to get this project to completion because I am looking to apply to this same exact institution for a fellowship later on in my career and am looking at this specific department. Moreover, I was genuinely passionate about the project and felt like authorship in that field would boost my morale. I also thought developing rapport with faculty would help my prospective academic career. I tried looking at my e-mails and even had friends look through my e-mails to see if I had inadvertently wrote something that could be interpreted aggressive, rude, or accidentally offensive (like calling them Mr./Ms. instead of Dr.) but I found nothing.<issue_comment>username_1: Since email isn't working, I see two alternatives. The simple one is to contact the person who originally got you involved to see if they know what the problem might be. Presumably this person knows both of you and may know the other person better than you do.
The only other solution with a positive outcome is to contact the other party in person. Your question is "How shall we proceed?" not "What is the problem here?". There might be any number of things in the way, but you have no way to know with a passive approach.
It's not impossible that you are being used and therefore ignored. But you shouldn't conclude that without more information.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It might not be a bad idea to call the person, or call the department to see if the person had been there. The colleague might have had mitigating circumstances.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/16
| 837
| 3,739
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing my Thesis in finance field and I am using Machine learning methods. Therefore, I wrote many Python and R scripts for collecting data, cleaning it and applying some statstics.
1. should I reference my own code that I wrote? if yes can you please tell me how?
2. should I reference all the libraries that I've used during my work?
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: In a thesis, you can include your own code as an appendix. For standard libraries there is no need to cite them, but for other things it is a good idea to do so. This enables others to follow up on your work. If in doubt, give a citation.
If your code is too extensive to include, then you can post it to an archive and cite it there, though my preference would be to include it.
You could also cite your own code as unpublished work or work in progress, as appropriate. Anyone needing it would need to follow up with you personally, of course.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The standard way is to upload the code in a public repository so that everyone can use your code. In the thesis, you can refer to your repository in the footnote/endnote.
What you really need to cite is the papers/books which introduce the used methods first. The need to cite a library is when it has a specific configuration and it is likely that it outputs different result, such as the method which requires a probabilistic sampling. Here, the output will be different based on the used method.
Back to your case and responding to your questions:
1. You can publish all the materials of your work in a public repository and refer to it by citing the link (preferably in the footnote). It is unprofessional to add the code in the appendix (unless it is short and in pseudo-code).
2. You don't need to cite the libraries but the papers of the methods that are implemented in these libraries. If the library has a specific configuration, you can mention it in the text or cite the library (very rare cases).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: As others mentioned already, publishing your code in a public repository and indicating the link in your thesis is standard practice nowadays. However you should talk to your supervisor first in order to confirm that there is no IP issue in doing so with your work (e.g. if you use a piece of code by somebody else in the team which is not under a free license).
Also you probably read a few Machine Learning papers when you developed your software; these papers can provide you with good examples of what you need to explain about your code in the thesis itself: not too much technical detail of course, but enough information so that a reader can understand the general method (and ideally reproduce it).
Some ML libraries ask users who publish work based on the library to cite a particular paper, this is usually indicated with the license of the library.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Your code is not your thesis. You are usually only required to publish the thesis.
You may publish your code as well and mention it in your thesis, if you like to do so, though.
If you use other (scientific) code and libraries, it is good to mention it, especially in sections which benchmark run-times and similar things.
There you should use the citation suggested on the homepage of the library, which sometimes refers to the source and often to papers which are implemented in the source. If there is no suggested citation, usually refering to the project with an URL is a sufficient solution. You may of course try to write a nice bibliography entry yourself for code that obviously deserves a proper citation, i.e. the authors actually wrote a new algorithm.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/17
| 474
| 2,049
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach computer science (USA - graduate level). I am teaching a software design course, and for a lecture I am to give on software anti-patterns I would like to use a real world example from an institution I was previously employed with. To share the example I would create some abstract UML class diagrams showing the pattern that was used, I would explain the general purpose of the application and share where we got it wrong and how the students could learn from the anti-pattern. I don't have to reveal any code (not that I have any) or share any trade secrets, and I don't even have to use the name of organization. However if someone was to read my C.V. they could probably ascertain what organization I was speaking in reference to.
Is it considered 'ethical' behavior to share this example? Or should I seek authorization from the previous institution? Are there certain things I should do to protect myself or further obfuscate this example?
As far as I know I never signed any sort of NDA or non-compete covenant.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, students always like “real” examples. You seem to have “anonymized” it sufficiently.
Those examples that start “You have 3 widgets produced by a widget company...” are SO boring, using relevant material is always good.
Could you re-write it as a case study if that is relevant.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As long as you don't break contractural agreements (trade secrets, for example), there is no issue here. Ideas are free to use. The fact that someone else had an idea previously doesn't put it off-limits to anyone.
Even patented ideas can be discussed and shared. In fact, the patent application itself needs a lot of detail explaining it. You may not be able to implement those ideas in a "device" while the patent is in effect, but you can still explore and discuss it.
If you avoid revealing secrets that you have agreed not to reveal then there is no issue. But be sure about whatever contracts you agreed to.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/17
| 2,017
| 8,663
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a lecturer, at the start of each semester in all of my courses, I have students complete a first-day diagnostic quiz on topics from the prerequisite course. There are usually a few significant under-performers (say, 40-50% success where most students are in the 70-100% range).
I then follow up with those under-performers by looking at their prior total course history. I always find a few cases that look like seriously troubled fits for their academic major. For example: Failing core courses one or more times and then passing with a "D" before repeating at the next level (e.g.: Introductory Programming for a C.S. major, Precalculus or Calculus I for a math major, etc.). Failing 5, 10, or 15 core courses over several years in the major (so far).
I feel like I want to do *something* to counsel these students, reflect on their choice of major, find the most profitable use of their time and resources, and/or find how to support or remove roadblocks if appropriate. But as the instructor, I'm not sure how best to do that.
One option would be to have a meeting in the first week and ask, "What difficulties can we improve on?", etc., so as to get off on the right foot and make the most of the time in the current term. Another option might be to say nothing until they likely fail my first exam and then use that as a wake-up call in the course.
How should I, as an instructor, intervene or counsel students who are struggling greatly with their major over a number of years?
(This is at a large U.S. community college.)<issue_comment>username_1: I can tell for you from a troubled student's perspective. I have some friends with similar kinds of problems here at Brazil in USP, and I think our academic cultures have similarities (including eventually diagnostic tests).
Some of my troubled colleagues have to work a part time job to pay for living in the city where the university is. Some have psychological problems triggered by pressure of university, or self induced pressure by a lot of expectations. A nonnegligible number have the three problems combined in different proportions. I think the culture of my generation (near 22-28 years) aggravates that scenario. People - having grown up with video games, the internet and shiny special effects everywhere - think to live fast and expect constant and fast feedback. This makes some throw things in the air when progress looks like very slow. Even when it needs to be because the situation - the expected reality and the experience don't match
There are educational sites, like coursera.org, duolingo.com, brilliant.org and even the Stack Exchange that have adapted for the expectations of new users with fast feedback. Maybe giving some 'landmarks' so people don't resign in the middle of the way can be helpful if is this kind of problem that is occurring. This can be real, I know a lot of strange examples, but the most intriguing for me is the case one friend of mine who had completed all calculus courses in coursera.org but got stuck for 3 years in calculus 2. (Now he works as a data scientist in a good enterprise.)
If the problem is triggered by some kind of anxiety, I think that if students feel they can count on you for a little and sincere talk in the final of some lecture or another, without being harshly judged - because probably they had heard hints for changing the major or something like that, a kind of talk that could be uneasy and even kills the trust - I just can think a good outcome being constructed along the semester.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: So, a few thoughts based on my past experience in such a case:
What you can do to help such students improve is partly dependent on how many students are in your class(es), and by extension, how many students would fall in the category of needing help. I did my undergraduate at a large university, so take this with a grain of salt. The average class size of an introductory lecture was ~150 students; since you said you teach at a community college, what you want to do *may* be more manageable, but still there is only so much you can do as an instructor at the college/university level.
On the note of advising/counseling students, there is absolutely nothing wrong with e-mailing students individually to express concern about their ability to perform well in your class or recommend them to make use of advising or office hours if necessary. However, it is also on the student(s) to put the time in to learn the material to set themselves up for later success. My thought would be to let students who fall in your category of concern about your concerns of their ability to succeed in your class once at the start of the semester and see if any of those students would like to consult your advice regarding major/career choices or study habits. Likewise, if any issues persist after the first examination, you could reach out to struggling students individually in this regard as well.
If a student has failed a class or several classes before and you want to advise, a place to start for me would be how much time did you dedicate to this class, and how difficult was it to grasp the material? Perhaps what are/were your study habits like? (I failed my introductory programming class and barely passed my linear algebra class after bombing the final in my first semester of undergraduate, and these questions, including the latter, were what I reflected on between that semester and the next semester, when I retook the former class I failed)
Do note that there are a variety of students who may be dealing with a variety of issues (as a previous answer mentioned) and that addressing student performance issues is really a case-by-case situation. Also, as unfortunate as it is, there is only so much you can do as an instructor while drawing the fine line between instructor and student. Not sure how the case is for a community college where class size may be smaller, but at my undergraduate university, at least a few students failed a class every semester. As said before, it is on the students to ensure their own success; instructors have very limited hours (especially if they also have to do research) to help students and they are best spent with the students who are more actively seeking help in any given course.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Just my couple of cents, mostly from things observed back in my student years.
Quite a few students couldn't keep up for one reason or another. Our associate dean was kind, wise and experienced, and the nugget of wisdom I gained from them was that "successfully" graduating the program is not necessarily the best option for the student. At the end of the day, what you want is them living a happy and fulfilling life. You also want to help them use their potential to the fullest extent possible, but not everyone can get to the same level.
Now, this is trivial - what is less obvious, however, is that many of these young adults have been following a path in life without that much consideration. Some of them are actually not in a position to not think of themselves as of failures when being unable to reach what they dreamt of.
The third realization is that they usually don't even know what that dream is, and the goal itself is foreign to them - it could be tiger parenting, peer pressure, seeing how everyone around is seemingly successful at completing their assignments. Such mental health issues are well-documented at this point and are best resolved with professional counseling (given that you are in the US). Our local culture is much different, so the aforementioned associate dean had to don the counselor hat every now and then, and facilitated transfers to less intense programs or even other universities, talked to parents and whatnot.
The above was about the dean office directly responsible for managing students, but instructors typically communicated their concerns to them, sometimes through the chair\*. **As an instructor, then, you could offer a set amount of your time to help these failing students and/or advise on modifications to their programs. From there on, it would be up to the dean's office to handle.** And hey, even if the students end up quitting, it might be for the best for them in the long term. You can not - and should not - strive to live their life for them. But you can and should try to help them. As an instructor, you are not in the position to help them personally, but you are in the position to help them professionally. *To a limited extent.*
\*I am not quite sure about the world choice here, academia is diverse :)
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/17
| 609
| 2,796
|
<issue_start>username_0: Say you're working on two papers A and B simultaneously, and the content and topic of the papers partially overlap such that normally you would be required to cite paper A in paper B. But since both papers are being written simultaneously how do prevent self-plagiarism?
Should you cite paper B in paper A and vice versa, even though neither is published yet?<issue_comment>username_1: With respect to accurate accountability: you are required to cite anything taken verbatim from another source, regardless of where, when, or if published. If we're not talking about importing exact language and you're referring instead to ideas you've included that are also present or explored in your other publication, it works as follows:
Your paper that is published first is free from obligation. Take whatever you want from your other paper's drafts and set it into print.
Your paper that is published second must cite properly any elements that were originally published elsewhere.
These two guidelines hold true down to the nanosecond. If both publishers produce on the same night, you still need only worry about accountability for the second one. But, since that's really a ridiculous pain in the ass, why not just cite everything (using a label for "pending" in your references)? Life would be easier that way.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends on whether these are the same type of paper. If they have different focal points but share certain informative paragraphs introducing a certain matter, it makes sense that they would be similar. If these are opinion papers with overlapping ideas, that could count as a form of parallel submission, though I doubt this is the case.
This is really a matter of personal consideration. I know theoretical biologists who repeat certain paragraphs in almost every paper they write, with some variation. So long as it isn't blatant verbatim copying, its only a question of whether this copying reduces the significance of one of the papers in the eyes of the journal. If it doesn't then I wouldn't worry about it, especially if the information is necessary to provide background in both papers.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, I would cite paper A in paper B, and I would cite paper B in paper A. Initially the citation would be something like “in submission” with a URL for the referees. As both papers work through the pipeline, that citation would evolve into either a refereed publication venue if possible, or a preprint server if not, to ensure that future readers can follow the link.
On the other hand, I would also write both papers from scratch, without sharing text between them, because (in my experience) that leads to better-written papers. So self-plagiarism isn’t an issue.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/09/17
| 993
| 4,573
|
<issue_start>username_0: A few months ago a very well-known (and controversial) authority in my field published a theoretical model of a phenomenon that one of my collaborators addressed many years ago. Interestingly, the paper does not reference my collaborator's work at all, even though the authors of this new paper are well aware of it, and have carefully cited "around" it.
My initial response was not to respond, but then I noticed striking similarities between specific paragraphs in the paper and my collaborator's work. The authors reach the same conclusions as my collaborator, but using a model they have developed. Though it doesn't qualify as plagiarism, it annoys me when "new" ideas are proposed without crediting those who originally proposed them. Of course this happens all the time, but I have never been in a position to respond.
My question is how should I respond to this paper, and whether I should respond at all. My collaborator has ceased publishing in this field, and was not interested in responding (but wouldn't mind if I did). Otherwise I have had mixed responses from colleagues, everything from "it happens all the time", to suggesting that I write to the authors or the editor of the journal. Another point to consider is that the senior author is on the advisory board of the prestigious journal the paper was published in.<issue_comment>username_1: From what you have described, it is unlikely that the author's decision to omit mention of the previous paper would constitute any breach of the journal's policies, or any violation of academic integrity requirements. You have stated your assessment that this is not a case of plagiarism, notwithstanding some similarities between the present paper and the previous paper. If that assessment is correct then you are really just talking about a decision by the author to omit mention of a previous paper, which is a decision that is within his discretion as a researcher, and which has gone successfully through peer review.
Since there is no evident breach of policies or academic integrity standards, the journal is unlikely to change the article unless its authors request an addendum. You could either write to the authors suggesting this, or you could try to publish your own "letter to the editor" supplementing the information in the recently published paper by mentioning the previous work. A letter to the editor could draw attention to the omitted work in a respectful way, noting the similarities of the ideas in the two papers, and noting the way in which the present paper formalises the previous idea with a new model. That would make a nice supplement for readers who are unfamiliar with the previous work. Of course, there is no guarantee that the editors would publish it, but if you feel strongly about this, it might be worth a try. If you can say something valuable about the connection between the two papers then the editors might decide that it is a worthy supplement.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't write to the authors or to the editor. If your collaborator does not want to respond, why would you?
You can, of course, mention your collaborator's results during conferences or when talking to other scientists. In fact, if your field is anything like mine, most of your colleagues will already have noticed that this paper does not bring anything new to the table.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Publish a technical report version of your work (or update any existing report) and include a critique of the new paper.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't know if this is field dependent, but I would definitely recommend contacting the journal editor as, in my field, one of the questions asked of reviewers is "has this paper correctly cited previous relevant work". Maybe the reviewer was just not aware of your previous colleague's contribution (although in my opinion, a thorough reviewer should be doing their own literature search to check the authors have done this), but the journal should be made aware that they haven't cited something relevant to their work.
Science (in the current state of career progression based on paper and citation counts) relies on us all being honest and giving credit where it is due to other researchers. As a community, we need to be vigilant about this and not let occasional egotists claim originality if others have contributed to the topic. Also, since your colleague is no longer working in this field I think they should be grateful to you for taking up this point.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/17
| 1,953
| 8,169
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am preparing a seminar talk. Currently the presentation contains some theorems and some proofs. Probably, I will not have time to explain all the proofs - I will have to skip some of them. My question is, which of the two options is better:
1. Keep the slides with the proofs visible, and during the presentation, if I see that the time is tight, rush through them saying that "I skip the proof", or -
2. Keep the slides with the proofs hidden, and during the presentation, if I see that there is enough time, unhide and go through them?
The advantage of option 1 is that the audience sees that I have a proof and they can read it later if they want; also, if I have time it is easier to present the proof;
the disadvantage is that it might look confusing or unprofessional to rush through slides. Are there other considerations?<issue_comment>username_1: Put the slides that contain the proofs after the last slide and have links on the relevant slides so you can jump to the proof slide and back to the next one.
That way no-one will know if you skip the proofs, but they could see you click the link to jump to a proof if you have the time.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: Keep the slides with the proofs visible and explain -- upon reaching the first proof -- that you've included proofs for those that like to read ahead and you won't have time to go through them/all of them.
---
*Response to [DVSA](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/117052/is-it-good-to-have-slides-that-may-be-skipped-during-a-presentation/117061?noredirect=1#comment308412_117061)*:
>
> That's terrible advice imo...there shouldn't be anything
> on the slides you aren't talking about...skipping the proof [looks] unprepared...
>
>
>
For every speaker there exists an audience member that is unengaged, because they've already understood the material. That audience member can engage themselves with the proof. By explaining, "I'll explain the general idea of the theorem; the proofs are included for those that like to read such details," your criticisms don't apply. This strategy will be appreciated by some often neglected members of the audience.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Depends on the size of the audience and/or your ability to “read” them. You figure out in advance what to minimize if you sense they are following well or even bored; and what additional detail to go into if you sense they need it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: **I use a 2D layout for that.**
I do not know the software you will be using, with [`reveal.js`](https://revealjs.com) you can have a linear progression, and [some slides can go "down"](https://revealjs.com/#/2) (these are the detailed ones).
This way I get to keep the continuity of the presentation, and move deeper if needed.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: While I love the answer from username_1 and the comment from GEdgar, I'd like to offer an alternative that has sometimes worked well for me:
Occasionally I elect to present a very rough sketch of a proof on my slides--this allows me to show that the proof exists and give some sense of the tools required without getting mired in the intimate details of the argument or burying my audience in a hail of notation. Depending on how time is running I can either breeze through this sketch quickly or more slowly fill in some of the details and intuition verbally (though I would highly recommend against attempting to present a full proof in this way). In addition, I can also mention that I would be happy to provide the full proof to anyone who would like to see it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: As an addition to the existing answers, if there are slides that you visibly skip over, you should explain *why* you're doing that. From personal experience, if the audience thinks you're trying to hide something, the whole atmosphere of the presentation can become antagonistic.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: I wouldn't do this in a professional business environment, but for academia it's no big deal to skip slides.
For a seminar talk you will probably have differently formatted handouts, but in any other case it's common to hand out the slides and so they should be linear structured, not 2d or having half of the content in the appendix.
Sure you could try to estimate exactly what you will be able to present in the timeframe, but actually you can't. Your audience should learn something and so they should ask questions if they don't understand something. And based on how many questions there are you will not get anywhere near what you estimated.
I think the ability to adapt your talk to the audience to enable them to get the most out of your talk is far more important than to have a smooth, perfectly planned out show. On the other hand it's more likely that nobody asks questions, only very few can follow up to the last slide, but everybody sits there quite and politely. But that's not how it should be.
The difference to business scenarios is, that it's far more involving for the audience to understand proofs, than to grasp some facts about products and bar charts. And your not trying to sell anything so you don't have to keep a polished facade that might deteriorate by skipping around your slides.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: Don't ever say during your presentation, "because we're short on time, we're going to skip these next slides". That just highlights your failure to prepare a talk that is of the appropriate length, and annoys the audience by teasing them with content that they will not get a chance to see.
If you *must* prepare some extra slides, either because you don't know in advance how much time you will get, or how many questions the audience will ask, or how interested the audience will be in the technical details, then do it as professionally and seamlessly as possible.
One way is to use Keynote, in which case you can [use an iPhone as a remote to control the slides](https://support.apple.com/kb/PH24289). The iPhone will display a thumbnail of each slide, which lets you select the slide you want to advance to, and the audience will never know that you skipped anything.
Alternatively, set up the computer such that the external display is not a mirror of the laptop's screen. That could also let you select the slide from your computer without letting the audience see your supplementary materials.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Some softwares have been suggested to help you skip slides without the audience noticing. I have two options for you in this regard, one is <https://prezi.com/> which I have used a fair bit. It allows you to move in any direction between your 'slides' and the other, assuming you are working in PP, is to use 'action' buttons as links to other locations in your presentation (under links tab).
The drawback with both is that you need a thorough knowledge of your presentation, inside, out, back and forwards, as this is how you will be able to move through it!
Some people have complained that the transitions in prezi, very forwards/backwards and fluid, leave them feeling a little sea sick from watching.
Overall, its not a problem to skip slides as long as you cover all the evidence in different ways, such as talking ad-lib with another slide if its appropriate. There is no point in making people suffer the same information twice as that leads to the well known phenomenon of 'death by powerpoint'...
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_10: The most frequent reason I see for speakers skipping slides is that they were interrupted by questions and were suddenly under time pressure.
Of course, one can naively say "don't accept questions". Stuff happens. If an interviewee for a slot refuses to take an important question, that's it for the candidate, and they may as well stop. You may have a poor session chair that loses control. Again, stuff happens. If you insist, under such cases, to stick rigorously to your stack, you're being rude to other in the session, or you look unaware of the situation.
The best speakers need to be able to think on their feet.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/17
| 2,810
| 11,920
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a recent review, one reviewer said we must rework the paper in light of two other papers. One paper was a highly valuable suggestion, and we've enthusiastically taken it on board. However, the second paper seems to be an ultra-specific paper (one example among thousands) and not applicable to our work.
I'm thinking of writing something like:
>
> There are many methods for XYZ (and an anonymous reviewer of this paper seemed fond of QRST [26]), and a survey was given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC for our specific problem.
>
>
>
(Here, I leave off "...since QRST does not actually apply to our problem".)
In this example, we (fairly politely) highlight that we're citing [26] at the reviewer's request. But I'm a bit worried it would be perceived as a passive-aggressive slight.
**Question**: Is it okay to mention we're citing an article only because a reviewer told us to?
I'm also considering two alternatives:
Alternative 1:
>
> There are many methods for XYZ, such as QRST [26], LMNOP [4], and QRSTUV [5]; a survey is given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC.
>
>
>
But this seems like I'm adding even more virtually irrelevant citations.
Alternative 2:
>
> **Acknowledgment**
>
> A helpful anonymous reviewer suggested citing [26].
>
>
>
But while accurate, it might be considered provocative (and rude) and get the paper rejected.
This question is related to: [How to deal with an unreasonable reviewer asking to cite irrelevant articles?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/99745/8469) But in our case, the reviewer is not being unreasonable, maybe just fond of this particular paper. And it's just one additional citation that's being requested.
---
*Update*: Thanks for everyone's help! To let you know what's going on (and maybe this will help someone who winds up in the same situation):
(*TL;DR*: The reviewer's suggested paper is related to an "in-between" paper which is related to our work; we feel it's not off-topic to cite it while discussing this in-between paper. It wasn't as off-topic as originally thought.)
1. We generally agreed with the advice in the answers (don't cite it). We also found the editor's email specifically said not to cite irrelevant papers suggested by reviewers. But we dug deeper to ensure we're not perceived as being dismissive. What happened next:
2. Upon more careful inspection, the reviewer described it as an "example". Eventually, we concluded that the reviewer was not giving us a list of papers to cite, but to generally say "look at papers like these".
3. This turned out to be a gold mine: it gave many papers which we could use to put our work into a broader context; none of our paper's predecessors do this. In fact, we found a paper which almost identically states the motivation for our paper, but in a broader context (which empowers our justification for working on this topic).
4. We looked into the suggested paper's references and papers citing that paper. We found another paper is a kind of "in-between" paper (related to both our paper, and the paper that was mentioned by the reviewer). We now discuss this in-between paper in detail, and explain how our method deviates from it. In the context of discussing this in-between paper, we feel it's not irrelevant to quickly cite the paper that was mentioned by the reviewer, without giving it undue weight.
(PS. In this particular instance, I feel this is not the reviewer's paper: other papers by the same authors (e.g. the in-between paper) are more natural to cite.)<issue_comment>username_1: There is no reason or regulation that you have to include the citation at all in a case like this. The reviewer's comments are just that: comments. The editor may take them as requirements or not, but the paper is still yours and you should use your judgement about what to include.
But to avoid problems that may arise with the editor, include your reasons in a note to him/her. We didn't include x because y. The editor may send it back, but I doubt it. The editor may also send it out for additional review but likely to a different set of reviewers. Even if it is reviewed again by the same person, as long as they don't have a particular motive for the suggestion, they should evaluate your paper as a whole. But your paper contains nothing provocative if you just omit the citation.
Let the editor work for you and explain why you haven't taken a particular suggestion among many that you did find helpful.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There is a tension between two motivations, which seem implicit in your question and approach:
1. You want to accommodate the request, although it is perhaps
unreasonable, to make sure your paper gets published.
2. You want to include only what's relevant and reasonable, so as not to compromise the paper's quality for the sake of "review politics".
You propose to resolve the tension by including the requested citation but distancing yourself from it at the same time. However, this comes across as either rude and petty or as perfunctory. Chances are, this won't get the job done: The reviewer may be less inclined to recommend acceptance of your paper if your tone is rude or his request is served perfunctorily; and you don't really stand your ground either.
My suggestion would be to treat the superfluous reference as a mere suggestion and to *not* include it. I would point out the reasons in the accompanying letter to the editor, in which you also detail the other changes you made to the draft. This helps both of your goals while being upfront: It maintains your integrity and the quality of the paper, but it also improves your chance of acceptance, since in the last instance, the editor makes the decision, and your argument for not including the reference sounds persuasive.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: As it turns out, not every comment or suggestion forwarded by a reviewer needs to be necessarily accommodated in your manuscript. Hence, as you seem to have a convincing argument against citing the suggested paper in your manuscript, in your rebuttal letter state that you have considered the suggested comment but you didn't find that paper to merit citation. (However, compose your argument politely, thanking the reviewer for the suggestion.)
Upvotes: 8 <issue_comment>username_4: No, it's completely inappropriate to cite something while making snarky remarks about how you don't think you should. There is no upside whatsoever: it makes you look petty and obnoxious, and it looks like you're disparaging the authors of the paper being cited, even though you're actually disparaging the referee, which is hardly better. Either cite the paper respectfully or don't cite it at all.
If the suggested paper is not relevant, then you shouldn't cite it at all and your response to the referee should justify that decision. If the referee insists and the editor concurs, then just cite the paper in as neutral a way as possible.
Given that there seem to be multiple possible approaches to solve your problem, perhaps the best solution would be to write a short paragraph addressing them. Something along the lines of your "alternative 1" but with explanation of why you chose the method you did, instead of one of the others. Wouldn't that improve the paper?
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_5: To complement the other answers, most of which seem to take as granted the assumption that the reviewer's request is indeed pointless and made by mistake (or possibly to pad their own citation count, as some answers allude to), let me take the charitable view towards the reviewer and assume that they actually think, correctly or not, that the method QRST described in the paper they suggested you cite *is* appropriate for your problem, and possibly even better suited for it than the method ABC that you're currently using.
If so, it's plausible that this particular reviewer may not be the only reader who will think so.
Perhaps method QRST is considered by many to be "the state of the art" for solving similar problems, while method ABC is older and often considered to be less efficient and/or less accurate. Thus, other readers might plausibly also look at your paper and think "why did they use ABC, when QRST would surely have worked better?" In the worst case, they might assume that you're only using ABC because your knowledge of the field is years or decades out of date and you're not aware of any newer and better methods, making the overall quality of your research suspect, or even that any unexpected results you've obtained are probably just errors caused by the inaccuracy of the ABC method.
If that's indeed the case (or if you have even the slightest reason to suspect that it *might* be the case for some readers), you ought to demonstrate that you're indeed aware of the current state of the art in your field, and explain why method ABC is, in fact, better suited for your problem than QRST or other more recent methods. In some cases, this might indeed mean citing the suggested QRST reference just to show that you're aware of it and have considered that method before choosing not to use it.
Depending on how you choose to phrase this, the result *might* end up looking somewhat similar to your first alternative suggestion, e.g.:
>
> There are many methods for XYZ, of which a recent survey is given in [15]. Unfortunately, some of the more advanced methods, such as QRST [26], LMNOP [4], and QRSTUV [5], are not well suited to this particular problem, because <*insert explanation why*>. In this paper, we instead take the classic approach ABC [2], which does not suffer from the limitations described above, and can still provide accurate results in a reasonable time, provided that [...].
>
>
>
---
More generally, the point I'm trying to argue here is that review comments *may* be mistaken, but they're rarely if ever *completely* without cause. If a reviewer thinks there is an issue with some part of your paper, then it's likely that other readers will also think so. That means that you should do *something* to address the perceived issue, even if it's only to clarify your writing so that others are less likely to misunderstand it the same way as the reviewer did.
(Of course, there are occasional exceptions to this rule. Sometimes reviewers are poorly chosen, and sometimes you may just have to accept that a particular reviewer does not actually belong to the target audience of your paper, or that their suggestions might have an inappropriate ulterior motive. But in general, it's still best to start from an assumption of competence and good faith, until and unless there is *clear and unescapable* evidence to the contrary.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: ALWAYS put the reader first. What would you like to read as a reader? Comment "method QRST [16] is irrelevant here but reviewer wanted it included" or nothing at all? Out of your suggestions, only 2nd one is viable even though you don't like it.
If such statement doesn't already rub the editor the wrong way and he demands removal of the statement or simply rejects your paper, reviewer is likely to be offended too - he will try hard to find reasons to reject the paper or at least demand this statement removal. (Well, unless he is only after that citation, but I doubt it - as you said, he recommended a valuable paper too, so he seems to know the field).
Finally, considering there are multiple approaches to solve the problem - enough of them to warrant a review article - there is absolutely no harm in adding yet another reference to yet another method solving the problem. After all, you surely have a section of introduction dedicated to other approaches and showing why you are better. It will be just another citation in the section mainly used to pad the reference list.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/17
| 1,286
| 5,037
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a medical doctor, but decided to go into a graduate program because I wanted to contribute to progress of humanity with new knowledge ( I know, very romantic). I got accepted into a graduate program in Germany (I am not German).
Now that I am in science, I have realized **it is not what I expected**. Getting a job in academia is very VERY hard ( particularly in Germany I think), the life of a professor **is not what better suits the lifestyle I want to lead in the future**, and a job in the industry is not really what I want, **particularly** having the possibility of doing a medical residency and having my own practice one day.
I have already finished my masters and thought I could do my PhD and use the 3 years to learn the medical german language and later apply for a medical residency here. But as time goes by I am forgetting everything I learned in med school and I cannot focus on learning German while doing a PhD because of all the work that comes with it, of course.
Don´t get me wrong, I **like my PhD project**, the lab and doing research per se. It is just that I feel these would be years dedicated to something that I do not want to do for a living.
So...
I have not share any of these thought with my PI, so, how do I tell him that **now** all of a sudden and without previous notice, I don´t want to do the PhD AT ALL, especially after having shown enthusiasm for the PhD in the past ( just a couple of weeks ago!)? That is, without looking like I was faking enthusiasm/ was just „using“ them.
Additionally, I am in the 4th month of a one year contract. I would actually like to work the remaining 8 months to get all of my work in order to hand it over. However, is it possible by law that he "fires" me and does not allow me to finish the one year contract?<issue_comment>username_1: You PI never paid you salary for your PhD study. As a PhD student, you worked for yourself. Your scholarship came from yourself. You indirectly paid your PI's team, not the other way around. Your're your own boss. He's ***not*** your boss.
Just tell your PI you'd like to quit because you believe PhD is not suitable for you. No need to be emotional. You're the person who is going to fire your PI.
---
OK... Your PI is *actually* your boss. Just inform about your decision, this is like resigning for a position. Again, no need to be emotional. Ask him for your future career referee.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no problem here. Just inform the PI that you intend to leave the program at the earliest opportunity. You haven't signed a contract with the devil for your soul. People change, people grow, people learn. Others understand that.
It would be good, however, for you to do what you can to leave things tidy when you go, not leaving others (PI, other students) in the lurch. To do this effectively you may need to spend some time cleaning up the current work and either finalizing it or passing it on to another. That is courtesy, but useful to you for the future if you decide later to re-evaluate yet again.
Take care of yourself; your future is yours and yours alone.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Summary: talk to your supervisor. If it is sudden for you to realize you want to get out of the PhD and your relationship to your supervisor is reasonably good, also tell him that you suddenly realized this is not what you'd want to do all your life, even though you still like that project. And that you think staying in the PhD program may hurt your chances with what you want to do for a living. You never know - he may have a good idea how to proceed. In any case, you don't have anything to lose: you can leave in any case (at the latest at the end of that contract).
---
>
> Additionally, I am in the 4th month of a one year contract.
>
>
>
Is that the first contract at that university? If so, as Karl pointed out you're likely still on probation (typically 6 months) and either side can still cancel the contract with 2 weeks notice without giving any reason.
(Your "as time goes by" sounds to me longer than 4 months in total.)
>
> I would actually like to work the remaining 6 months to get all of my work in order to hand it over.
>
>
>
That is something most supervisors like to hear: worse than a student leaving is a student suddenly leaving and leaving a mess.
>
> However, is it possible by law that he "fires" me and does not allow me to finish the one year contract?
>
>
>
Other than the Probezeit (probation period), no: neither the employer *nor you* can *one-sidedly* cancel a fixed-term contract. Both sides can agree on prematurely ending the contract, though (and employers will typically agree if an employee wants to leave).
And as employee, the employer has to let you out of the fixed term contract if you can show a better opportunity. I.e. if you have an offer, say, working full time + night shifts as doctor, that's more money than your PhD contract, so "better".
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/17
| 3,557
| 13,916
|
<issue_start>username_0: While thinking about [this recent question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/116752/should-i-retire-early-from-my-tenured-job), I was reminded of an issue at two different institutions I've taught at, as well as a third institution I am aware of via my father.
One complication I have seen at each of these universities is a number of professors who are well into their 70s (or even 80s), yet who refuse to retire. Obviously retirement is a personal decision that has no one-size-fits-all answer. However, I saw several instances of these professors causing "log-jams" in terms of resources and departmental turnover. For example, a professor who oversaw a lab next to my father's had "owned" his lab for something like 50 years. He did his research in there, brought in subsistence level funding, and "taught" a class every other semester (meaning his PhD students taught the course). He took up an entire lab and resisted anyone "encroaching" on his space. University administration placed pressure on him over some of these issues and he would usually (with much gnashing of teeth) comply in the minimally sufficient way. He never gave them enough cause to actually fire him. Because he had been with the university so long and was tenured, they could not fire him outright on account of his age alone.
In another instance, this time at one of my own universities, we had three professors who were about 85 years-old. They fulfilled their minimal teaching responsibilities (chosen in order of seniority in the department), but had each last published a paper about 5 years prior (with ~5 papers combined between them in the last decade). They sought next to no funding. They just squatted in their positions. The department could not hire any new professors until a position was vacated. By the time these professors finally retired (or died, in the case of one), there was a seven year gap between recent hires. This meant that there were exactly two professors who were not yet tenured, with one of them currently being evaluated for final tenure decisions. The department is struggling with stagnation now due to almost no turnover in their faculty. In the next five years or so, a number of professors in the department will reach age 65-70 ('retirement age'), meaning that within the next 5-7 years, the department will be comprised of ~65% untenured, assistant professors. As such, the department has been forced to attempt to recruit some established professors away from their current tenured positions at other universities (or have professors stick around well past retirement age, which caused the whole issue in the first place).
I also observed this phenomenon when I was applying to post-docs. Some universities wanted to hire tenure-track faculty, but instead had to hire post-docs in order to cover departmental teaching loads. In many instances, this leads to significant departmental instability in terms of continuity. Departments usually can't make a post-doc the graduate coordinator or even have them sit on committees (thesis/dissertation, curriculum, scheduling). This in turn places a larger burden on the existing faculty.
To be clear, these departments have policies in place that enforce certain productivity levels. These professors adhere to these policies, albeit barely. Yes, the standards could be raised, however, we also are trying to strike a balance between encouraging good research/teaching and enforcing a long list of rules and commandments.
**My question is thus as follows:** Should universities start including a clause in professors' contracts that mandates a certain retirement age? Or at the very least, what are some practices a department can adopt that will mitigate issues of professors who work well past standard retirement age?<issue_comment>username_1: There are places with mandatory retirement ages. There are other places where such practices are illegal. Most professors are subject to annual (or so) review and generally self justify their continued presence at the institution. Many have an annual self review, followed by a meeting with the dean. But in the presence of tenure and the absence of misconduct, such things mostly affect things like salary and teaching schedules. A self funded researcher is less affected by this, of course.
But any university or lab can provide inducements to retirement as long as they are generally available and not directed at specific individuals. For example, a (large) cash settlement in exchange for giving up tenure is fairly common. A cash settlement combined with a timed phase out is also possible. Some institutions have an honorary role for emeritus professors that keeps them connected but with few duties. It also helps keep people mentally active as they age.
Such things as inducements to retire are actually beneficial in general, not just in extreme cases. Some people don't want to retire because of financial considerations even though they no longer really enjoy their work. It is also an advantage to an institution to bring in new "talent". It is nearly impossible to get tenured if the faculty is so full of never-retiring full professors that there are no open permanent positions. Over time, you will get less qualified applicants if the young stars see no possibility of advancement.
Forcing someone out other than for misconduct of some sort is unethical, and often illegal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Here in Germany, professors are public servants and automatically retire when reaching retirement age. This has the equally automatic consequence that they are not paid a wage out of the university budget any more but a pension. And pensions of public servants work the way that any money they earn is subtracted from the pension.
Thus retired professors are typically (as long as they don't mess up the working atmosphere of the department) a net gain: any lecture they hold is essentially for free, any exams they take administer (they keep the ability to act as examiner) save work for someone else in the department. OTOH, they typically have to move into some small office, and can keep lab space only if they have grant/3rd party money to pay for that.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It seems to me that in all the examples you have given, the problematic issue is not age *per se*, but rather, the low level of productivity of the older academics you mention. It is also notable that the problem stems from the tenure system, where the older tenured academic is effectively immune to labour competition from new applicants. This is a form of 'closed shop' in labour economics, and it has various economic implications relating to productivity incentives and outcomes.
Since age is not the outcome of interest, it makes little sense to impose a policy that discriminates with respect to age. (Setting aside legal requirements, which might also prohibit this.) It seems to me to be more sensible that if a change to policies is made, to try to improve productivity and use of resources, that change ought to be either: (1) abolition of the tenure system, thereby freeing labour competition generally and freeing university resources; or (2) keeping the tenure system but raising the minimum productivity requirements imposed on those with tenure.
In regard to these two choices, there is already a substantial amount of economic literature that analyses labour competition under the tenure system (see e.g., [Alchian 1953](https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Private+Property+and+the+Relative+Cost+of+Tenure&btnG=), [Alchian 1968](https://www.econbiz.de/Record/the-economic-and-social-impact-of-free-tuition-alchian-armen/10001814473), [McPherson and Winston 1983](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0167268183900057), [McKensie 1996](https://www.jstor.org/stable/40752959?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents), [Brown 1997](https://www.jstor.org/stable/40751998), [Winston 1999](https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.13.1.13), [McGee and Block 2008](https://ideas.repec.org/h/wsi/wschap/9789812790798_0026.html), [Chen and Lee 2009](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264999308000989), [Brown 2017](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929119914001539)), which might be of interest in determining whether tenure is a good idea or not. In the first of these references, Alchian posits that non-profit tax-subsidised enterprises (such as universities) free administrators from the usual profit-loss constraints of the market, and therefore allow greater shirking, and greater arbitrariness in hiring and firing decisions. Alchian theorises that tenure acts as a limiting device to offset arbitrariness in hiring/firing decisions by administrators, and thus, there is a trade-off between reduced labour competition, and increased incentives for applicants to seek tenured positions. [Brown (2017)](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929119914001539) tests this theory empirically using data from the 2006 and 2010 [IPEDS surveys](https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/). He finds that tenure is more common in non-profit institutions than for-profit institutions, and that in private non-profit institutions tenure is positively related to endowment level and negatively related to reliance on tuition and fees.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The issue is not the age of these faculty members but that they do not carry their share of the workload and expectations of the department: Their sum of research, teaching, and service work does not match what one would expect from someone with the likely salary of someone who has been on the faculty for a long time.
The problem is then one of setting policies. If you don't publish, then you're clearly not matching the expectations for the position. There are then two options a department and faculty member have: initiate the procedure to revoke tenure; or change the workload assignment. We have done the latter in my former department with some old faculty members: They were simply assigned 4, 5, or 6 classes a year instead of the common 3, since they were not doing much research any more and were not overly active in service either. The policy that instituted this did not mention age but was simply based on research productivity. The net effect was two-fold: (i) a number of faculty decided to retire; (ii) the remainder now had a way in which they could actually contribute significantly to the mission of the department, given that their research productivity had waned a long time ago; this also allowed them to, for the first time in a long time, get good annual evaluations because these are based on the workload distribution assigned to them.
In other words, departments that do not address the problem typically do this because they want to "keep the peace" and not "rock the boat" or simply don't want to deal with the problem. But it's not true that there is no recourse -- it's not terribly difficult to design departmental policies that make sure everyone contributes in some way.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: The question and other answers focus on what is good for a university, mostly in terms of departmental economics, resources etc. I would like to highlight the ethical aspect in the context of the wider academic community.
As people age, they tend to have less energy, but more authority. Consequently, they become less likely to expend the former, but more likely to abuse the latter.
Although some decision-makers or even departments may benefit from having a well-connected and unscrupulous individual within their ranks, harm will inevitably be done to research and education overall. It is very unlikely that an impartial audit of a professor who has been occupying the same chair for decades can be conducted by his or her colleagues. In the absence of other reliable safeguards, the practice of forced retirements of veteran professors is better than nothing and hence perfectly ethical. A fair comparison would be a limit on the number of presidential terms, which is imposed and upheld in some countries, but disregarded in others.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: A very reasonable question. But/and, when people embark upon an academic career, they're thinking about short-term sacrifices in pay and choice-of-location for longer-term stability and security. That's certainly what I was thinking, decades back. I figured that if I managed to run the gauntlet and get tenure, it meant that I'd won the right to be self-directing. *Of\_course* be a good departmental citizen, service, teaching, etc.
But to have someone tell me decades later that the deal has been unilaterally changed... I'd think it was blatant bait-and-switch.
Yes, I'm certainly aware of "senior" faculty who are not really much of a help... but my own genuine explanation-to-self of why this is not terrible is that it is a (hidden?) cost of the tenure system. Which does not mean that the tenure system is bad, at all! But that there are such costs...
As it is, in the U.S., at my R1 place, in math, we have yearly "reviews"... and apparently have yearly "assessments" passed up the chain-of-command. And we still do have "tenure", except, oops, for "post-tenure review" which was mandated 25 years ago as a "compromise" to avoid having tenure abolished altogether (and be vulnerable to 30-day notice of termination, without cause).
So, ok, yes, there can be some old people who're still getting paid while not doing as much as they once did, or as much as some younger people might... but, as far as I can see, the filter mechanisms to avoid this are all too easily abused by central administration, *AND* would deter many bright, energetic people from going into academia at all, considering the trade-offs.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/17
| 680
| 2,976
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a two year contract as a visiting assistant professor. Is it normal to be keeping an eye on the market and perhaps selectively sending out applications now in my first year, or should I be holding off completely until next year?
I suppose the tricky thing is I'd ideally want a letter from my current chair, and I haven't discussed it with them. A postdoc who also started this year though asked if I'd be looking around, as it seems they will be, so there seemed to be some consensus perhaps that this was normal? Figured I'd throw out the question to see if anyone has had similar experiences.<issue_comment>username_1: Academia usually has a very long turn-around when it comes to hiring. You often need to apply for a tenure-track position at least 10-months before the position actually starts. Preparation of your application obviously needs to begin well before that. I began looking at jobs more than a year in advance of finishing my PhD. Even as it was, there was a small gap between when I defended my dissertation and when I was able to begin full-time employment.
I would certainly keep my eye on the market and prepare to start sending out applications sooner rather than later.
Speak with your department chair on his or her thoughts. She or he will be able to direct you as to their thoughts personally on the matter. They cannot fault you for wanting to have a successful career.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: ### Yes, absolutely be on the lookout for opportunities
Your employer has made it abundantly clear that they intend to kick you out after two years: It says so right on the contract. If you do not plan for that time, you will be unemployed and with no appointment/affiliation, both of which are more problematic than they should be.
So it is only natural you devote some time to your future options - regardless of it being in Academia even. As an academic in particular we know, that hiring processes tend to be very long; and you very often have to move far away / abroad so the logistics and legal aspects are more complex and again, take longer. So it's doubly important to plan well in advance for an academic.
Concrete suggestions:
* Don't look for a letter from the chair of your department early into your contract - unless the subject somehow comes up. I'd feel comfortable asking for something like that after I've done something impressive and/or once I have one year or less remaining.
* Tell prospective workplaces that you are mostly interested in starting out in 2 - X years (with X being the time into your current 2-year contract), but also say that this is flexible. Because it is: You could wait a while, on one hand; and you could also give notice and quite earlier than the full two years, on the other hand.
* Give independent consideration to whom you want to share your active job-search with. Telling people about this can have both positive and negative effects.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/18
| 3,304
| 14,316
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate studying math and I'm taking a graduate math class for the first time this semester. I've taken the undergraduate prerequisites, but it's still very challenging, which I was expecting.
I'm starting to get overwhelmed by the content and the pace of the course. The professor is not only very famous in the field but also tends to brush off most things as 'basic' during lectures and doesn't seem to like to answer students' questions in detail. I find it intimidating to approach the professor or go to office hours because I feel like I don't even know the basics. I'm the only undergraduate in the class, but it seems like other graduate students are also finding the content quite intense.
I also don't have anyone to work with, and I find it very difficult to just randomly approach people in the class, not only because I'm introverted but mostly because I feel very embarrassed of my lack of understanding. I'm really interested in the subject and I want to give it my best. It's hard to tackle the problem set even after consulting multiple books, and I feel more discouraged and unsure of myself. I'd appreciate some advice from people with more experience.<issue_comment>username_1: Mathematician here: We've all been in a similar situation when transitioning from undergrad to grad classes. You write that you are "embarrassed" due to your lack of understanding; don't worry, others probably are having issues also. But if you do think you aren't getting basics, then it is more, not less important that you talk to your fellow students and the professor.
However, the main thing you should realize is that this is a pretty regular experience. What matters is how you react to it; don't get demoralized but put the effort in. And don't hesitate to ask questions, even in class; your fellow students are likely confused about some of the same things you are.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Talk to your professor, fellow students, tutors. The department almost surely has resources to help students learn, and it's up to you to use them. As long as you make a genuine attempt to learn the material and don't show up expecting to be spoonfed, virtually everyone will be willing to help you.
As for being embarrassed: this isn't something to be embarrassed about. In fact if anything it would be embarrassing if the material were so simple you can
understand it easily. Besides, would you rather be embarrassed by your lack of understanding now, or by an F grade at the end of the semester? Being part of a university gives you access to resources an outside self-studying student doesn't have - make use of them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I was also in that exact situation once. As you can see from other answers, many of us were; it's a common experience.
The main thing that I regret, and I think limited my advancement at that exact point, was the inability/unawareness of reaching out to others and forming/joining a study group. (Turns out I was "competing" in some sense with another group of a dozen or so students who studied together.)
There's an actual a name for this phenomenon of feeling alone and spending overwhelming amounts of energy trying to get over that to the point of burnout, called [<NAME>ism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Henryism). In the literature, it's mostly associated with high-performing African-Americans who feel isolated, but I think it's applicable to a wide range of situations, esp., people from rural areas seeking to succeed in elite academia/industry. It seems particularly likely to afflict personalities who (a) are introverted and tend to go into math, (b) have had high success at the undergraduate level working alone from text resources, and (c) try to make this radical leap to graduate-level math work (not having the experiences or toolbox to get outside help).
In short: Push through and do what you need to join or create a study group. Also, go to the instructor's office hour and lay out your situation and experience. It's my primary regret that I couldn't think to make that happen in the exact same circumstance.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I was in a similar situation myself as an undergrad (physics), as I took an advanced quantum field theory course designed for graduate students. It was also taught by two lecturers - one of whom was excellent at teaching, the other less so...
At the time I had a good relationship with a professor who had previously taught the course, with whom I was able to talk about the subject matter. I also spent time with the graduate students on the course, both of these strategies are immensely useful and can help you figure out what you need to figure out.
In addition looking at other resources (particularly useful if the subject matter is a commonly taught subject) such as lecture notes and problem-sheet solutions was very helpful when I came across a subject I didn't feel I understood.
It is also very useful (in my experience) to look through problem sheets/past exams and make sure you understand the problems on there, as these are often the intended key take-aways and important points (it can be tough to sort the unnecessary detail in very complex subjects!).
Wishing you the best of luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: There are a couple of things that the other answers don't mention:
* The official prerequisites may not line up with what you are actually expected to know in the course. Being a graduate course, the professor probably expects the students to have a certain amount of mathematical maturity, which is not something that can be accurately measured in terms of prerequisites.
* There are different styles of graduate courses. One is where you are taught "basics," but at a higher level/faster pace than undergraduate courses. (These often have regular homework and/or exams.) Another type is a what I think of as a more "seminar-style" type course, where you are trying to teach something broader or deeper than a basic course, and you don't have time to go through all the underlying details to cover the material. (These ofter have no graded homework or exams.) Then there are things in between.
I can't tell from what you've said which type of class yours is, or if it's being taught in a reasonable way, or if the other students are following along better than you are. Depending on your situation, it might be better to switch to another undergraduate elective if possible.
But if you want to diagnose the situation, and do better in the class, try studying with some of the other students, and try going to office hours and asking the professor about some of the details. Even if they're not willing to explain all the details to you, they should at least be willing to say tell you whether you shouldn't be in this class if you don't know this already or suggest references where you can learn how to fill-in the details for yourself. It's also possible the professor doesn't know you (and the other students maybe?) don't know these things and this will help make things clear. (I often don't know what my students are familiar at the beginning of a course.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: You definitely want to talk to the professor during office hours and be open about your struggles in the class. They will be able to give you some advice and direction about how to tackle the material. Make sure to mention you are an undergraduate so the professor knows you are coming from a different background than the other students.
Don't feel embarrassed by your lack of understanding, I guarantee there are other students who barely understand it themselves or are out of practice from when they took other mathematics courses years ago during their undergraduate study.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I agree with the answers here, and would add the following points from personal experience (both as a student and as a mentor):
* Find a mentor. Your professor or department might suggest one, or it may be someone you know and trust. Either way, it needs to be someone who is reasonably knowledgeable on the subject, but more importantly someone you feel comfortable feeling "stupid" around, and asking "stupid" questions. You will very soon realise that your questions are not only *not* 'stupid', but are the right kind of questions to be asking in order to grasp the material. Typically it's mostly a case of overcoming the steep initial learning curve, and you'll find that it becomes much easier to work things on your own after that (typically after a couple of months).
* *Do* spend time understanding basic concepts and building on them, rather than simply fall back on memorising approaches that you feel you don't quite understand, or just gathering enough superficial understanding to barely pass the assignments. Be inquisitive, and ask questions. Personally I would also recommend making Anki notes whenever you have a personal insight, and revising these insights daily as per Anki's smart scheduling. This takes some time initially, but saves a lot of time later, because the basic building blocks and insights you'd otherwise have forgotten and have to revise all the time, will now be available to help you revise your understanding and build up on more advanced concepts as you progress.
* Yes, you *will* need to put in the extra effort in parallel to trying to keep up with the course at the same time. No it will not be like this for the entirety of your course; in all probability if you put in the extra effort for a couple of months, you'll find yourself being more and more comfortable keeping up after that. But you *do* need to be as organised and as fast as possible about it *now*, otherwise you risk leaving too significant a gap to fill. So find someone you trust and start having discussions and exploring your insights as soon as possible.
* Many students are under the mistaken impression that a university is a place of *teaching*. It is not. It is a place of *learning*. You should 100% be responsible for what you get out of it. Lecturers, professors and mentors are useful in hopefully guiding you on the off chance you stray from the right path. But don't expect anyone to push you along that path or hold your hand; if anything occasionally they might accidentally push you backwards! Pushing forward at all times is totally up to you, which is also what makes this exciting and worthwhile in the first place.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: **Have you asked yourself what you want from this course?**
You haven't mentioned how far along you are in undergrad, nor how many weeks into the semester you've progressed. I applaud you for taking the challenge. Do not be demoralized! Some graduate classes and materials are brutal for nearly all students.[\*] It certainly was the experience in my case.
That being said, you need to have a conversation with faculty and perhaps, importantly, *yourself*. Really ask yourself if the time you need to invest to push through the material is worth the payout here. Whatever material is contained in the course will not disappear from the annals of history - you can revisit such a course in the future. Again, I'm not sure how far into the semester you've gone, nor what your needs are, but consider such questions as:
Is the course required? Will it help you achieve your goals? *What are your goals?* How does the *energy* necessary for this course weigh against your other responsibilities and interests?
Throughout this analysis, remember: **Do not be afraid to turn to help. And, do not be afraid to drop the course.** I mention the latter because it is not emphasized in the other answers. I'm not questioning your ability - no! I'm questioning whether you'll be *happy* after allocating your time to push through the material. Don't fall victim to the sunk cost fallacy, nor to your whims. It's tough to cut projects, yes, but there is no shame in it. It's a skill actually! Keep your options open.
[\*] Consider that grad students often have varied levels of preparation. Some may find the course harder than you are. You're not alone in the struggle.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: During studies (CS with maths as side dish), I had this effect twice.
* Once, I tried to handle a more practical project in a programing regime I had zero experience with (logical programming, in ProLog). I thought I'd just wing it (like I did everything else in CS, pretty successfully), but it turned out that there was not only a whole world of different mindsets here, but also terminology, practices, etc. that I simply did not have, and was also not able to get with the admittedly little time I invested. Also, which was a huge difference to everything else I did in a similar fashion, it turned out that I didn't really find the topic that interesting, after all.
* The other was a late-stage maths course on Abelian Groups. It had precious little prerequisites, they started from first principles. I was able to follow anything in class pretty easily, but after some time it turned out that I simply could not do the homework anymore. I later learned that the more successful maths majors who took that small course invested 10+ additional study hours each week *just* on this course to make the material intuitive for them; a purely mechanical approach (like I tried) didn't work anymore. I still could pretty much understand what they were talking about in class, but had no idea how to apply it.
So: a) check if what you are listening to is really "for you", i.e. whether it actually is something you are kind of familiar with, or really want to become familiar with, or if it is some weird stuff that does not really connect with you. And b) check how much effort the more successful students are investing. Maybe it is one of those courses that views the classroom work as more of a hint of what to study on your own, maybe you are supposed to invest the majority of your efforts in private.
Obviously, you'll have jump your own shadow to talk with your co-students; I guess it's up to you whether you are able to deepen the work you do together with them. But that's maybe more a topic for the interpersonal StackExchange...
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/18
| 1,534
| 6,324
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have observed two recurring trends in Academia, both in Europe and in North America. I don't have statistics in hand but I can present quite a few examples of budgets in which the investment for new infrastructure is 1000 fold what is invested in hiring permanent research staff. For example the French government has invested 4.6 billion euros in buildings and 680 million in researcher for a large research hub outside Paris. New infrastructure, most often new buildings, are filled with temporary staff, more than half of researchers are on temporary contracts. Some European countries even have limitations on the number of times a contract can be renewed, so researchers end up moving from one lab to another, which is also an inefficient use of (public) money.
A building is only paid once, while 20-30 years of salary definitely adds up, but considering the cost of a new building we could easily hire hundreds of researcher. I would rather have more permanent staff in an old building than being in a new building with 80% of temporary researchers.
So why this agenda and why is money not invested more in people? Is it just imposed by politicians? Why don't large recent centers ask for more permanent positions to be funded?
PS: I am not even sure what tags would be appropriate for this question.<issue_comment>username_1: You can have a reception when you open a building, cut the red ribbon, invite the queen...you can't do the same with new positions (as far as I know).
This is another example, but with philanthropy, it is often the case that the benefactor will want to put money towards a physical object that will stay in place with a name plate. I think equipment goes under the same category. Does the same go for politicians or whoever secures the funding for the building?
Funding research is like a big black hole. You invest and you get only a few percent back on your investment. To policy makers and philanthropists it must feel like investing in a building and getting an elevator shaft.
Just to give an example, recently a natural history museum was opened in my institution. A huge amount of funding went into the project, all donations, but the institution created basically zero new research positions for the facility.
I think the problem is well summarized in the Yes Minister episode "The Compassionate Society".
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Even though collaboration over distance has become more and more easy due to technology, it is that **researchers like to meet**. Really, they do. And especially, they **like to meet at nice places**. I am pretty sure that places like Princeton would not have attracted all these great minds over a long period of time if it has been an unpleasant and crammed place.
Similarly, **researchers still like to have offices**.
Besides this, there is also politics: It is much simpler to allocate a fixed amount of money for one greater expense than to allocate a yearly budget. This is what I observe in my country. We see a lot of programs where a fixed amount of money is given for a specific purpose which has to be spent in a limited amount of time ("Hochschulpakt", "Exzellenzinitiative", "1000-Professoren-Programm", "Digitalisierungsoffensive") and this is often used to fund *temporary positions*. but it is really rare that the government actually raises the base funding of and institute to hire more *permanent* researchers.
Finally, the number do not really add up. You can build a decent building for, say, 10,000,000 (Dollars, Euros,…), but considering that a researcher costs (very) roughly 100,000 a year, the building only pays 100 year of research, so can have enough money to pay about 3 or 4 young guys for the rest of their careers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You are assuming that current buildings are enough to keep up with the rising number of students and staff. It simply isn't true. One just needs to look at how many babies were born in 2000, and a few other known factors, to know approximately how many students there will be in 2018. (This task sadly appears to be out of reach for many politicians when they decide on the budget for higher education and research.) Simply put, it's more than last year, which was more than the previous year, which was more than the year before, and so on. Meanwhile, buildings have a mostly fixed capacity. You can do the math.
You mention Paris in your question. I work in a Parisian university. **There isn't enough room.** Period. There is an immense pressure on available rooms to conduct teaching, organize seminars or conferences, etc. It disorganizes everything. Some tasks that should be trivial become impossible. Even opening up new classes (a decision that should be purely academic!) is potentially in jeopardy because it's not clear that there will be enough room to accommodate it.
All this, despite the fact that we are in a brand new campus (2012) built from the ground up... because there wasn't enough room in the previous one! And this breaks down another one of the implicit statements in your question: the old campus isn't just demolished or left unused to rot. It's now used by another university (it used to be shared by the two). The "old building" is, in fact, also full...
Another example: where I got my doctorate, some doctoral students had to wait weeks or months for an office to be free. Until then, they had to work at home or in the library. I also had to give classes to 40 students in a room fit for 30. Not because of bad administration or lack of foresight; simply due to lack of space. Students stole chairs from nearby rooms or sat on the floor. I hope you realize that this does not foster a healthy learning environment. After a few weeks, many cut their losses and stopped coming to class, "fortunately".
You might complain that not enough permanent faculty/researchers are hired, and I would be the first to agree. One just needs to look at the trends in student vs faculty numbers to reach a conclusion. (Sadly, another task out of reach for politicians.) Or the rising amount of researchers working precarious contracts. But infrastructure is vital too. If you hire 50 researchers and you have 3 empty offices to put them in, something will explode.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/18
| 1,470
| 5,888
|
<issue_start>username_0: Ok, so I'm in a pretty dire situation here. I'm coming towards the end of my PhD contract in France. For a litany of reasons, it hasn't gone too well.
* I had extreme difficulty getting my experiments to work, and as I'm working with living organism (microalgae) this often meant months of delays. My experimental schedules were often incredibly strenuous and I had nobody to help me with them.
* My supervisor is a kind person but far too busy for me, and I've never really been a real priority to her. She's often away for weeks, responds incredibly slowly or not at all to requests for review of my work or help, and has decided to go on a research cruise just before my deadline date (while continuously delaying review of my currently written chapters). I don't want to be too pessimistic but I feel like she gave up on me months ago and didn't suggest I quit because she wanted me to finish the work and publish the papers.
* Ridiculous bureaucracy in France has no leeway on deadline for submission -- 2 months before the prospective defence date and no later, and no defence date outside of contract end (to avoid paying unemployment benefits to students while they continue to work). Apparently I am unable to waive this either, as I would be happy to do if it meant a few weeks more time.
* The difficulties of living abroad and alone exacerbated incredibly my pre-existing depression and anxiety and this meant me having extreme difficulty self motivating and keeping good time. I've had probably 4-5 mental breakdowns over the last 3 years due to experimental scheduling.
* I didn't have a good grasp of what I was supposed to do in my PhD apart from experimentation, and I was ostracised pretty badly by my mostly French department (I'm English). Other PhD students (French) all received great advice and tutelage under the senior members of staff, whereas most staff here don't know my name nor have ever tried to talk to me.
I feel like I've just failed life. I don't have any idea what kind of employers would accept me after this 3 year mess. Due to my extreme experimental schedule I feel very underdeveloped as I didn't manage to publish anything (yet), go to many classes, go to any conferences... etc. The only thing going for my is 5 years of lab experience. However most lab jobs I've seen (in the UK - my home) that pay well require experience in techniques I haven't used, and low paid ones that I could adapt easily to require only A levels; having a first class masters would probably mean they think I’m overqualified.
Science was always my dream and it's been my career path since my youth. Now that I have the experience of what not to do in a PhD I feel like I could enter another program and succeed easily. I made SO many mistakes this time around that could've easily been avoided if I'd known what to expect. Unfortunately, almost nothing at all was communicated clearly to me on what I had to do to succeed until it was too late, and the language barrier meant that I had a hard time finding this info myself. However, I don't know at all if another project would accept me. Also, I don't know if I could handle the stress.
Sorry for the rant. The advice I'm asking for is:
* Do I have any career prospects?
* How on earth do I present myself to prospective employers as anything but a failure?
* Would a potential future PhD supervisor ever consider me given my failure? It's unclear, while I feel like i'm advantaged because I know what to do now and I'd have the confidence and drive not to repeat the same mistakes, I don't know if anyone would see me like that. I've truly learned from my mistakes.
Thank you for your time...<issue_comment>username_1: I lack sufficient reputation to simply comment. I am also unfamiliar with rules in France, although in Germany there is similar rigidity (in US much less so). I would try to apply for some sort of health status exemption that suspends the bureaucratic clock and gives you time to sort things out. Also, consider taking stock of what data you do have ... you may have results that are indeed valuable and can be written up, published. Most PhD work doesn't go as planned, and with original research this is unlikely anyway. A key component of working as a professional scientist is being able to look dispassionately at data, including your own, and understand what's really there. You need some distance, some detachment to be able to do that.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The situation you are describing might sound like a difficult one, but I am pretty sure that if you go and talk to your doctoral school you will find that is not an uncommon one.
Instead of relying on what your supervisor says, you should probably just describe your situation to your doctoral school and see what possibilities are before you. It is, in a way, the role of the doctoral school to provide counseling in such cases.
In the meantime, if you do not know what [ATER](http://www.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/cid23097/devenir-attache-temporaire-d-enseignement-et-de-recherche-a.t.e.r.html) are (Attaché Temporaire d'Enseignement et de Recherche), have a look at these specific positions. They are sort of TAs positions. The link is in French, but in your case, the most important sentence might be:
>
> Pour devenir A.T.E.R., il faut être dans l’une des situations suivantes :
>
>
> * [...] soit être inscrit en vue de la préparation d'un doctorat, le directeur de thèse devant attester que la thèse peut être soutenue dans un délai d'un an ; [...]
>
>
>
This means that you are eligible for such a position, only if your advisor is positive that you can defend within a year.
Finally, while your experience feels wrong, you sound like you have learnt quite a lot from it. I guess you should focus on finding the positive sides your experience.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/18
| 400
| 1,704
|
<issue_start>username_0: My colleagues and I are looking into ways to get a list of all articles published for the history of a given journal. Primarily, we are looking to for a list that includes title, authors, year, volume, and issue number, but more/less information is good too. Our primary function is to just use as a resource for various reviews that we might conduct.
I've had some success with Web of Science citation reports, but for some journals, the citation reports are incomplete or do not cover far enough back in the journal's history (the journal that I'm currently having difficulty with is published by Taylor and Francis).
Are there other resources available to generating these lists?<issue_comment>username_1: If you can't find this on the journal's website, you can do this with Web of Science. Go to Web of Science, then search by publication name. For example the search below would find all publications in *Nature* from 1900 to the present day.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/86TyW.png)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Most university libraries subscribe to many databases. Web of Science is only one. Scopus is another. And there are a huge number of databases that are more discipline specific. In pretty much all these databases you can search the source or publication name field for a particular journal. And they will enable you to export detailed bibliographic data.
Some may place limit on the number of records you can readily export.
But the basic advice is that if one database does not give you what you want, try another. My default is Scopus, but there are many others.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/19
| 643
| 2,882
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted my manuscript to a journal. After several weeks the editor sent me the comments of two reviewers. The editor said that "*the authors should provide proof that the paper has been proofread by a native English speaker*".
So how can I provide the proof? Should I send the proofreading certificate which I recieved after using the service from a proofreading company?
And if I only ask a native speaker for proofreading without any certificates, how should i provide the proof?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, send the certificate you received from the proofreading company.
There are proofreading companies out there who will edit your paper until it's acceptable, so if the editor comes back with "this still isn't good enough" that's what to do next.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> And if I only ask a native speaker for proofreading without any certificates, how should i provide the proof?
>
>
>
Have the proofreader write a short letter to the editor, describing who they are, where they learned English, and stating that they have proofread your paper. They can also state their opinion of the quality of the English after proofreading. Have them sign it, and forward it to the editor.
While of course such a letter could be faked, I doubt that the editor would desire any more proof than this.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: This seems like an unreasonable request. Frankly, it *does not matter* if you paper has been proof-read by a native speaker or not. If, after revision, your English presentation is still bad, the editor won't accept it even if you include proof that it was read by a native speaker.
I would personally be prone to just ignore this request, make sure that the English language is as good as it can be, and resubmit the paper.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: This sounds like an unreasonable request which makes me doubt the quality of the journal. If the journal's review process is good, the editor should be able to decide whether the standards of language are appropriate for the publication without asking for external "proof". Most journals I published with will also use their in-house proofreading service to improve the paper after it's recommended for publication. A request that the authors should use an external proofreading service is neither necessary nor sufficient to ensure the quality of the outcome. I would ignore it and resubmit the paper making sure it's as clear as you can make it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: You can also just ask the editor what sort of proof he would like to see. Might be the simplest method.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: This sounds like a strange request. Not all native english speakers are good writers. This should not be about who proofread the paper rather than the quality of the submitted work.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/19
| 2,116
| 8,775
|
<issue_start>username_0: I notice that often a lot of Chinese mathematicians collaborate with other Chinese, and Americans collaborate with other Americans. Many of the journal papers that I look up seem to indicate this sort of self-segregation too.
Is this real or perceived?
If it's real, is it due to racism, familiarity with people of one's own background, or perhaps a combination of various factors?<issue_comment>username_1: I seriously doubt that racism plays much part in any effect you might think you see. I also question what you think is the evidence.
There might be some small effect based on language, not race. If a couple of academics at a US institution share a language other than English, they may be drawn together to ease communication. But such an effect should be short lived.
The fact is that the majority of US academics in STEM fields in the US are white males. The person in the next office is likely to be a white male. While there are issues with that, I don't see much racism in evidence *within* the academy. As with anything, there can be exceptions and a few noted scientists and mathematicians were notably racist. But they stand out.
The article cited by user <NAME> on general self segregation can be easily explained. In the college first year student example, the self selection was going on *before* the students actually had a chance to meet anyone. So their self segregation was a result of factors outside the university not inside it. In the US, much of the force driving racism is *fear of the other*. We fear people who we haven't met and don't know. When a white and a black person pass one another on the street at night, both feel fear. But this fear is caused by the pervasive separation of the races in neighborhoods and schools. People have been actively discouraged from interacting in normal ways.
*Fear of the other* is probably much influenced by evolution. People in truly ancient times had to be wary when the met another person (from a different tribe) or an unfamiliar animal. Until you had some knowledge of how they would react, you had no basis for trust.
But within a university department, people *do* know one another and see one another each day and so have no reason to fear them. So, if you need to collaborate with someone you look first to the next office over, not thinking of them as different. They are just fellow academics. Likely they will be white men, of course. But if they have similar interests, regardless of race or sex, you will be glad to collaborate.
If racism and sexism exists in academia, and they do, it is much more likely to be evident at the point of entry, either for students or academic jobs. But after people come to know one another, assuming that is permitted and encouraged, the *fear of the other* goes away and we can just accept that people are people. The army doesn't give you the option of not participating. Initially you are forced to work with people not like you. But mutual trust is required for the job.
---
Since it wasn't referred to in the question, I didn't discuss the notion of racism toward students by faculty. Such racism might be conscious or unconscious, but it has a damaging effect when it occurs, regardless of cause.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There probably is some self-segregation, but nothing above what people normally do in everyday society.
I think it's worth keeping in mind that much of the dialogue regarding segregation deals with the actions of government, an extremely powerful 3rd party. Self-segregation is at best an ethical issue, not legal. Moreover, everyone has a right to free association and can decide who they want to deal with.
Arguably, I would say that academia self-segregates less than society at large, due to more liberal attitudes of academics and students.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: From my observations, there's some self-segregation. It's not so much because of racism but rather the feeling that [outsider] is not [one of us]. For example, if you collaborate with some Chinese nationals who talk to each other in Chinese (and you don't speak that language), then that's a subtle sign that you're not one of them. This applies even if they speak fluent English and default to that language when speaking to you. There's nothing unique about Chinese either - it could equally be German, French, or whatever language.
Another example of this is religious beliefs, when they manifest in real life. If I'm Muslim (and some races are certainly more likely to be Muslim), then there're certain things I cannot eat, and I certainly cannot take alcohol. If I go to a social event where everyone is drinking alcohol, then I'll definitely get the feeling that I'm not one of them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Even in mathematics, it greatly varies from area to area etc. E.g. I co-authored papers with (in no particular order, mentioned by the country of origin rather than residence/citizenship) Australian, Indonesian, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, South African, Iranian, Israeli, Italian, French, Croatian, Greek, Belgian, Spanish, Dutch, German, UK, US, Canadian, Mexican, Bulgarian, Polish, Estonian, Russian mathematicians and computer scientists.
On the other hand I am probably not typical; I imagine a majority still stays in one country throughout the career and only collaborate in their mother tongue.
Disclaimer: I grew up in USSR, did my PhD in Australia, hold a Dutch passport and work in UK.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I am not sure if people are "segregating" their collaborators. However, I do see some patterns in research departments and groups in STEM fields which may lead to what you see in those collaborations.
My particular research group had a lot of ethnic diversity, however, I have noticed that some other groups or even department have a tendency to have a lot of senior researchers and students of very consistent ethnic background (to the point of having similar names).
Some salient examples that I observed in my particular university.
* Some groups in theoretical computer science seems to have a huge amount of
researchers with Greek background and they all collaborate with each
other. Just look up some research paper in this area.
* In applied computing, there is a lot of Chinese researchers, and they
all collaborate with each other or industries in East Asia like
Huawei and Baidu.
* In electronics, there seems to be a lot of researchers of Eastern
European or Italian researchers or Middle Eastern backgrounds. I do see that, often, these professors taking on students with the same ethnic background.
* In mathematics, a lot of researcher from Germany, also a lot of
researchers from Israel. But it gets more interesting when you break down the particular fields...
Of course, this is just what I observed *for some research groups* repeatedly during my time in academia as a student and as a researcher.
What could be the explanation for what I saw?
There could be a confluence of factors here beyond bias or prejudice in picking collaborators or professors or students.
Cultural factors. For example, I think Italian engineering school place great emphasis on mechatronics. However, I don't know why there are so many famous Greek computer scientists (maybe someone can enlighten me). I think there is a strong tradition of math education in Germany, which may explain why there would be many German researchers in this field. Finally, I think East Asian culture place great value on tech entrepreneurship, which may explain why many would be doing applied computing.
This still doesn't resolve some of the other more interesting things that I saw, for example,
1. the head of department being the same ethnicity as his replacement, who he mentored for a decade,
2. a professor with a mixed-race child taking interest in a student who is also mixed-race (she was a fellow classmate), then taking that student as his student.
3. a professor in applied computing with wife who is Asian having large amount of Asian female research students. Again, is it racial ethnic preference or self-selection? We'll never know.
4. The funniest one. I actually remember two distinct research groups where all the members look like Abercrombie & Fitch models. In one group photo, where conference was taking place near a beach, the members of the research group even posed as if they were models. I might add that the research lead for this group was gay. It did cross my mind that whoever is leading the research group might have a bias for certain "look" to his/her students.
But at least it give me more assurance that this game is not totally rigged in North America.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/19
| 593
| 2,323
|
<issue_start>username_0: [Wiley](https://authorservices.wiley.com/author-resources/Journal-Authors/Promotion/journal-cover-image.html) journals request payment from authors who want an image to appear on the journal cover. Is this a common practice followed by many publishers? Why do authors pay the fee?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, it's not common. Much more often the front page of the journal is a rather drab-looking, standard page that the journal uses again and again with minor changes. If the front page does vary, it's decided by the editors, who also choose the image to feature.
As for why authors might pay the fee, this is a form of advertising: by having an image of their research in a more visible venue, it might make people read their paper. The page you linked gives some examples. The front page is used in marketing materials, on the journal's webpage, etc., and is likely to be seen by more people as a result.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's not that uncommon. Authors pay this charge mostly because they think having a cover image increases their reputation and/or impact. I don't know any study proving this assumption. Please let me know, if there are any.
Nevertheless, if an author wants to have a cover image, I always suggest to negotiate because this significantly decreases the amount of money the author has to pay, see e.g.
>
> Similar story: Journal (a respected one) offered to use one of our images for their cover page. They wanted $1800. I said I don't have the money. They offered to do it for $900. I said no. In the end they put it on the cover for "free".
>
>
>
Source: [Tweet be @rauscherMRI](https://twitter.com/rauscherMRI/status/963672444002238464)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I was told by a Wiley journal that my article image was being considered for the front cover. They 'asked' for a contribution of US$1400 to the publishing cost of this, but when I refused because our funding for that project is now concluded, I didn't hear back from them. So there appears to be no 'unbiased' selection process, rather this appears a quick money-grab from the publishers.
This is pretty shameful behavior, especially as to be 'selected' required time and energy to prepare the image for their requirements. Not impressed.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/19
| 1,169
| 5,013
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received a failing for a course; however, one of my project (which worth around 10%) was not graded. It is possibly due to my late submission (one minute late). Previously many of his students submit their works late (I mean super late), and he accepted them all. So I politely asked him by email whether the assignment is graded or not. No answer.
My other works are curved at a B grade. It was not a fancy grade so I politely asked for extra work as part of one of my previous email, well before the semester was ended. He did not answer that question, but he answered the other questions that I asked in the same email.
I have emailed him a few times before about grading or something else, he usually responds after a few days. This time, he is not responding for like 2 weeks. He does not have regular office hour. The prof is very nice (so I definitely don't want to appeal to a higher authority) and also super busy. Since our school has a loose policy on updating grade, he gives out my grade a couple of months after the course was over. Any suggestions will be appreciated.
He could have private office hour for his current students so I could try to sneak in with my acquaintances who are his students.
---
He is still teaching this semester at another campus so I could technically catch him after class. But I doubt that we are going to have a private environment for discussing grades.<issue_comment>username_1: Visit him in his office hours, if you can make it to the other campus.
There is a good chance, that your e-mail landed on a huge pile of things to do, as it is much more important to you than to the professor. E-Mailing again is an option (you get at least a few seconds of attention and a chance that he reads and reacts), but visiting him in the consultation hours will get you the full attention. And personally I would not e-mail more than twice with (almost) the same content, but try something else instead.
For such formal problem you may consider mailing his secretary as well.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, consult your student handbook. The policies at your university, college, or even department should direct you on who you are to contact for disputes about grades. You may find that a policy is in place that says you should contact someone other than the instructor for your situation.
In case you are username_1wed to contact the instructor, are not limited to contact the instructor first, and certainly may even be recommended to contact the instructor first about grade disputes, I might propose that this email might get respectful attention ...
---
I would appreciate a chance to meet with you to discuss my final grade in Course ABC taken over the (Fall/Spring/Summer) semester of (whatever year). I recognize that my (first/third/last/tenth ...) project report was not graded. As best I can determine, my submission was late. !I acknowledge that your syllabus states that no late reports will be accepted (thereby giving a grade of zero)! I am (however) concerned because I heard from other students in the class that their reports were graded even when they were submitted later, possibly even later than mine was.
I am available (at this location at the university) on (whatever days at whatever times). I hope that you will be able to arrange a meeting so that we can discuss and resolve my concerns in person.
[ I have copied Dr. XYZ, the Department Chair, on this correspondence in case he/she needs to be consulted for further advice. ]
OR
[ I have contacted you in the past with email without success. I am therefore also preparing my records to take my case forward to Dr. XYZ, the Department Chair. I prefer that we can resolve my concerns without such an action. ]
I appreciate your prompt attention to my request.
---
The part in !...! is essential to include if it is true.
You should also approach how you phrase the email and what you document in it as though at some point, its entire contents will be published on Facebook without your permission. So, by specific example, do NOT put the words "failing grade in Course ABC" in the email.
In summary, I might comment on the overall issue raised here. A student always has a right to appeal a grade. The appeal must be based on objective facts not on personal desires. When all recourse at the first level is exhausted, the appeal goes to a higher authority. The professional approach throughout the process on both sides is to avoid stating the need for further appeal as a threat or holding the decision to take a further appeal as punishment. Finally, instructors are human beings. They make mistakes in judgement that may lead to unfair practices for any number of reasons. Sometimes it is as simple as "I forgot, my apologies". Sometimes it is as hard as "This is MY class". Learning to be mindful of such outcomes and to navigate them professionally and respectfully is perhaps the biggest lesson here.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/19
| 1,083
| 4,567
|
<issue_start>username_0: A course came up that I was interested in (C\*algebras). It's a grad class but was offered to a select group of undergrads including myself. I accepted the offer but then once the class started I received an email saying the following:
"Dear XXX,
I have just noticed that you have not completed Math 311. I think it would be a terrible idea for you to be doing the operator algebra course before completing that. It would also be irresponsible of me to let you do it. This isn't really dependent on why you didn't complete the course. The appearance alone would make me look bad.
Best, XXX"
I replied that I have 100% on all but one assignment and an A+ on the midterm. I haven't yet taken the final but it will be scheduled by the end of the semester. (I couldn't take the exam for health reasons that he knows of.)
He knows I am an A+ student and has given me 2 A+'s in the 2 classes I have taken with him. I tried speaking with the instructor of the Math 311 course and asked him to speak with said prof to see if he could convince him that I know the material but I'm not sure how that will go.
I don't know why this prof would rescind the invitation when we seemed to have previously had a good rapport. The prof does know that this would be my 6th class for the term which may be a contributing factor. (4th at 4th year or above)
Is there anything else I can do to increase my chance of getting into this class?
Also I don't want to damage my relationship with this prof further as I hoped to ask them to do a summer research project.<issue_comment>username_1: Look, the thing with these kinds of questions is that process varies significantly from institution to institution based on their regulations, bylaws, etc. I actually agree with the instructor's decision, even though the email is unprofessional. It is usually not allowed for a student to take a course in which they have not yet completed the prerequisite for that course.
Having said this, there **may** be a solution. In many institutions, exceptions like these are handled by a specific entity such as the Faculty Council, the Department Council, the Vice-Dean for Undergraduate Studies, the Vice-Dean for Graduate Studies, the Faculty Dean, etc. Since I don't know your institution, I can't begin to say which one of these would be the proper route to take, but typically a request or a petition could be sent to the responsible body, and they would then study it and make a decision based on your unique circumstances.
My advice in this situation would not be to get upset, nor to talk about how the reason was "incomprehensible" or anything along these lines. I would say you that you should write a letter/email/petition to whomever is responsible in your faculty and ask that an exception can be made based on the circumstances and situation that you pointed out in your question. Talking with the instructor of the Math 311 course probably won't help because technically, the professor of the Grad course is simply following proper university procedures and guidelines. if you are close with the instructor of the Grad course that you want to take and are familiar with him, I would say that you should talk to him in person, and ask him about what the official channels would be for getting this exception and see if he would support you in this.
Don't attack. Don't accuse. Don't get upset. Just try to find out the solution that complies with all relevant bylaws and regulations. That is my humble advice.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Ask him if you can at least audit the grad class, and if he would allow you to hand in any assignments and take any exams and be graded on them, informally and not for credit. And ask him if he will allow you to register back to his class later if and when you successfully complete the Math 311 prerequisite requirements and in that case have the grades you received up to that point be counted as official. (Since this may happen late in the semester, you will want to check with your department/major adviser to make sure this would be allowed. Most institutions have a registration deadline of some sort, and you may need to file a special petition and get it approved to pull off a maneuver of this type.)
This proposal seems so reasonable that I can’t think of a reason why he would refuse. At the very least, it seems to undermine his “irresponsible/makes me look bad” argument. Allowing a student to audit a class does not make anyone look bad or irresponsible, ever.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/19
| 757
| 3,122
|
<issue_start>username_0: I came across a paper published in the Journal of Mathematical Physics in the year 2016. In the paper, the authors claimed to have developed a methodology which extends the dimension of an existing method. But this extension has already been discussed in a paper published in 2014. This seems to be a kind of cheating which the reviewers of journal failed to identify. The bibliography also appears to the suspicious as a large number of papers of a particular author has been cited without any motivation. I want to report this unscrupulous work, how can I report to the journal?
PS. This is not a case of plagiarism but a kind of unscrupulous research.<issue_comment>username_1: For the case of the "forgotten" reference to previous similar work, I'd say you should assume good faith: maybe they just missed it. If it's not plagiarized then it's not really fraudulent. Re-discoveries happen all the time and it's not generally expected that all papers cite *all* the relevant literature. [It can however be frustrating to the authors of the original paper](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/49208/10643).
If your intention is to notify the community that a very similar work exists, which can be very useful, then you could write a letter to the editor. These are often published if the journal find they are of value. Word it without hinting that you suspect the omission was made on purpose as this will not achieve anything.
For the large number of citations to seemingly unrelated papers from a given author, again it might just be a coincidence. But you cannot exclude a "citation ring" scheme. What you can do is communicate your concerns privately to the journal. If you gather enough evidence of an organized fraud you can also make it public through post publication review-websites ([pubpeer.com](http://www.pubpeer.com), etc.). Do not hold your breath though, it's very possible that it will have no consequences whatsoever.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Do not just think of the referees who should have spotted this, but of the handling editor. Either that person was not paying much attention either, or, worse, in cahoots with the author(s). (It is not sour grapes on my part to point this out. It is a fact of life that people form friendships, and that these friendships result in favours being done. Now, although sometimes one does wonder, academics *are* people. QED)
If you point it out to the journal's editorial board, your message may land on the same HE's desk. You should be able to imagine how this will play out for you and your good intentions. Not so great.
However, sometimes a journal changes editors and editorial policies. Example: Nobel Prize winner '<NAME> took over as editor of chief of a philosophy-oriented physics journal. To his dismay he found that his predecessor had been a weirdo promoting the crackpot theories of his mates. 't Hooft took action, publishing a series of papers by competent people outlining the flaws in the journal's previous contents.
But this example is probably the exception rather than the rule.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/09/19
| 1,525
| 6,442
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my writing, teaching and research, I always do much more than I should. I produce excellent work, but it's always late because I seem to be incapable of scaling back my (unrealistically high) expectations due to time constraints. I am exhausted and demoralized. I know this isn't group therapy, but has anyone had success with concrete strategies to delimit themselves when a "good enough" job really is good enough? (ADHD + perfectionism is a bad combination.)<issue_comment>username_1: Get counselling. Really.
**There is no shame in that**, and you don't need to have full-blown burnout to get support from a therapist.
Aside from that, what has worked for me is to schedule private things I like to do (including simple and "obvious" things, such as spending time with my family, watching TV, playing video games, etc.) in exactly the same manner as work tasks. At the very least this makes it explicit that you are actually making a trade-off when you burn the midnight candle at work. Keep in mind that, hopefully, other non-work things are important to you as well, so if you decide to burn 20 more hours on a paper that's basically done you are effectively trading off one thing you want to do for another. If you look at it this way it basically becomes an optimization problem - do I really want to proof-read this paper three more times to make sure that there are no typos in it, or do I rather want to spend this time on something else that is also important to me?
A second thing I do is rigorous time keeping and time budgeting. I actually learned this during the teacher's seminar that our university mandates for all tenure-track faculty, but it's actually applicable to all aspects of academic work. Basically, one can always invest an infinite amount of time into every activity, so it is important to assign a budget of how much time one practically has for a specific activity (say "I can only spend 6 hours to prepare a single lecture"), and then do the best that is possible in that time. This may mean that you can't make the fancy flipped classroom work that you had in mind, or it may mean that this really interesting data analysis will need to wait for the next paper, but time is finite and ultimately a great paper that is never submitted is worse than a good paper that is.
But, again - if you feel like you can't bring yourself to make these trade-offs on your own, get **professional help** before you burn out completely and/or drop out of academia.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A few tips:
Wait until the afternoon or evening before class (or even morning right before class) to prepare a class. Can be a bit risky because of ninja meetings being sprung on you. But if the time constraint forces you to just G.I.D. without putting in the effort you really wanted to, that's a success.
Intentionally set out to write "ok" papers that only cover the unpublished results you are sure about and perhaps bored of by now (not necessarily the super-awesome-but-not-quite-completely-clear new result that you are on the edge of having ready). Revise the paper to improve it with the hot new stuff if you can, but do not completely iterate from one set of results to the next, that's the next paper. Also the usual advice: write according to a writing schedule and into an outline. The process must be a job, completely devoid of any reliance on inspiration or enthusiasm.
If you are spending too much time reading, stop trying to learn new things from the readings and just focus on understanding what's been done and why. If you aren't spending much time reading, read more papers. It helps you keep on top of the line for what's good enough to publish despite obvious shortcomings.
I left out research because it's probably too variable between fields and to be honest it's what make the job fun for me, so I try keep as much fun there as possible (as opposed to making it just a job too)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Perfectionism is really something that a mental health counselor, therapist or psychiatrist should be helping with. That said, some things that I've found to be useful based on my own experience and that of others:
* Deliberately set a goal to complete a task in a flawed way. You have to exercise judgement to make sure you actually perform it to an adequate level, but if you have a problem with perfectionism, most likely you are aiming for much more than is expected. Take a moment to identify the least you can get away with doing, and then try to do not only no less than that, *but also no more*. As soon as you notice yourself "polishing up" something that is pretty much done, force yourself to stop and call it a day.
* Set deadlines for yourself and follow them. To be fair, I haven't had much success with this - I just don't have the discipline to follow my own deadlines. But setting and attempting to respect limits in terms of calendar time as well as actual work time can help, especially if you are cognizant of the time limit throughout the task (as opposed to just when it's about to run out) and plan accordingly. It also gives you space to come to terms with the fact that you don't have enough time to do a perfect job.
* Set out to fail. I've heard others get good results from setting a personal goal like "fail one time everyday". This will help you get used to the idea of occasionally not succeeding, and hopefully reduce anxiety over the fear of doing an imperfect job.
In my experience, the whole process of dealing with your perfectionism is a bit like training a muscle. You will never truly "cure it", but there are certain techniques that you can apply over and over, and gradually teach yourself effective skills to mitigate it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Speaking as an undergrad that likes to 'perfect' all these long projects assigned to me... I have gotten to the point where I no longer laser-in one one item and get it perfectly done, then move to the next. Rather. I find it more beneficial to simply get a (in my mind) "rough draft" of anything I need to turn in, then when all is done, I go back and perfect it until out of time. This way, I can somewhat satisfy perfectionist tendancies, and not be caught without a submission by the deadline, should perfecting take a long time.
It does take some adjusting, to force yourself to work differently, but I recommend it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/19
| 6,672
| 26,973
|
<issue_start>username_0: ### Background
In the U.S., many colleges adopt an A–F grading scheme, topped with pluses and minuses.
Professors vary in the way they assign A to F grades, but my sense is most rely on discrete “bins”. For example, some professors use relative grading and (roughly) give an A to the top third or the class, a B to the second third, etc. Others will give an A to students who get between, say, 100% and 95%, and A− to students between 94% and 90%, a B+ to students between 86% and 89%, etc.
Using discrete bins necessarily implies some knife-edge cases where a student is right at the border with the next bin, and it would have taken very little for that student to jump into that next bin and improve their letter grade by one “level”.
That would be all fine (I guess) if letters where only honorary titles, and what mattered was the actual underlying percentage grade. However, in most places (i.e., all the places I know), it is the letter grade – and never the percentage grade itself – that is attached to the student’s academic record.
This could be an issue *per se* if a student wanted to show proficiency in a particular topic and got, for example, an A− that was in fact very close to an A. That student’s academic record will forever show *very good but not perfect* for that course, whereas it should really indicate *almost perfect*. This creates understandable frustrations from students who nearly made it.
Things get even worst when averaging through different courses and computing one’s GPA, since most colleges then use a scheme like the following one:
* A: 4.00
* A−: 3.67
* B+: 3.33
* B: 3.00
* B−: 2.67
* C+: 2.33
* …
Again, this means that the half of a percent a student needed to jump from an A− to A will have a significant effect on that student's GPA, where really, the effect of getting one more half of a percent should be negligible, regardless of the baseline percentage one is starting from.
In a world where GPAs are taken so seriously, this means that half of a percent can make a significant difference in a student’s life and career. Again, this can create understandable frustrations for students who nearly made it.
### My question
I know that there are “palliatives” to deal with the discrete grading scale and avoid some of these knife-edge cases, such as rounding up decimals. In all fairness, I don’t think those are real solutions (rounding up decimals just moves the problem from one threshold to another), but that's *not* what I am interested in here.
What I would like to know is:
* Are there any arguments in favor of using a discrete grading scheme like the one above?
* Or is just a product of history and the difficulty to coordinate practices across the vast number of U.S. colleges?
In other words, is anyone claiming that the discrete scale has virtues of its own other than the fact that it is used in so many places – creating comparability –, and that it would be hard to coordinate a change at all those places at once?<issue_comment>username_1: There are a number of issues here. One, however, is that the table you give doesn't seem accurate to me - or at least, I'm pretty sure it isn't used by *most* US colleges.
Second is that your assertion that a student can "miss" a higher grade by an insignificant amount, while true in theory, is less true in practice. I never let that happen, for example, always giving students the benefit if a point total for the course was insignificantly different from that of another student who got the higher grade.
Third, it is a tradition that A means "finest kind", B means "good but not finest kind", C means "acceptable", and D means "needs improvement". Yes those are bins but I don't think I can make a statement that a person with 3.22 is in any way better than a person with 3.20. The means by which I assign grades are not that fine grained. The grade is an aggregate, not an absolutely precise measure. So I can't even distinguish that finely between students.
Fourth, if we compare different courses, even by the same professor, but in particular by different professors in possibly different fields, does a 3.22 *mean* the same thing. Is a 3.22 in a basic philosophy course exactly the same as a 3.22 in an advanced math course. It would be foolish, IMO, to assert that they were the same.
All of the above indicates that indeed, the grades *are* just bins. And the bins are accurate enough that, for example, an employer or graduate school admissions system can make valid judgements about the prospects of a student. There are exceptions, of course, but in the main, simple *bins* represent reality better than giving a precise measure to something that isn't.
Don't confuse *accuracy* with *precision*.
---
Also note a psychological effect of "bin grading". If a student realizes that with just a bit more effort they can raise their grade from B+ to A-, they may just be wiling to put in the effort. That won't occur with grades that are purely numerical.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I am in favor of using the US discrete grade system. Some thoughts I will address are as follows:
As the OP mentions, in the US, the ABC grade system is relatively standardized and well understood by a large variety of institutions. It makes comparisons among students from a variety of schools more compatible (although, yes, not perfectly comparable).
Beyond this, I feel that the ABC system delivers the appropriate amount of granularity. After all, you have to truncate grade percentages somewhere. In some sense *every system is discrete*.
One method that I have used for my students in math classes in the US is a clustering system guided by the grade cutoffs. The percentages are guarantees. After that, I cluster students into grade groups, with students who barely missed the cutoff still usually getting adjusted up. For example, let's say that we have the following percentages:
>
> 93.23%, 93.17%, 92.88%, 92.81%, 92.08%
>
>
>
I would give the first four students A's and the final student an A- under normal circumstances. (It is usually more nuanced than that). I feel that the grades I gave my students usually very accurately described their proficiency relative to the stated outcomes of the course. This was also vastly true when I was a student. In fact there were times where I would prefer to take my A grade than my raw percentage. An 'A' sounds much better than "I got 83% raw, but I was the second highest grade in the course."
In my opinion, the ABC system actually is a *stronger* system than a raw percentage system. Is a 95% in Dr. Haskin's Calculus I class better than a 97% in Dr. Bodrel's Calculus I course? Both would result in an A grade. Or how would a 97% in Calculus I compare to a 97% in Floral Design? By using the ABC system, we effectively run a sort of "low-pass" filter on the grades. In my opinion this actually allows for a fairer comparison between students.
Let me also add that having a raw percentage system would be **awful** from the perspective of an instructor. Students already anguish about their grades. Now picture if they had to anguish about not just getting an A, but getting 100%. You would end up having students with 98% in the course worrying about getting 99%. It just becomes excessively fiddly. As a former student myself, I would actually hate a raw system. I was grateful for being able to get an A with 94% in a class without having to worry about pushing it up to a 95%.
I will close by saying that **school and grades are not always fair**. Such is life. No matter what system you use, there will be drawbacks from one perspective or another. There is no system that is perfect.
---
**Addendum:** Several comments have mentioned thoughts on being graded relative to others. Note first that my proposed method never moves a student *down* a grade, only up. Several comments seem to overlook that.
>
> @BartoszKP: "You are grading not 'their proficiency relative to the stated outcomes,' but 'their proficiency relative to the stated outcomes and relative to other students.' Did other students doing well make this student suddenly know less?"
>
>
>
How could raising a grade indicate a student "knew less"? It seems that raising a grade would actually indicate a student knew *more*.
I guess I could grade students solely on their raw scores, 100ths of a percent be damned. Then students would be graded with less relativity to their peers. But wasn't such a "zero-tolerance of rounding up" system one of the named drawbacks of the ABC system? It seems like we are trying to play both ends of the flute here. I can see that it would be patently unfair if I rounded students down a grade. I must say though, I have never had a student complain about being graded "relative" to their peers when I rounded their grade slightly up.
Secondly, to continue the thoughts on being graded relative to one's peers, we need to keep in mind that it is next to impossible to provide students from current semesters the *identical* exam experience as students from previous semesters encountered. By adjusting scores within semester, this can help control for slight variations in exam difficulty from semester to semester. Note that I do not always have complete control over exams, since they often must be written on teams with other professors. All told, which system seems more "fair," a system that does not control at all for variability in exam writing styles or a system that attempts to account for that?
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Consider the perspective of a transcript-reader. They're interested in scanning a school transcript with records of maybe 30 or 40 classes (for a bachelor's degree), with maybe half of those in the major, as quickly and efficiently as possible. The fact that there are a small number of different marks is a help in parsing the record.
1. The A-F scheme is just a single glyph per class, instead of the
two-glyphs (or three) for a 0 - 100 system.
2. The granularity of letter grades is entirely useful to the reader; it is doubtful that the reader cares about the difference between 85% and 86%, and so that ones-place digit is often just wasted space and eye-strain.
3. The A-F system seems compatible with ["The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two) rule, which says psychologically people can juggle and assess around 5-9 discrete things in short-term memory at once.
Furthermore, many non-STEM classes have, by their nature, qualitative grading on assignments, performances, etc. Consider, e.g., the policies listed for [Grading at Yale](https://ctl.yale.edu/YaleGrading). The *first* possible protocol listed is "Letter grades for all assignments"; the *second* protocol listed is "Numerical grades on all assignments", and it asserts that this is the standard only for STEM courses. So in the first (possibly more common) case, presenting a number at the end of the course with two-digit precision would be vacuous.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> This creates understandable frustrations from students who "nearly made it".
>
>
>
It’s worth keeping in mind that *life outcomes* are also discrete, and this also causes students (and everyone else) similar frustrations: you either get the fellowship/top grad school admission/job/promotion/whatever, or you don’t. So students would still experience the same frustrations even with continuous grades, and even under the completely unrealistic assumption that their grades are a perfectly accurate tool for measuring their level of knowledge, which obviously they aren’t.
I’m not a huge fan of the US grading system myself, but honestly I don’t think it matters very much whether grading is done on a continuous or discrete scale. Grades are a statistical tool and should be interpreted as such - when averaged over many scores they have some (limited) meaning, but any one individual grade doesn’t necessary mean very much.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> half of a percent can make a significant difference in a student's life and career.
>
>
>
Here is where you are wrong. The difference between an A- and a B+, or an A+ or an A, etc *will never make a difference in your life*.
This is because:
1. That variation will regress towards the mean in any students career
2. GPA has arguably the lowest ratio of actual\_importance / given\_importance of anything you have ever encountered in your life. It is nearly entirely irrelevant once you no longer have to apply to colleges.
So why do discrete letter grades exist? Because they are easy to understand and compare, but most importantly because *it doesn't matter*. Grades do not define who you are. They are an inaccurate and minor indicator of what you could become, and useful for binning students into their colleges, no more no less.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: For the overwhelming majority of classes, grading is at least partially subjective. In the case of essay-based classes, this is immediately obvious. Likewise for art classes. Even for math and hard sciences, though, there's an element where graders need to make their best judgements. When a student solves an equation incorrectly, but their only mistake was dropping a sign deep in the weeds of an entire page of algebra, do you take off 1% or 2% of partial credit? If a lab report didn't have the expected accuracy in its data but was within a single significant digit, how badly do you ding the student?
As a result, the exact, four-digit-long raw percentage grade you get in a class gives an impression of being an extremely precise measurement, but in reality, it isn't. Depending on how the graders happened to be feeling and thinking when they looked at your projects and tests, your grade could plausibly have gone up or down a whole percentage point or two with you submitting exactly the same work yourself. Assuming your raw grade is perfectly accurate is very similar to reading that the Earth is 25 thousand miles in circumference and assuming that number is accurate to the inch.
Because of this, I would argue that the discrete letter-based grading system is actually a more reliable measure of your performance, one that does not overplay its accuracy. The distance between partial letter grades is about the same magnitude as the margin of error I would give to raw percentage grades. So after your raw grade is converted to a letter grade, you can be confident that the grade you received is very highly likely the grade you deserve, even accounting for the subjectivity, fuzziness, and slight randomness of assigning percentage grades.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Just to briefly reiterate other answers:
The information content (in an information-theory sense) of "precise numerical grades" is much lower than it might appear, even apart from complete lack of information about the purported meaning of numbers at a given level.
Apparently many people believe that "letter grades" are "absolute", and resolve (!?) the ambiguities and context-dependence of numerical grades. Of course, this is not true in the first place, and, in the second, there is grade inflation, and so on.
But/and there are virtues to discretizing, as also observed, because it can reduce fixation on grades ... to some degree. Sure, edge cases are still an issue, but without discretization *everything* is an edge case.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I actually think the letter-grade system is very good. First, it makes the grades comparative in the sense that - in principle at least - the top student of a class can get an A+ even if the numerical grade is not >95. Second, while students may get unlucky in some courses and just miss threshold, they will get luck in other courses and just be above threshold: it tends to average out over the time of the degree.
Most important in my mind is that the binning system captures the reality that numerical marks are *overly* granular: there is no material difference in competence level between a student with 89% and one with 90%. The marking scheme is not that accurate and the difference in marks could be due to some trivial factor, such as fatigue on the part of the marker, or bias such as having marked a number of very good copies prior to marking a slightly less good copy, etc.
Students are IMO overly fascinated by numerical grades, and this binning - in particular the ability to assign A+ irrespective of the actual numerical grade - is a good overall way to assess students within a peer group.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I think it depends partly on the nature of the class. As a (former) teacher of electronics, I could argue that ABCDF is too granular:
* Can student identify a clipped signal or not?
* Can student measure the voltage on a test point or not?
But an art class would be very subjective.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: All grades are discrete. I've never had a teacher use an irrational number for a grade. I also have never had a professor use more than ~5000 or so discrete "points" in a grade. Said another way all possible grades in a course can be uniquely described by the numbers 0-5000.
The problem is 3392 of 5000 captures absolutely nothing about a student's knowledge, skill or level of effort (why we care about effort when grading is a misery to me, but that's not important here).
Grades represent two or arguably one thing. First they represent how a student has done (in the graders opinion) against other students. Secondly (and far less importantly) grades represent if a student can accomplish the material in the future(the link between academic and "real life" performance is tenuous at best).
So given the goals and problems of grading all we can really do is separate students into categories and let the chips fall where they may. Humans are really bad at dealing with more than 10 or so categories/bins. So we created a system with ~10 bins and assign students to those bins.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: The 0–100 grading system is problematic in several regards.
To begin with, let’s assume the true knowledge level of a student can be meaningfully represented by a number in [0, 1], and that the grades are professors’ best efforts to estimate that figure. One professor’s function will end up being convex upward while another one’s would be downward, one will convert 0.5 to 40% while the other would grade the same student at 60%.
Not that it even makes sense for professors to try to define such a function in their minds. If the problem was solved correctly but with an inefficient method that suggests the student failed to master a more appropriate approach, is that worth 100%? 90%? 80%? 84.2%? What weights to apply to each of thousands of possible factors? Not to mention the grading will likely drift as the professor goes through students’s papers because it’s so vague.
Additionally there are some perverse incentives, such as the professor feeling free to deduct a point here and 5 points there for things that annoy that professor personally, where most would have refrained from turning an A into a B on petty grounds.
A discrete system can be formalized much easier. Like math olympiads: you solved it correctly? You get a 7, no variance.
Professionals in most fields take pride in their ability to estimate parameters of complex things, but study after study (I think Kahneman quoted some in his famous *Thinking, Fast and Slow)* shows that many such professionals are consistently outperformed by simplest methodologies akin to the APGAR score.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: **Short verion:**
>
> Most of the answers here discuss the ABCDF grading scheme in the context of some numerical or percentage grading scheme. One strength of the ABCDF scheme is that it enables grading schemes decoupled from numerical score and instead focus on mastery of specific key content. Because the ABCDF schene is based on a commonly understood philosophy of student achievement, it allows comparison of student grade outcomes in courses that use a numerical or percentage grade basis to those that may use mastery, specifications, outcomes, or other non-numerical basis.
>
>
>
Consider a course with five learning objectives, each covered by an exam. If an instructor set a C as a 70% exam average, a student could achieve this 70% by a number of ways on a spectrum in between the following extremes:
* Earning an average of 87.5% on four exams and earning a 0% on the last one (say by earning 100%, 100%, 100%, 50%, and 0%) ,and
* Earning 70% on all five exams.
The former extreme could be trouble if the student earned a zero on the exam for a learning objective that is critical for success in the subsequent course. In fact, a student could easily earn a B despite failing an exam. This student would feel confident in their preparation for the next course, but might be no better prepared than a C or D student.
For example consider a General Chemistry I course that covers the following key topics: atomic structure, molecular structure, solutions, stiochiometry, and therochemistry. All five of these topics are foundational for many other chemistry courses. What if a chemistry department determines the strongest predictor of a student's grade in General Chemistry II is not their course grade in General Chemistry I, but their grades on the stoichiometry and thermochemistry exams. Their grades on the other three exams are not strong predictors. That is, a student who earns a C in Gen Chem I but does well on the stoichiometry and thermochemistry exams is more likely to earn an A in Gen Chem II than a B student who bombed the thermochemistry exam.
The ABCDF scheme allows a General Chemistry I instructor to set a grading scheme to require passing the exams on stoichiometry and themrochemistry in order to earn a grade of C or higher and qualify for General Chemistry II:
* Grade of A - Pass the exams for all five learning objectives (scoring 80% or higher is a pass), and pass the advanced project.
* Grade of B - Pass the exams for all five learning objectives (scoring 80% or higher is a pass) without completing the advance project; OR meet the criteria for the Grade of C AND pass the advanced project.
* Grade of C - Pass exams for three or four learning goals (scoring 80% or higher is a pass): stoichiometry, thermochemistry, and any other goal.
* Grade of D - Pass exams for at least three learning goals (scoring 80% or higher is a pass), but fail to meet the criteria for the Grade of C; In other words, you failed the exam for stoichiometry, thermochemistry, or both.
* Grade of F - Pass exams for fewer than three learning goals (scoring 80% or higher is a pass).
If the instructor allows students to earn the chance to retake an exam they almost passed, say by crossing some threshold on turning in homework or by completing a certain number of optional review quizzes, we virtually eliminate the "knife edge" issue. In my case there will never be a student who has 92.7% and gets an A- while a student with 93.1% gets an A. Students pass the exams or they don't. Students pass the advanced project or they don't. This specifications-style of grading emulates life to a certain degree. On the job, an employee completes a project by the deadline, or they don't.
However, even if I use a grading scheme like this, I am still basing my grading philosophy on the common understanding that the grade of A is reserved for the highest achieving students, the grade of B is reserved for students who have mastered most of the courses, the grade of C is reserved for students who have learned enough in my course to be successful in the next course, the grade of D is reserved for students who have learned something in my course but not enough to be successful in the next course, and the grade of F is reserved for students for whom I cannot be certain they learned anything in my course. This philosophy makes my A comparable to another instructor's A despite the radically different means of determining that A.
In a system where I was required to note a student's grade using a numeric grade of some kind, be it percent or percentile, I could never run a grading scheme like this one. And I like this scheme better because it forces my students to focus on learning and mastering key material instead of playing a mathematical game with a point-based system.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: I am not an expert on the US system, but the UK system used to do that as well, and it sort of lives on in degree classifications or "honours" (first, 2:1, 2:2, third).
The idea as I've always understood it is that
* An A shows that the student has understood the subject material **clearly beyond what was taught in the course**.
* A B shows that the student has **achieved what we set out to teach**, no more and no less a.k.a. "ticked all the boxes".
* A C shows that the student has **understood basic concepts, but hasn't got as far as we'd hoped**.
So the discrete grade bands are based on qualitatively different understanding of the subject material. I've also been told by one of our industrial partners that there were engineers who you could give a problem to and they'd solve it, and engineers who'd come to you with a fully worked out solution before you even realised (as project manager) that there was a problem somewhere - and that this distinction correlated remarkably well with getting a second or first class degree.
*So my answer would be that discrete bins do make sense if they're used to encode qualitative information, like which students will go beyond what you teach them without much prompting.*
Another aspect of the UK system is that we're explicitly told (at least at my university) not to mark on a curve: the proportion of firsts / "As" should only be determined by the quality of the work, and can (and does) vary quite a bit from year to year.
That said, several employers that I've written references for have an online form where I have to select whether the student I'm writing the reference for is in the
* top 1% of their cohort
* top 5% of their cohort
* top 20% of their cohort
* top 50% of their cohort
* not in the top 50% of their cohort
and you get the distinct feeling that they wouldn't ask this if they didn't use it somehow to determine who to invite for an interview or not. So you can try as a university to not "grade on a curve" but employers will react to that.
*Discrete bins can help giving information beyond your rank in a cohort, especially with small cohorts where the meaning of a particular rank changes from year to year, if they are coupled to particular competence standards and you're allowed to vary the percentage of "A" grades you give out each year.*
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/20
| 2,538
| 10,592
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wonder if is it okay for a researcher to suggest a new technique in a field of research and prove that this new suggested technique is a bad suggestion and gives no or negative gain and publish his work as a research on bad idea? (I'm in computer science but my question is a general question about every other field.)
Of course if there is some believe and doubt in the field about the idea, the researcher can prove it is correct or not in a research and it would be totally a productive result. However, if the idea is totally new and he just wants to prove incorrectness for future researchers, is this type of research acceptable in academia?
If not, why?
What is wrong with proving some never-existing idea is not a good idea?
I read [this](https://www.elsevier.com/authors-update/story/innovation-in-publishing/why-science-needs-to-publish-negative-results) and I want to know what the current academical approach about such a research result is and the reasons for it.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> What is wrong with proving some never existing idea is not a good idea?
>
>
>
Ideas are easy to produce, but unfortunately only a tiny fraction of them are really useful. If you pick an idea at random, it's likely to be not a good idea, and in most cases it would be relatively easy to check it and see it. So, your referees and your editor may wonder why is it so important to publish this random negative result, particularly in competition with other ideas, which actually lead to improvements and positive results.
>
> why-science-needs-to-publish-negative-results
>
>
>
Some negative results are indeed worth publishing. For example, when you consider not a random idea, but a mainstream direction, which is believed to be superior all the time, and demonstrate that for a particular class of problems, or in particular setting, it does not work. So, your negative result essentially is an important warning that some popular and blindly trusted method is not yet well understood and should not be used as a silver bullet. Publishing such result can help preventing serious mistakes and hopefully start important discussion, eventually leading to improvement (or ban) of existing methodology.
Even in this case, you will need to do a good job convincing your referees and editor that this negative result is worth publishing, particularly if they are stand behind the idea you prove to be not good. Academia is very much influenced by the modern culture of success. It's much easier to become successful in academia when you talk about your success (however marginal and simple), rather when you produce negative results (however important and difficult).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Research that contains negative results about an experimental technique that seemingly fails to produce any useful result, or measure what it was trying to measure, can sometimes [lead to a scientific revolution](https://www.the-scientist.com/books-etc-/michelson-morley-the-great-failure-63642).
So yes, if the research addresses interesting questions and is carried out in a competent way, of course it can be published.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: One case I can imagine for that, looks something like that:
>
> Based on existing research [1,2,3,4,5] we hypothesize seemingly obvious idea that process X should follow path Y. But when we look at this super-obscure papers [6,7] it seems that X only follows Y under very limited circumstances. Hence, generalization that X follows Y is false. Here are more details.
>
>
>
In scientific paper you have to create something new, *based on something old*. For example, new theory that refutes old theory, or new theory that is based on recent experimental results. In this case you base your theory on existing theories/data, and logic. Then refute it using some other, less known data.
In nutrition circles, for example, there is a wide-held belief that eating too much protein will stress and damage kidneys. That seems about right, since if you put too much pressure on some system (kidneys) it will suffer, correct? Well, the data on that comes mainly from kidney-failure patients, and when you look at data on healthy subjects, there is no harm at all.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Other answers don't seem to mention that individual journal policies are important too, and you need to pick the right journal that will publish this kind of research. Obviously you're not going to get into the top journal of your field with a negative result, however, 'PLOS ONE’s broad scope provides a platform to publish primary research, including interdisciplinary and replication studies as well as negative results' (source: <https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/journal-information>).
Publishing can take a long time. The main practical question is that given the low impact of publishing negative results, is it worth your time going through all the hoops of getting it published.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: You invented a new hammer and discovered that it is not good for driving in the intended nail. Are their *some* nails that it is good for? If so, you could write a paper about that -- and bring in the failure to work with the other problem as a limitation of the new tool. On the other hand, if the new tool is literally good for nothing, why bother?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: If the idea is interesting enough, and the reason why it doesn't work is also nontrivial and interesting, then I would say this is definitely publishable, with bonus points if you can use the combination of idea-plus-no-go-theorem to shed some new light on aspects of the problem which have not been unearthed before.
Basically, I would propose as the key criteria to frame this decision:
* How likely is it that someone else will come up with that idea in the near- or mid-term future? How likely is it that a literature search will save them a significant chunk of time?
* To what extent do the techniques you use to prove your no-go theorem add new tools or insights into the theory?
If you think that the answer to either of those questions is positive, and you feel confident that you can convince both editors of reviewers of that answer, then I would say that you should go ahead and try it. (Of course, this involves a huge judgement call, and reasonable people can disagree about both of those answers. If you're in doubt, consult with colleagues before going ahead.)
---
In fact, one of my papers ([this one](https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.00397)) arguably falls into that category: there was this existing observation from experiments ("there is an asymmetry in the harmonic emission doublets") and we came up with what we thought would be an excellent way to explain it ("if you analyze from a rotating frame, there are ionization-potential shifts which simplify the ionization dynamics"), but it turned out that in the full analysis the simplification brought in by this idea is exactly cancelled out by some non-intuitive effects.
Of course, that's not the whole story, and there are a bunch of conceptual insights into the configuration and the overall theory that fall out of the analysis, as well as some concrete experimental predictions, so you can't cleanly say that the idea-plus-disproof by itself is what made the paper publishable. But then, I would argue that if the work is nontrivial enough, then it will rarely be the case that you can cleanly separate the idea-plus-disproof from the conceptual insights added by the paper, and it is the latter that can really make it publishable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: You have to realize that the publishers motivations are not purely academic. I’ve tried to publish null results before (on a topic of high interest) with negative outcome. There are two problems you face.
First, if you publish on a completely new idea (that you prove ill founded), there just isn’t a wide audience. If you seek to prove Relativity wrong, you’ll get attention. But, if this is totally new, the readership won’t care much.
Second, in today’s journals, you need to tell a nice story. The reaction to my own attempts were basically ‘we believe you, but come back when you can end on a positive note’
So proving x != z when no one is studying x or z isn’t interesting, but even if it were, it’s more compelling to outline that x != z, but x ~ y ~ z.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I would like to add to previous answers, that if your idea, if realised, is useful, then if you stress what exactly stops your idea from working and what issues (potentially olvable) need to be solved for it to work, then it is a valid and useful paper.
Example: Orbital elevator. Possible? Not currently. Interesting? Yes. Scientific value? Depends on how deep the research is done.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Think of publishing papers as a way of saying "Hey, here is something I've proven, rather than do this yourself you can read my results and see if they help you out in what you're thinking of doing." to help everyone progress.
Now, the question is, is your 'never-existing idea' something other people might try? If not then you aren't telling them anything useful and it isn't worth publishing. Otherwise it is worth it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Dmitry has covered it well, so here is an example of showing a mainstream direction does not work from the field of computer science, and specifically time series data mining. The paper *Clustering of time-series subsequences is meaningless: implications for previous and future work* (2004) by <NAME> and <NAME> at UC Riverside showed that online and offline clustering of time-series subsequences via a sliding window was completely meaningless and led to incorrect conclusions.
This is a good paper to reference since it motivates the problem with a review of the literature and that many of the papers' conclusions would be invalidated by this negative result, performs a number of experiments to demonstrate the negative result, provides a remedy to the negative result, and concludes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: There are **Journals of Negative Results**, e.g.
<http://www.negative-results.org/>
<https://link.springer.com/journal/12952>
<http://www.jnr-eeb.org/index.php/jnr>
<https://openaccesspub.org/journal/ijnr>
Thus, generally, publishing "negative" results is possible. Choose a journal appropriate for your field of work and check its "Guidelines for Authors".
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/20
| 839
| 3,546
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently an MSc student in math in Europe (I'm doing mainly analysis and applied math). During my Bachelor's I've had mainly average grades (I'm not sure what the exact GPA equivalent is, but it would be around 2.5, I guess). Now, in Master's, I've been getting only good grades and I am looking forward to finishing with distinction/honors.
My first PhD option would be at the university I have been studying in the last few years, which is good and well-known, but below the ones in the US or the top unis in the UK. Some of the programs are funded, depending on the advisor. How important are my Bachelor's grades? Am I overestimating myself if I go and talk to a possible PhD advisor and, moreover, ask him if I can enroll on a paid PhD program?<issue_comment>username_1: This is the sort of thing you won't know until you apply and someone with authority to decide evaluates your background. However, in general, your most recent work will weigh more heavily in a decision for most people who think about it for more than a minute.
However, you are in competition with others who don't have your "disadvantage" so you need to have some way to explain it. If your recent work overwhelms the past then you are more likely to be successful.
A doctoral advisor will be more interested in your potential for the future than in your past and will be looking for both deep knowledge and enthusiasm. Most likely the issue of getting funding or not depends on how much confidence he/she has in you rather then your past. But there will be competition, even there.
But if you don't ask, you don't get an answer.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Overall grades don't matter as much as your specific grades. Remember a PhD will be focused on quite a narrow field. If, for example, you're going into a dynamics PhD, and you have first class marks in dynamics, a dynamics based dissertation, and rubbish statistics grades that pull down your overall, then it probably wouldn't matter too much. Research is different to exams. It's not as much of a memory test and requires different skills, more creativity and perseverance than ability to recall past papers, and selection panels understand that.
If you're looking at something in applied maths, then how much you know about the application will play heavily into it too. My PhD was mathematical modelling in cardiology, and going into the interview having read quite a bit about the various existing approaches probably went a long way to helping me, with average grades from an average uni, get a PhD position at a top 10 university in the UK. When I applied for my PhD I was told in the interview 'I see your Groups Theory mark was quite low, I hated that subject too', and was given the position because I 'clearly had the right ethos for the project' after complaining about how most of the research in the field doesn't make their application clear enough.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: A close relation of mine was applying for history grad school. Before he majored in history, he had tried engineering and had rather sub-par grades in math/physics, which were definitely held against him when he applied for grad school in history (even though his history grades were excellent). I don't know if this speaks to math programs, though it could. I know several math students who got a master's but did not pass the Ph D qualifiers. All of this is for a major Midwestern U.S. University with a U.S. state in its name.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/20
| 654
| 2,392
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wanted to publish a research paper which has less relevant stuff compacted and would be more focused on important and relevant items.
Also, I have failed to find a guide to publish small compact research papers.<issue_comment>username_1: It is entirely up to the journal or conference.
Most venues have page *limits* but I have never heard of a minimum. I've seen some really short papers in math journals. Submit it to a venue that you think it would fit in!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: <NAME> published a paper entitled *Equilibrium Points in n-Person Games*. The paper is one page long. But it's <NAME>, and it was in 1950. It was the beginning of a whole new field (game theory), and the man was a genius. (Credit to [MathOverflow](https://mathoverflow.net/a/7891).)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: My favorite short paper, which like Nash's in another answer is from the 1950s, is as [follows](https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.82.554.2):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6MX3W.png)
I do have a hard time seeing how it would be published these days, but clearly very short papers have been acceptable in the past.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Yes, if your ideas can be expressed concisely enough. For example if you were to find a counterexample to the Beal Conjecture, then you can write two paragraphs and be done. Watson and Crick's [1953 paper describing the structure of DNA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_Structure_of_Nucleic_Acids:_A_Structure_for_Deoxyribose_Nucleic_Acid) was one page long, and won the Nobel Prize. Some other examples of very short papers (admittedly, some of these are jokes) are [here](https://blog.paperpile.com/shortest-papers/).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: This will often depend on the journal in question. In my field, "Brief Reports" and "Letters" are often quite short, and sometimes less than a single page, highlighting a particular case, a minor point of interest, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: A paper should say a little bit about the significance of the result and prior research. In mathematics, the definitions need to be quoted or given. Doing that in one page, along with the result, could be tricky.
But it is definitely possible.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/20
| 934
| 4,005
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate student looking to publish 2 papers in materials physics on novel research. I've lead the project on my own as an independent research, but have worked with the departments and faculty to gain access to several of my universities labs to conduct the research. I have no clear supervisor or adviser for the project though, and have a few questions regarding the submission of papers to journals as an undergraduate.
1. Would I be discriminated against due to the lack of qualifications
2. Is it appropriate for an undergraduate student to submit a manuscript to a journal.
3. What journals have low to no cost for manuscripts, the project is self funded and I doubt I'll be able to financially support the extraordinary fees I've seen from some journals.
I understand the paper can be posted on ArXiv or ResearchGate, but that nullifies the legitimacy of it being called a publication. The professors I've spoken to have suggested the paper could be submitted to well ranked journals, and wish to have it published in a well respected journal. Frankly I'm just unsure how I should approach submitting my manuscripts as an undergraduate.<issue_comment>username_1: Editors don't normally look at your "qualifications" when evaluating a paper. It is actually unprofessional. The work should stand on its own.
You don't need degrees, or specifically advanced degrees to submit. Again, the work...
The costs are a different matter. I can't know the policies of all journals, but for some, at least (I hope it is still true), the following applies. First try to charge the funding agency of the research. Second, to charge the submitter's institution if available. Third (maybe second), charge the submitter. Fourth, if no one pays, absorb the costs internally.
I'm especially not certain of the fourth point, but it used to be true for some reputable journals.
My advice would be to submit the paper to the most appropriate journal, ignoring costs. But also ask your department if, in the eventuality that it is accepted, they would pay. If they say no, submit anyway.
Deal with the issue of getting a personal bill only when it arrives. Possibly just by saying it is impossible for you to absorb the cost as an unsponsored researcher. If they then refuse to publish it, you have at least benefitted from some review of your ideas.
Journals normally expect that researchers have some funding and that the funding includes covering page fees for the resulting research. Funding agencies benefit from being mentioned in the papers produced. But that doesn't apply to you and journals may still be able to make exceptions "for the greater good."
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: With regard to the cost issue, you should probably research what precisely those fees you mention are charged for. At least for the fields I publish in, many if not most reputable journals have a path to publish at zero cost to the authors, providing you:
1. Don't want colour plates in the paper version of your article
2. Keep the submission below a certain length
3. Accept very bad terms regarding open access (i.e never, or with a very long embargo)
4. Don't use any of the optional, fee-driven methods to increase exposure.
Number 3 in particular is an example of an airline style method of charging. Public funding bodies tend to demand open access on publications, but then provide the money to pay the publishers to allow it.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: 1) No, not specifically because you are an undergrad. Often peer-review is conducted on anonymized papers. Your lack of experience might play against you but you should by all means try.
2) Yes it happens, although usually it is with support from more established researchers.
3) It's a pity that thanks to the "open access" hype, people now wonder how they can afford to publish papers. Just pick a subscription-based journal that will publish at no cost to you.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/20
| 912
| 3,875
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know somebody, let’s call him Joe, who had been a good student. Being a good student, other students asked help from him to understand the class materials. In the meantime, our university started recruiting a lot of international students. These new students, especially those who had a lot of money started hiring Joe to teach them for a fee.
Then, I came to know that Joe charged these students a set fee for the semester with the understanding that they would get the expected grade. This means that he would do online quizzes, do any specific homework problems that students had difficulty, and teach them before a major exam.
Then, Joe became a teaching assistant and now he has access to more materials that normal students may not have. Since he is now a graduate/teaching assistant, he could potentially have access to quiz/exam questions before the exam and have answer keys for those tests. He continued to assist other international students for a fee.
Now, Joe is at part-time professor. He finished his graduate degree and the university hired him for part time teaching. He is continuing to help with quizzed, do homework and possibly leaking exam questions for other students.
In future, he may be hired as a full-time professor at the university.
Personally, I know this, and I do not feel this is right. I see a case of collusion and conflict of interest with this setup.
Should I inform the university about things that is going on? I am not sure if university knows about all the things that are going behind the scene.<issue_comment>username_1: If this is a real, rather than a hypothetical, then yes, Joe has been unethical and probably criminal, though it might be hard to make the case.
In theory you should bring it to the attention of the authorities, but you will be creating a painful situation for yourself, conceivably being charged with slander. An anonymous letter to authorities would be safe, but easy to ignore.
A group of accusers would be more likely to be heard than an individual. A complaint transmitted by a trusted authority such as a lawyer would be relatively safe and the lawyer could advise you on your potential liability.
But the charge is a serious one.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There is definitely a conflict of interest - but the wording in your question makes it a bit fishy. You are mixing up evident facs (helping students for a fee) which can be proven with assumptions / rumors (leaking exam questions).
If you decide to report the issue (which is legit and should be done), I strongly suggest to stick to proven facts. If possible, I would take a step-wise approach since from your description Joe seems to be sliped in this situation - and at each step, I assume it was not "much of a difference to the situation before" to him. Maybe he is just not aware of the unethical behaviour, so I would start e.g. with an ombuds person or the dean of the faculty. If they are not taking action, you should escalate the situation. It might be an idea to do this anonymously or as a group to avoid personal consequences if you still have to deal with this professor.
But you are right: At the moment you are hired by a university for teaching, you can not teach a subset of students for a fee on the same topics. Even on different topics it is difficult since students might feel they have to book such teaching assistance for a different course just to be graded better in their own course afterwards.
In our university we had a potentially similar situation a few years ago, because some of our professors are teaching in a private foundation like institution and some of the students of this professor wantet to attend his courses.
The decision / advise was that they would be allowed to do so, *after* they did all relevant exams held by this professor.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/20
| 610
| 2,493
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently applying for a research/study grant, and need three letters of reference. Would it be out of line to ask the recommenders to coordinate with one another so that they don't say anything conflicting, and don't double up on the same exact content? Not sure what the norms are.<issue_comment>username_1: I'd think do *not* ask them to coordinate. Not that it's such a terrible idea, but that writing letters of recommendation, while arguably part of one's professional responsibilities, is not quite obligatory, so has a component of "doing a favor". In that context, to ask for coordination would be adding (possibly considerable) work, since academics are not known for their cooperation. E.g., I myself will invariably write letters, but if I were obliged to cooperate with colleagues not of my own choosing, I might balk...
Anyway, "doubling up" on content is *confirmation*.
If there is "conflict", well, why would there be? As a long-time *reader* of recommendation letters, it does not surprise me when people have different opinions, or even different recollections of fact.
So, also, I think don't worry about those issues.
EDIT: To be clear, it's not that I imagine myself to be uncooperative (probably no one does!), but that my experiences with colleagues have made me dread most "cooperative" work. That is, I'd rather do twice (or more) the work than have to "coooperate" with randomly-chosen people. Certainly other people may feel otherwise, but asking for cooperation is asking for *more*, and perhaps quite a lot more work than you'd anticipated. Thus, since I think there's little if any to be gained... just let it go.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's certainly a good thought to make sure your letter writers don't double up on information to the detriment of their unique perspectives.
However, it certainly sends an odd vibe to ask that they three communicate with each other to do this ... They are doing you a favor writing the letter in the first place, but adding to that to try and make them coordinate with two other professors is a huge load, and plus, if you want three professors to work together, you might get your letters in a year, if they aren't too busy.
That said, it's *absolutely* normal to talk to one professor and ask her to write about your programming abilities in particular, and to ask a second to talk about how you are a quick study, etc., so that the letters are complementary.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/21
| 319
| 1,477
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working on a grant proposal. The topic of the proposal is in a technical study and do not have any direct social interaction. And the grant only provide salary for the applicant and project costs; therefore, there won't be any other recruitment.
One of the question in the grant application is to describe how the project will promote equality and non-discrimination? I understand this question is very common in most grant applications but I am not sure how can I promote equality and non-discrimination in a pure technical project.
should I include additional social engagement plan?<issue_comment>username_1: This is obviously not very relevant for your grant, but to be safe I would add something along the lines of, if and when the possibility of employing someone arose in the project in general (not just under this grant), you would consider candidates based on their technical suitability, and try to have an even representation of gender/etc in the candidate list.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you are in the US, your institution should have an IRB (Institutional Review Board) that will vet any research involving human subjects, but which can also give you advice on this. In other countries there may be an equivalent office associated with the Research Support (or similar) office.
It may be that it is enough to say "Does not apply" in your case, but you should get advice from experts.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/21
| 893
| 3,666
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started my PhD some months ago. My advisor was also my Master's advisor. He was impressed by my skills and passion so I enrolled in a PhD program with him.
What happened is that my topic changed quite lot and he didn't tell me clearly before enrolling. Basically my master thesis topic is in the trash for him now (FYI we published in a top conference with that). He wants to work on a totally new idea, on which not even him has the right expertise, so basically I have to study a whole new state of the art, have the ideas, acquire the skills and present the results - why do I even need a PhD advisor then..?
I feel lost, abandoned (I have nobody, nor other PhDs or PostDocs to work with) and hopeless. Yes, I tried to explain my advisor that I'm not excited by the new topic, but he's like "I pay you for this, so you'll do this".
Any experience on situations like this? Should I quit and say goodbye? Am I wrong expecting more by a PhD advisor?<issue_comment>username_1: You have good reasons to feel abandonned, and it is the good moment to decide whether or not to pursue a PhD. This decision is a difficult one to make, and you will need to reflect on your professional goals and alternatives for you. Starting such an endeavour, and not being excited by the subject is a big deal.
**No, you are not wrong to expect more**. A PhD student is not a researcher you pay to have something done. A PhD student is someone with some skills, but that still need training.
There is things you can do if you want to continue your PhD on this topic:
1. Ask your advisor to include a coadvisor with expertise in this new subject. You could even try to find yourself a coadvisor.
2. Find course on this new topic, either at your university or at another. Sometimes it is possible to take classes at another university and have it include in your program. It depends on your country and university.
3. Make the subject your own, by developping your questions around it. A little bit difficult when you are starting, but this is doable.
... and this is not an exhaustive list.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I offer this as merely a suggestion and not a recommendation. The conditions you face seem to be intolerable.
On the other hand, however, consider that your goal in receiving a doctorate is to become an independent researcher, coming up with and solving new and interesting problems. Many (most?) students don't get a chance to do that from the beginning and are led through their research by an experienced researcher. Usually this works. After you already have a doctorate the fact that exploring a new problem has risks of wasted time and effort is less critical than for a student.
However, if you can trust your advisor based on past work (maybe, or not) then exploring a new field with him/her could be a marvelous experience. In order to do that, however, you would need to have a *take charge* attitude, sometimes leading your advisor. If successful, it would put you in a good position later.
But before you embark on such a suggestion, first explore with your advisor the likelihood of your success in obtaining the degree, since exploring a new field entails more than a little risk. You need assurance that *no matter what* you will emerge with your degree and a future in academia. You need to trust both the ability and the attitude of your professor to adopt this suggestion as a working model.
Again, this is something to think about only. If it still feels too risky, the answer here of [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/117274/75368) seems to be appropriate in the main.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/21
| 2,767
| 11,147
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a masters student at one of the top two universities in the UK and will be applying for PhD positions soon. When I google my (unique) name, the first few results are what you'd expect, my LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, and some university web pages.
However if you keep scrolling and go through the pages of Google's search results, you see some silly forum posts from when I was 12-14 years old, and some poorly written Yahoo Answers questions from the same time. I am now 22 so this was almost 10 years ago.
I know it's stupid but when I was that age no one really taught me how to use the internet properly and so ended up using my full name in a number of places.
I've not written anything offensive and my name isn't on anything objectively bad, but it's just childish silliness (memes, poorly written stories, Yahoo Answers nonsense, and just weird forum posts) and I'm a bit embarrassed to be honest. I feel like as I continue to progress academically, it will become more likely that people will Google me and see all this which might make it likely that I will be judged. Again, it's nothing offensive or objectionable just old young teenager stuff. Benign but embarrassing.
Should I just ignore it and hope that as my career develops these old results get pushed further back in Google's search results? Should I try to remove this stuff from the internet (very difficult as I have lost all these old accounts)?
The stuff I posted back then has little to nothing to do with who I am now professionally, and I would hate for people to think it is. Having a unique name does seem like a curse sometimes and I have made it worse by being extra foolish when I was young.<issue_comment>username_1: Well, be assured that you are not alone. Things kids do were hidden from view in the past, but no longer. Now your entire life is on view for anyone who looks.
In general, however, as long as what you did or said isn't truly horrible, it will do little more than raise eyebrows or elicit a laugh. People generally realize that we eventually grow up and those older than you, whose background is less visible will look back at their own foibles as well.
But if you bragged at age 15 that you liked to blow up frogs with firecrackers, you might want an explanation for why that isn't the same *you* anymore.
More generally, however, I think that society needs to take more account of personal privacy, especially for those not yet officially adult. No one seems to have good solutions for that, however, other than parental supervision. Certainly the social media sites have little interest in your privacy when their business model depends on exploiting information about you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Relax. No one cares, and no one will judge you on what you said when you were 12. (At least, no one who was ever 12 years old themselves...)
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: European Union privacy rules include certain aspects of the [right to be forgotten](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten). I am not an expert on what this means precisely, but it seems to include the right to have search engines remove certain information associated with your name from search results.
[Here](https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/legal-removal-request?complaint_type=rtbf) is another page provided by Google with more information and a form for submitting privacy-based requests for removal of search results. I assume other search engines will have similar procedures in place to comply with the EU rules.
Note that these rules apply in the EU. I suspect the embarrassing results associated with your name will still be available in non-EU countries. See [this](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/10/opinion/google-right-forgotten.html) related recent article where this somewhat controversial issue is discussed.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: This question is definitely more of a online reputation management question so my only advice is buckle up and try to anonymize your past actions.
Here are some suggestions:
* Change your username on those forums and remove profile details
+ Often times this will globally change your name across all your posts
* Contact the forums and ask them to de-associate your account from your posts; Stack Exchange does this so I hope others can too
* Delete/edit your old posts if you can
* Deleting your account can sometimes anonymize your old posts but some sites could maintain your username without a link to a profile
Ultimately, assuming you didn't post anything illegal or bigoted then it's not likely to come back and haunt you; unless you decide to become a politician then EVERYTHING will be used to smear you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm deeply involved in web technologies, including search results. The simplest and fastest way to solve this problem is to add other search results. The more "legitimate" and positive results found, the less likely the others will be seen. There are numerous factors in raising search results, but still:
* Create another Stack Exchange account with your name and use it.
* Create social media accounts with your name.
* Join groups and use your real names (in addition to pseudonyms).
* Create a [Disqus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disqus) account with your name.
You don't need to make many posts on each site, but place professionally enhancing content there.
If you really want to spend time with this - open other accounts with simple variations of your name thus creating even more false results.
A little work every day and soon you'll have 100s if not 1000s of positive results that will appear above the other silliness.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_6: From what you described, I wouldn't worry too much about it. If you were *earnestly* engaging in public discussions before you had mastered articulate presentation skills, I personally would see that as a positive not a negative. But much more likely, I'm never going to search remote forum boards for a candidate I'm interviewing.
With that said, I think a very proactive measure one could take is to simply build a professional website. If I'm interested in judging the professional contributions of an individual, this is the very first and most likely the last place I will look for them; it gets straight to the point and typically communicates exactly what technical skills they do (or do not) have. If I'm interviewing you, I don't care if you're into sky-diving in your free time, I want to know what your research interests are and how well you communicate technical information. A website is a great place to demonstrate this.
As an anecdote, I also have a unique name (only one in the world) and for a long time if you Googled me, my website was the first result to pop up and some combat sporting events I participated in would pop up on the first page of the search results (it's now moved down much further). At the time, I similarly was slightly embarrassed, as I felt it was a bit unprofessional. Many of the people who have interviewed me were familiar with what was on my webpage. Not a single one was familiar with the sporting events.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: While I do recommend the point, mentioned by other answers, of having more (non-embarrassing) internet entries with your name (that can be anything from blog entries to mailing list discussions), something that has not been mentioned is that *the people looking for you on the internet won't know that the Yahoo answers poster is the PhD student*.
Sure, you have a very unique name, but... are you sure no one else on the Earth bears that name? Do people looking for you believe that?
When searching someone's name on the internet it's not uncommon to find, in addition to the one you expect, someone else with that name -which clearly is a different one- living on the other side of the globe (and perhaps nobody else, just those two results). Then, there are those results that could relate to the looked up person or not, in which I guess all those embarrassing entries will fit, unless you included extra details there, like listing your school or the place you lived.
The people that really browsed a lot for entries by your name will conclude that *maybe* you said some silly things ten years ago.
My expectation is that, at most, you would get some questioning from other young colleagues for fun (*are you the Mxyzptlk that said 2+2=5?*), at which point it is up to you to acknowledge having made those posts... or not, after all, how would you remember if you made certain Yahoo answers post 10 years ago, even if it mentions a name like yours?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: This is the problem of unable to change from your perspective to other's. Pick a person you want to know right now and google their name, would you even scroll to the bottom of the page? No. Just a couple of first results is enough to overwhelm your mind. Even when they have read everything about you, they will feel closer to you, not to mock you.
**By being able to put yourself into other's shoes, you can detach to your emotions and move on.**
See more:
* [Perspective-taking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective-taking)
* [Empathy gap](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy_gap)
* [The Spotlight Effect](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-big-questions/201111/the-spotlight-effect)
* [Detachment (philosophy) - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detachment_(philosophy))
* [F-Shaped Pattern For Reading Web Content](https://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content-discovered/?lm=how-people-read-web-eyetracking-evidence&pt=report)
* [Why You Should Stop Caring What Other People Think (Taming the Mammoth)](https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/06/taming-mammoth-let-peoples-opinions-run-life.html)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Relax.
What you did in your 12 is half your time here back. It will become a third soon, quarter slightly later, etc.
During this time you will feed the Internet with new and more relevant content and low-quality posts will become very obsolete and cannot backfire to you. If anyone tries to play that card in an argument, you can belittle it by "And you were a genius in your 12? You made a very poor improvement since then."
The only case your 12-year-old self can backfire at you is a very serious misbehaviour and it still can be dismissed as "I've learnt my lesson from that".
This is the part of growing up and learning. If you don't learn you don't improve. What actually happens to you is judging your old posts written with 12 year old knowledge and 12-year-old skills by criteria adjusted to recent knowledge and 24-year-old skills. Be sure that after 10 years you will see your today's work, you are proud of, with the same emotions as you are seeing the ancient posts Google has found.
If you are about to be assessed by a sane person they will know that and ignore that. If they will assess you because of your 20 years old posts, it is a strong argument for you to never meet them again.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/21
| 1,447
| 6,126
|
<issue_start>username_0: ### Background about me
I am an early-to-mid-career teaching-track faculty (four years of cross-curricular teaching experience in engineering) in the USA. I teach courses both at the undergraduate and graduate level. I also try to keep up with research and publish a conference or journal paper or so every year. It is hard work and my maturity is growing.
(About ten days ago, my research was identified by a rather senior faculty member (twenty years of research and consulting experience with multiples millions of dollar in grant money and more incoming) as being quite promising. I had a rather pleasant conversation with him and he was genuinely interested in my work and wanted to collaborate. Happiness abound!)
### Main question
A few days ago, his PhD student stopped by my office to discuss my research. There are some common ideas I and the student are both working on. I found that although he is a smart student (yet to pass his PhD qualifiers), his attitude was a little off-putting with a superiority complex I have not sensed in the hundreds of students I interact with every semester. He wants to collaborate with me but kept saying things like “you should do ...” and “you could do ... for my research”. It is okay for a student to suggest a line of action, but I still feel that an instructor–student distance should be maintained. I certainly did not speak to my adviser in such a fashion and neither did my colleagues (to their advisers, during their PhDs).
I appreciate the exchange of ideas but I am somehow repelled by the idea of a student who I have barely only met has a superiority complex. This probably stems from him working with an adviser who is pre-eminent in his field.
I know that working with this student would likely lead to being co-PI on research grants but somehow, as mentioned earlier, I am repelled by this idea.
Is this common in academia, to come across PhD students with such a high superiority complex? Am I just being overly conceited and self-absorbed by feeling repelled? I am not sure if the student met with me on the behest of his adviser, but my gut feeling is to communicate research ideas directly with his adviser. At the same time, I feel that ignoring the student could impact my relationship with his adviser (unfounded fear perhaps, but I don't know).
I am reaching out to the larger advisers on this forum to get some perspective and thoughts on such situations. This is an immense opportunity for me to break into prominent research ranks after somewhat *wallowing* in teaching.<issue_comment>username_1: While your, I hope preliminary, assessment of the student as having a superiority complex may be correct, I think you might want to consider another option.
It may be that the student was told to try to impress you that he isn't the dumbest rock in the pile and so laid it on thicker than normal. It might be hard for a normal student to find an appropriate balance if he is new to this.
Since you indicate that there would be advantages from an association with his advisor, you might want to withhold judgement until you know and observe more. One think you might want to pursue is a talk with the advisor and work in the question "Is he *always* like that?". You might get some insight on how the student normally behaves that might make you more or less willing to take on the task. Of course, you might also learn that the student has, indeed, thought hard and deeply about the issues before approaching you. It isn't always easy to work with a truly brilliant student, but there is something to be learned from it.
If you have won a Fields Medal (mathematics) but come up against a student who makes you feel small it can be quite a shock. (Movie Reference: Good Will Hunting)
True enough that some people play dominance games, of course.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Academia is no different than anywhere else: it has people who are talented and pleasant to work with, but also people who are talented and less pleasant to work with, including ones with a variety of psychological issues such as a superiority complex or a patronizing/domineering attitude.
So yes, it’s normal. Your feelings of being repelled are also normal. But with that being said, I agree with username_1 that it’s very hard to judge someone’s personality based on a short encounter in what from the student’s point of view must have seemed like a delicate and fraught professional situation (unfortunately, in my experience it seems that for some grad students almost all interactions with faculty are regarded as similarly fraught). So perhaps you should give the collaboration a chance. Also, people are capable of change, and it’s quite possible that if you simply politely ask the student to refrain from telling you what you “should” do he will adjust his behavior.
On the other hand, of course some people are simply insufferable and the pain of working with them is not worth the benefit. But I think it would be premature to decide based on the short experience you had that the student in question fits this profile.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Unfortunately some students - sometimes gifted students - can be excited about a topic and not realize that some things they say or do come across poorly. You ought first to make sure this is not a one-off or a misunderstanding: I would quietly talk your colleague to see if he has identified this kind of behaviour with the student. You may discreetly point out to your colleagues that the “overbearing enthusiasm” (or such similar turn of phrase) of his student made you a little uncomfortable.
While you may think the student has behaved unprofessionally, make sure you yourself remain professionnal with the student. One way to do this is to communicate directly your colleague on this topic but without seeking to avoid the student if he is present or nearby. Basically, you want to make sure your discussions on this topic are perceived to be (at least initially) primarily between you and your colleague, not between you and his student.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/21
| 2,437
| 9,897
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am now studying Computer Application, a bachelor degree in India. I can get a job in the IT sector if I try only a little harder. But I have this deep desire to study Physics starting from undergraduate.
My high school science scores were average. I consider myself as a smart working science student. I want to apply in UK colleges as there I can start from bachelor degree even if I already have one. I study Physics whenever I get time apart from my present course preparation. But, I have this depressing and demeaning feeling within me that I shall not be able to cope up with Physics, I shall fail and that I don't belong to that field.
I want to know **how can I be finally sure whether I have what it takes to study Physics.** So that either I can finally remove this desire of Physics from my head and concentrate on Computer/IT jobs or prepare myself for another field of education that I think will best fit me. **How can I assess myself?**
It's private to me, so I don't want to ask anyone close to me. Not even my almost-a-physicist brother. I struggle a bit at solving deep thinking problems. I am slow at math but I don't give up. Often it makes me cry, but the next day I'm again after it. And I don't think I shall be happy in the IT sector.<issue_comment>username_1: Physics is very hard, if you've learned only IT on pre-grad level, you probably can't imagine, how hard is it. It is *not* like the IT.
Furthermore, you earn much lesser with it. Simply, there are much lesser physicist jobs.
Do it only if you have an inherent internal urge for that.
From the other side, giving up physics you will likely lose something what you will sorrow in the rest of your life.
The main hardness what I can see in your plan, that you want to do *two* hard switch simultanously:
1. Switch from IT to Physics (nearly impossible)
2. Switch from India to the UK (probably very hard)
In my life, I could do some similar as (2), but in much better circumstances. I had no chance for (1).
Your chances are better, but still low, if
* There is some strong financial support behind you (you can simply migrate into the UK and apply to a physics University, paying it and learning there, without the need of finding a job there).
* You are young (ideally, below 25)
* You have the urge to learn and work with around 10 times harder as you are doing now.
Math is a very strong requirement in Physics, knowing only IT you probably can't imagine how hard.
I think your chances are low, but nothing is impossible. In your case I would try both of (1) and (2), but I would be ready for that at least one of them won't succeed.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It is hard to give specific advice here so I'll just try to make a few helpful comments.
Most important is that it would be a shame if you learn at age 60 that you made a wrong decision at 20 and that you feel you wasted your life. If you have the opportunity to do what you want to do, and not everyone does, take advantage of it.
But switching will be hard. In fact, it will be starting over, rather than leveraging a lot of what you already know. Be prepared for that. Your age doesn't matter, though you will likely finish later than others who started earlier.
Thinking physics is hard. It isn't necessarily harder than thinking computing, but it is a different way of thinking. Be prepared for that. Of course, there are a lot of subfields of physics and each is hard in its own way. Some are very mathematical, some computational, etc. But a bachelors is usually pretty general, with the expectation that you will specialize later.
It is hard to think of an assessment that will predict success unless you have already been evaluated in meaningfully difficult scientific courses - especially physics. It is a bit of a blind leap. But desire and enthusiasm can make you a success as long as you put in the work, and work effectively.
It would, in fact, be a good idea to discuss it with your brother. He knows something about physics, but he knows a lot about you. He can point out the challenges you will face.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Like anything in life, you should try it and see how it goes. However, I have an answer for this particular fields you mentioned because I do have PhD in Computer Science and I’m working with people with the background in physics and mathematicians all the time.
**why you may not enjoy physics**
The chances are that you, as a software engineer, will find physics not moving as fast as computer engineering field. Also, there are mountains of knowledge to climb on. Third, as a software engineer you might like “virtual things” to develop ( computer games, graphics, chat rooms, virtual reality, etc.) but in physics you are kept down by the reality of universe. Fourth, how good is your math? Get ready to climb on another set of mountains to be sufficient in math.
**There is another solution!**
Why not marriage the both fields together! Why not look at simulators that are developed by software engineers for people who want to do physical simulations? You can start looking at simulators like Comsol? In this case you are enjoying physics as well as being a software engineers. Also there are game engines that are used that requires programmers know physics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Not a direct answer but I have zero reputation (new on SE) so I can't comment on your question : I was doing a master's thesis in philosophy and switched to physics a few years ago. The math part is HARD. But with enough hard work, nothing is impossible - I even graduated with pretty good grades, and I absolutely have no regret switching to physics. So another case of "follow your gut feeling" there, if I hadn't tried it I wouldn't have known.
Another remark concerning the math part : when I take CS classes I find them pretty easy - in general, but most specifically regarding mathematics. The equations you'll have to solve in physics are way harder than what you do in CS. So be prepared to that.
Oh and final comment : I'm beginning my master's thesis in physics with a particular focus on numerical simulations. So yes, as has been noted by others, you can join disciplines eventually and get the best of both worlds.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I was in kind of similar situation few years back and I've successfully changed my stream to physics now and pursuing my masters in Physics in a good University in India. I run a blog for all the Physics enthusiastic Engineering grads like you looking to switch to Physics somehow. Along with me <NAME>, an engineer turned Physicist currently pursuing his PhD in Cornell University writes articles about switching to Physics in it. Also you can meet 150+ other engineers like you aspiring to switch to Physics there. You might want to take a look at that.
<https://physicsafterengineering.blogspot.com/2018/03/physics-after-engineering.html>
These are the major ways for doing Msc or Integrated Ph.D.(or direct Ph.D. in some cases) in Physics after Engineering.
JAM
Universities Entrance tests.
Opportunities abroad (Physics GRE, General GRE, IELTS and TOFEL etc)
JEST
TIFR GS (Integrated Ph.D. paper)
MS by research programs
TIFR Hyderabad
Direct Ph.D.
Astronomy and related programs
GATE
CSIR NET
Distance programs
Details about the exams are mentioned in the blog
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm a physics ph.d. from one of the top universities but I took career change afterwards and work in computer science field now. It may depend where you (want to or end up) live- some places have more jobs in certain fields- e.g. silicon valley is very much populated with CS jobs. Maybe think about what you really want and why you want to study, what do you define a success as?
p.s. If you keep having itches, why not try taking some courses or do research interns? Graduate study (research mostly) is very different from undergraduate coursework. In both experimental or theoretical physics, your computing skills may be valuable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Answer from a physicists. Please make an effort to define what it means to "belong to the field of physics".
* Do you have what it takes to **get a bachelor in physics**? Sure you do: if you can graduate in another STEM field as computer engineering you can graduate in physics as well. Physics is hard, but with good math skills, and lots of passion this is certainly not an insurmountable challenge.
* Do you have what it takes to **get a master in physics**? Pretty much same as above. If you still like it after 3 years you can certainly put one or two more. If anything, master is easier as you are already through the first barrier (having the proper mindset)
* do you have what it takes to **obtain a PhD in physics**? If you got till here, then the question is more about attitude: can you on work for long hours, many days a week toward a very hard, possibly ill defined problem, for years? This is a skill you develop in any PhD
* do you have what it takes to **become a physicist**? (physicist = an person that does research in physics for a living, typically in universities or laboratories) It takes a person with a PhD who can prove he/she is creative, relentless, ambitious, can get papers published and money grant flowing, and face extreme competition without crushing under pressure. At this stage, it takes exeptional hard and soft skills, and a good dose of luck.
I think you were referring to the bachelor. Go for it, follow your passion. Are you not sure you want to become an academic? Most physics graduates I know who left the field are now working as quant traders, data scientists, entrepreneurs, journalists, teachers, politicians. Not too bad if you think you would not make for a good academic, right? :)
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/09/21
| 279
| 1,228
|
<issue_start>username_0: As the title suggested, if you have been doing research consistently with a professor, can you write RA as your title in CV? If not, what should be the title to put there instead to show that you have done research in that lab? Thanks a lot.<issue_comment>username_1: The different faculty has different views on this, one of them said to me once that "Project Assistant" or "Research Assistant" means full-time researcher and unsuitable for this case, but others don't mind. Same with Undergraduate or Graduate Researcher.
Rather than the title, the explanation of your role and accomplishments in this research should be concisely written in one-two sentences, this is much more significant.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are a student at a university it's probably unwise to claim to have a title there if you don't have it. Simply putting 'student' is probably better. On the other hand, many departments have unpaid, "zero hour" appointments if you really want an official title.
If you're not at a university and you fund yourself I suppose you can technically give yourself whatever title you want, but "independent researcher" would seem like a fitting description.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/22
| 749
| 3,193
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am exploring some new research fields in CS from my unrelated field in math.
Many papers I have stumped upon during research seem to completely ignore the fact that notation and symbols have meanings. Coming from math, this is a bit unsettling to me.
I hate to provide example, but [here is one](https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1210/1210.4893.pdf). In equation 1, some magical capital letters are used as functions, but never defined. No references are provided either. Here is [another one](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1709.08568.pdf). Virtually all the symbols which are supposed to mean something in math are not provided with any definition.
I've encountered a whole string (dozens) of these papers in a row.
Is this a common practice in CS? Or perhaps due to page limit? Can anyone explain what I am seeing?<issue_comment>username_1: In the case of the first paper, the meaning of these equations are well-known within the subfield of reinforcement learning. (See Barto and Sutton's [book](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1opPSz5AZ_kVa1uWOdOiveNiBFiEOHjkG/view) for background.)
For instance, V is usually a value function which is the expected reward from following a policy π to termination. (The Q function - the value of taking an action from a state is also often used without full definition as well.)
I can't speak about CS as a whole, but in subfields like reinforcement learning, this is somewhat common. Personally, I find myself getting more and more formal the older I get. But, CS doesn't *demand* the same rigor as might be found in mathematics, so people get used to not providing it - and don't demand it of their graduate students.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Mathematical notation tends to be more context-dependent in computer science than in mathematics. I guess the reason is cultural: computer scientists are often also programmers, and programmers routinely deal with much larger abstract systems than mathematicians.
Even a small program can have hundreds of named functions and variables. Large software systems are orders of magnitude larger. The code also evolves over time, as new concepts, functions, and variables replace old ones. There is no way one can define everything with the level of rigor a mathematician would expect.
Instead, the code is expected to be self-documenting. Function/variable names are often already sufficiently informative that further definitions are unnecessary, especially if you already understand the context. The structure of the code and the patterns in it give further hints that can help to understand it. Difficult/confusing places may have comments that clarify them, and high-level concepts are usually documented.
If a computer scientist can't read code, their career options are severely limited. Reading code is a basic skill every CS graduate should have, just like every mathematics graduate should be able to read mathematical proofs. And because the target audience is familiar with context-dependent notation, computer scientists often use it in their research papers. They may even find it easier to understand than mathematical rigor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/22
| 353
| 1,537
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently submitted my replies to peer review to a journal. After submission I found out I had missed out on turning on track changes to the last part of my manuscript. Will this cause a problem? Do issues like this irritate journal editors and reviewers and lead to rejection of a manuscript?<issue_comment>username_1: Did they specifically ask for change tracking to be turned on? If so, then you should contact the editor and send in an updated version that meets their requirements. If not, then don't worry about it.
Having to handle additional versions due to an author's mistake could be a little irritating to an editor or reviewer, but if they're expecting change tracking, then it would be more irritating not to have it. Anyway, administrative issues like this, which do not affect the content of the paper, should not be a reason for rejection.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The editor may be irritated or not, but that shouldn't concern you. What you should do, however, is immediately send a corrected version with an apology. The apology should be sincere, but needn't be overly long or explanatory.
If it will take you a few days to get the manuscript ready, then immediately send an email if you can with the apology and the date he/she can expect the revision.
The editor would like to correct it quickly so as to avoid too may turns between you and the reviewers. They are interested in publishing a high quality manuscript, not in punishing authors.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/22
| 507
| 2,238
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it common for a PhD student to be asked to contribute to a grant proposal (one of those that require faculty to submit them, the "big" ones)?
I've been asked to write a small section but I'm really worried that whatever I will write will be used to shoot down the proposal and that if that happens it will be my fault. I have no experience whatsoever writing grant proposals and have only minimal experience writing research (I'm a first year).
This is a big proposal for a multi-million dollar project. I don't want to be the reason for its failure.<issue_comment>username_1: You should have no cause for concern. If the grant is related to your work in any way then it is appropriate for you to be involved in the grant writing.
But you aren't going to "shoot it down". In any reasonable case your work will be reviewed by others putting the grant together and also, especially for a large grant, a grants management office at the university. You might be asked to re-write your contribution once or twice with advice from those others.
It will be a good experience for you. If such large grants are an important part of your field, then you will want to learn what goes in to them so that you can lead it yourself later in your career.
You might try to find writing samples from other grants to aid you. The research office or the PI can probably provide some older work. You can also try to work as closely as possible with others on the team. They likely have more experience than you do and can provide some guidance.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is completely normal to get people who will be involved with the project to help write the grant. The PI is not going to just take your text and copy-paste it into their proposal without reading it. Doubly so because you've never done this before. The proposal, when it is submitted, will be as good as your group as a whole can make it.
If you want to stay in academia, every time you interview for a faculty position you'll be asked about your experience in applying for grants, because generating income from grants is a key part of what academics do. Having this experience will be very valuable for you.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/09/22
| 1,273
| 5,165
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated with Ph.D. in 2012 from SUNY-Albany College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering, with B.S. in Physics. Then I could not find a related job to this day.
In 6 years, I managed only to get two different full time jobs in entirely different fields, and they did not last. I believe one of the major obstacle in my goal is that I am Deaf, and the employers do discriminate.
So, now I am enrolling into community college to try to get in an internship program in Computer Science/Engineering in Spring 2019. One of my major defects was that I did lot of modeling and simulations on a platform, but without a computer program language (C++, for instance). Another major defects: the program was not ABET certified, did not have any undergraduate engineering courses (AutoCAD, statics, etc), exhausted references.
As I was working on this course of action, I realized that most college and universities tend not to admit people who has advanced degrees (both undergraduate and graduate programs). Granted, the community college will provide me with additional training and coursework to cover some of the defects such as basic engineering courses, programming and possibly one more math course. But how do I get back into advanced research and coursework, or at least do advanced research (postdocs generally requires recent graduate within 3 years)?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a bit orthogonal, but let me describe a project that might give you some ideas that you could conceivably turn in to a career. Not exactly in this form, but you might want to think about whether some variation on it might suit you.
A friend of mine started a project in New Mexico to take young people with no seeming future (poor, gang-bangers, dropouts) and start up a combination educational program and software development house using Agile Software Development principles. I met some of his students/workers a few years in to the project and they were productive, hardworking, and articulate. They were also fantastic software developers. [The Road: Reinventing Education](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjM8unN4M_dAhUKMt8KHZd-ArYQFjACegQIBxAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dreamsongs.com%2FFiles%2FRoadLess.pdf&usg=AOvVaw241xzJ0c5BP62b192EXuHB) - pdf download.
<NAME> was the principal person here. He both taught the "kids" how to do software development, found grants to support the project, found real projects in local businesses, etc.
It occurred to me, reading your question, that if you are in a large enough place that there are others like yourself nearby, a project that is part education and part workforce might be something you would be interested in.
The education part isn't enough, as you learned in your own life, but a *Studio Workshop* that provides also a workplace in which the workers are trained by other, similarly situated, people might be viable.
It does require a fair amount of governmental support, but I imagine that can be found, though it is hard to maintain. A relationship with a sponsoring educational institution also helps. The workshop was not a charity in any sense and it produced real software for businesses. It helped a lot of young people turn their lives around.
One major challenge, of course, is that building software requires communication. Pair programming especially depends on a lot of communication. Someone wanting to do this with profoundly deaf people would need to replace chit-chat with visual communication, of course. But it would be a major contribution for someone to do this well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, you don't need a job at most colleges, you just need one of them. So don't let a bunch of closed doors bother you. Many others are still open.
You can definitely still do postdocs. Some schools have strict rules, many others do not, treating it as a generic at-will employment job with whatever name the prof wants to give the role. I knew someone who came back to a postdoc after over a decade in industry (they left again in a few months for another industry job though). I know others who have stayed in the role for way too many years. There are also similar jobs with other names like research scientist that you can get in academic labs. It's kind of wide open if you are willing/able to relocate. Pick some big schools and monitor their job opening list.
You can also take classes at many (perhaps all?) major public universities via some variant of an open university system, requiring little more than permission of the instructor (and some cash). There will likely be a limit in the number of classes you can take this way but it can get you started. Ace a few classes and you will have a much easier time moving to the next step.
Lack of ABET certification is not a huge deal, by the way. It's a lot of paperwork and many universities don't bother with it. It's more important that the school is regionally accredited. Then we can trust (at least somewhat more) that you were actually taught what your transcript says you were taught.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/23
| 773
| 3,318
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose a situation when two students trying to apply for a PhD position in pure mathematics and they both have same GPA, same Rec.Letters, etc except for their published papers. Let both applicants have one paper published each, but applicant A has a "much better" research done compared to applicant B.
*What makes applicant A's paper "much better"?*
If it is the number of people cited his/her paper in their references it is absurd because *time* is the main factor of growth of its credit.
If it is the reputation of journal the paper is published it is also not a good judgement because the very same journal can contain both proof to FLT and a PhD paper.
I don't think the length of paper matters... I don't think the time that a researcher has spent matters since no one asks that...
This is a question of comparing two research paper which neither contains a solution to a famous unsolved problem; it's about papers that normally publish by students (or even professors).<issue_comment>username_1: This may be a bit of an odd reply, but bear with me..
When you go to school, you go not to learn, but to learn HOW to learn. This takes training for an undisciplined mind. Years of training.
When you head off for college and university it's just a progression. The subject username_1er may be far more complicated, but showing that you have your own personal grasp of an understanding is what "they" are looking for and not just copying text to show you've found the relevant information.
So when you do your paper/s, truly come to an understanding on the topic before even starting to write. If you do that, then the answer will flow from you and it'll show anyone that reads that you actually can learn.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The quality of a mathematical paper isn't an absolute. It may not even be apparent for years. Quality is judged by individuals and two judges may come to opposite conclusions on the value.
Number of citations is no more than an indication. A person working in an especially arcane sub-field with few other researchers will naturally have fewer citations than someone working in a popular field. *Who* cites your work may mean more, actually.
The quality of the journal in which you find something is an indication, but partly that is a username_1er of coincidence. Perhaps the paper in the "lesser" journal is, again, in too arcane a field for the editors to have included it. It isn't that this means nothing, it is just that it isn't an absolute indication.
If the purpose of the question is anything beyond a hypothetical, related to who is more likely to advance, then that really depends on other factors. Certainly one paper isn't a great indicator. As a comment by Prof. <NAME> notes, a future advisor is more likely to want to work with the student who has more to contribute to the actual work of the subfield of that advisor. Something in either paper may help that person to make a decision, but other factors will also come in to play.
---
This doesn't, of course, address the issue that some *problems* in mathematics are considered important. You mention famous unsolved questions of course. Giving a first correct proof of a problem already considered important is, of course, quality work.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/23
| 743
| 3,300
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm talking about a narrow sub-field of Computer Science - algorithm execution high-level simulations. However, I guess, this applies to many fields to some extent.
When you are submitting an article to a journal (peer-reviewed, indexed, with a track, not from a ranking bottom), you can't send the same article to other publishers. After submitting, editors often do not update anything in Elsevier's or Springer's systems about the status of your submission. The first move from the editorial board usually takes 2-8 weeks. 2-8 at best, if you sending them emails to track this, at worst they can just lose your paper and/or ignore emails. Usually, the next stop is a desk rejection (the shortest and the way causing least headache, just isn't leading to the goal) or sending it to the reviewers. The reviewing process in this narrow research area takes 3-12 months. A reviewer may say something not really relevant and short (or something you can use to improve your text, but this doesn't matter in this case) after a year and the article gets rejected. This can take longer if you aren't keeping an eye on it.
Then you have to repeat the process. This is not a short story process either, reformatting the article, pictures, editing (for the next journal's unique rules while you still remember that they can just ignore it or responding once a month to emails) etc. You can't speed this up, you can't even predict the time it will take. Seems like a kind of strangely convoluted hell just for presenting your results in some peer-reviewed (not high tier) journal if you're outside academia.
Disclaimer: the author is outside academia currently, but he has publications, teaching and research experience. 3-month tool development and output analysis results sometimes need 1-2 years to be published (just accepted, to be more specific). Maybe, the situation isn't as rough inside academia, but for one has no proper business relations, and paying all fees as an author and without an ability to focus on this process because it isn't one's main activity - it is.
Any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: Since you are in CS, the solution is easy: Submit your results to a conference first (at least as an extended abstract, if the full paper is too long for the conference). For conferences, there are fixed deadlines for the review process, so you are guaranteed to get a decision within two or three months (even though it need not be the desired decision). After the first version has appeared in some conference proceedings, you can still submit an extended version to some journal. Then: be patient. There is no guaranteed way to speed up the reviewing process. Live with it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In addition to @username_1's suggestion about conference publication, most computer science venues allow preprints to be circulated, e g., via [arXiv.org](http://arxiv.org).
You can thus publish and distribute a version of your manuscript before submission, then update as you improve it and link to the final version upon publication.
This pattern is particularly common in the more theoretical portions of the field, which it sounds like you are in, and where review times are often particularly long, as you note.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/23
| 1,026
| 4,414
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper and some of our findings validate the conclusions from an already published peer-reviewed article in a respected journal. We also find things that differ.
However the authors of the paper uses techniques that are not ideal for making their conclusions, and furthermore, some of their data look particularly weak to me, i.e. I do not find that they substantiate their claims. For example, there are immunofluorescent images that simply look black.
How do I discuss and reference a paper, that seemingly come to the right conclusions, but do so in a manner, I am not sure about?<issue_comment>username_1: There are at least two aspects to scientific papers, method and conclusion. You can critique either, but should do so using evidence. Likewise you can critique the connection between method and conclusion. There is no real problem with that. But you need to present the evidence to back up any claim so that it doesn't sound like opinion or preference.
On the other hand, if you have come to the same conclusions you may not have to include any discussion at all, other than a citation. It might actually be wise to omit any criticism if the other paper is well accepted. That may not be possible, of course, if you think the validity of your paper in some how depends on the problems in the other. In particular, you need to attack the issue directly if reviewers consider your paper to be just a re-work of known things.
In mathematics there is a huge body of "knowledge" for which all of the published proof is flawed. But we accept that "A new proof of KB's Lemma" as a valid thing without needing to explain, necessarily, how all existing proofs of KB's Lemma are flawed. Sometimes it is easier than others to side-step the issue of course. When reviewers don't see the value of the new work because it is "known" you may need to do more, or, alternately explain to them something about the flaws in the earlier work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I am writing a paper and some of our findings validate the conclusions from an already published peer-reviewed article in a respected journal. We also find things that differ.
>
>
>
That is all good and normal.
>
> However the authors of the paper uses techniques that are not ideal for making their conclusions, and furthermore, some of their data look particularly weak to me, i.e. I do not find that they substantiate their claims. For example, there are immunofluorescent images that simply look black.
>
>
>
Often (especially when it comes to experiments) the choice of technique is down to what is available to the authors, and what their expertise is. This is generally understood, and it's left for later papers to improve on methods, analysis, data, etc. In fact, an earlier less-than-perfect publication, while not great for the scientific record, helps position and justify your own paper.
Also note that it's possible they had better data than made it into the published figures. Sometimes the picture quality deteriorates during the publication process, sometimes the authors do not know how to make high-quality graphics, and sometimes there are outright mistakes. It might be worth reaching out to them asking for more details.
>
> How do I discuss and reference a paper, that seemingly come to the right conclusions, but do so in a manner, I am not sure about?
>
>
>
It's best to be sure before directly criticizing the other work. If you're not sure, it's usually better to focus on presenting your own work in a good light by positioning it relative to the other work. It sounds as if you are in a good position to do that here, perhaps writing something like "System X has previously been studied using technique A [1]. We use technique B [2], which has better time resolution and allows for more precise control of property c." This construction can be adapted to discuss the claims where you agree and disagree with the other work. Basically focus on your own work first and foremost, and argue why we readers should trust it over the other one, not why we should distrust the other paper.
I'll add the caveat that this obviously breaks down if you come to wildly different conclusions than in the existing literature. In that case there's no way around directly addressing their flaws, but then you *really* want to be sure.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/23
| 368
| 1,699
|
<issue_start>username_0: Let's say that you thank Professor X in your paper that you will submit to a Journal Y for providing you some insightful comments. It is never possible to know but let's assume that Professor X is the anonymous referee for your paper. This is possible since you make a list of potential referees (this is quite common for some journals).
What would be the reaction of an editor?<issue_comment>username_1: Nothing would happen. In my area (math) it is quite possible that X will end up being the referee in spite of the fact that you mentioned them. Providing someone with insightful comments is not considered to be a connection strong enough to constitute a conflict of interest, so the editor would not normally have any reason for concern.
I should note that in math, authors submitting papers for publication are not typically asked to suggest names of potential referees, so perhaps that makes the answer less relevant for you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: As an editor in both computer science and biology, I would generally consider a person listed in the acknowledgements to be involved enough to have a conflict of interest, and therefore would not invite them to be a reviewer. This is a heuristic, not an absolute rule.
It is also worth noting that I usually solicit a review from precisely one of the recommended reviewers, since recommended reviewers are often "close" in the network of the authors, and I want to have more independent perspectives as well. It's still worth listing multiple recommended reviewers, since some may be unavailable, but it's not useful (for editors like me) to make a very extensive list.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/24
| 423
| 1,758
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently submitted a paper to the international journal of adaptive control and signal processing Wiley. The statute of the paper is:
STATUTE:
ADM: Not Assigned
Under Review
Can someone tell me what exactly this means?<issue_comment>username_1: A previous [question asked about "ADM"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/56027/what-does-adm-stand-for-on-an-article-submission-information-page) and the accepted answer noted *ADM probably means "administrator."*
Thus, your paper does not have an "administrator" assigned, but is currently under review (i.e., peer reviewers are currently reading your manuscript). The exact answer of how many reviewers is journal and editor specific.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Depending on the particulars of how the journal operates and how much of the review process it makes visible, this is likely to mean one of two things with respect to [the standard journal workflow](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55665/what-does-the-typical-workflow-of-a-journal-look-like):
1. Most likely, the journal simply reports "under review" for all manuscript that have not yet received a decision. In this case, it probably means that your manuscript is still undergoing initial processing and hasn't yet been assigned to a handling editor.
2. If the journal gives finer-grained status information about the workflow (e.g., "assigning reviewers", "under review", "waiting for decision"), then it would likely mean that the paper is with reviewers, but that something has happened to require a change of handling editors, which is now ongoing.
The first is much more likely than the second, particularly if the paper is recently submitted.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/24
| 752
| 2,851
|
<issue_start>username_0: My situation: I have finished university more than 10 years ago. I work for company X. I also own a small startup company called Y (no employees). I am in the process of publishing a paper and I was asked to provide an affiliation. Not providing one is not an option, in the sense it's a mandatory field on the form. I asked X and X said no, as I worked on the paper in my spare time.
Does it make sense to use Y as my affiliation (which is 100% true though not necessarily relevant)? The other option would be to try with something like "Independent researcher" and hope the journal is fine with it ([idea came from here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19710/what-to-put-in-affiliation-field-when-submitting-paper-without-affiliation); [example](https://www.nature.com/articles/srep10432#author-information)).
Relevant questions:
1. [Does one need to be affiliated with a university to publish papers?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3010/does-one-need-to-be-affiliated-with-a-university-to-publish-papers)
2. [Using home address when submitting an article with no affiliation?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60082/using-home-address-when-submitting-an-article-with-no-affiliation)<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I was asked to provide an affiliation [for a paper]. Not providing one is not an option, in the sense it's a mandatory field on the form.
>
>
>
You could write *N/A* or *unaffiliated*, since this seems like the most relevant answer.
>
> Does it make sense to use [my startup] as my affiliation (which is 100% true though not necessarily relevant)?
>
>
>
Just like your employer decided that they didn't want their company name on your paper, you should consider whether you want your startup name on your paper.
---
On an aside, I wonder whether an employer (generally) has the right to deny an employee of listing the employer as their affiliation. (Some employers -- especially those in R&D -- will explicitly define contractual conditions, but generally they will not.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like the actual subject of your paper has nothing to do with your work on startup Y. In that case, I think it‘s more accurate to report your affiliation as “independent researcher”, “no affiliation”, or “N/A”. Readers of the journal simply aren’t going to care about your connection to the startup in a completely unrelated context; why distract them with irrelevant information?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I would use Y as my affiliation just to advertise my startup (this reason was not mentioned in the other answers).
I think readers do not care one way or another what the affiliation is - I certainly don't. No need to overthink this, it is also fine to add Independent researcher or No affiliation.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/24
| 1,865
| 7,549
|
<issue_start>username_0: What do you do to write better proposals, grants, and papers?
Do you think reading books about how to write scientific content is a good way to improve it?<issue_comment>username_1: There are many ways that one can improve their scientific writing skills. Because humans learn in diverse ways, I do not know if there is one be-all-end-all solution for how to improve one's writing skills.
Two main methods that I have used (and still use) are (1) attending grant writing workshops, and (2) reading other published papers in my field and emulating their overall style. I am someone who learns by seeing and copying.
Some items to note:
* Quality scientific writing is rarely achieved by complexity of word choice and sentence structure. In fact, sometimes the best scientific writing is achieved by relative simplicity and clarity. You are not trying to wow people with your prose and poetic presentation.
* Quality scientific writing often has just as much to do with *how you present something* as it does with what you say. Observing required formats for the venue you are trying to publish in is rather critical. I once worked with a collaborator who routinely ignored our target journals' "Instructions for Authors." This made it very hard to produce quality writing with him because I was repeatedly having to parse down what he was saying into actual defined sections. Much of his writing was well done from a pure "English" standpoint; he just had no concept of venue specific format.
* Quality scientific writing is an art that is never completely learned.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The way to learn to write is, simply, to write.
But then get feedback on your writing and re-write in light of the feedback.
The Software Patterns community has a process called Writer's Workshops that are quite detailed. When you submit a paper to a patterns conference you are assigned a Shepherd who is an experienced pattern writer, usually with knowledge of your field. The shepherd works with you (the "sheep") to improve the paper over three or four iterations of feedback-rewrite.
After shepherding your paper may be accepted to the conference, though not for presentation in the traditional sense. The conference consists of a set of writer's workshops in which a few (8-10) authors each have their papers discussed by the *other* participants while they listen and take notes. The author has a very small part in the workshop other than to think about what others suggest about how the paper can be improved.
After the workshop the author can ask questions, but never gets to "defend" the work. The idea is that if others misunderstand you then it is your job, not theirs, to fix it.
The paper is then revised one more time and it is this version that makes it in to the proceedings. The whole idea is to improve the print version, not present a version prepared without help.
The patterns community is pretty close knit because of this working together to improve one-another's work.
This process was brought to the software development community by [<NAME>](https://dreamsongs.com) who is both a geek (Lisp et al.) and a poet. The same process is used by poets, in fact and is quite old. RPG has written a book on the process: [Writers' Workshops & the Work of Making Things](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/020172183X)
If you don't have the patterns community behind you, or if you aren't writing patterns, it is relatively easy to set up a local writers workshop and follow the process. You can do this for any sort of writing as long as you have some people with domain knowledge and some writing experience.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Two ideas for you:
A writing skills course
-----------------------
Many, if not most, universities offer scientific writing courses for graduate students. If you're a graduate student - take such a course. If you're a post-doc or even a tenure-tracker - don't be ashamed; go attend one (not for credit).
Language editing
----------------
Ask your advisor, if you're a grad student, or a colleague you're close to and whose writing skills you appreciate, to help you by performing a language-editing pass on what you're writing. If it's too much to ask or if you haven't someone to ask - try finding someone to do this for pay; it is not uncommon.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A very specific answer:
There's an (originally) online course from Stanford called "Writing in the Sciences" that became very popular. While you might not agree with everything she teaches/suggests, I think it is a very good course.
It's now all on [YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xdond91JfU).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes to books. I recommend [Writing Science in Plain English](https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/W/bo15288825.html) by <NAME>, which includes helpful exercises. Other books from the University of Chicago include [The Chicago Guide to Communicating Science](https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo18111315.html) and [The Chicago Guide to Writing about Numbers](https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo19910133.html).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Scientific writing skills are mostly the same as general writing skills. Read good works of fiction, non-fiction, journalism, etc. These are easier to find, and more enjoyable, than good pieces of scientific writing.
Nature recently published a career column titled "[Novelist Cormac McCarthy’s tips on how to write a great science paper](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02918-5)".
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: **Reading books** is for sure one way to go. I have read many of them, and my favorites are "Writing science" by <NAME> and "Writing Science in Plain English" by <NAME>.
However, reading books remains a passive way of learning. In my research group, I have therefore decided to create a **writing group**. In a writing group, we learn together, comment on what we learned and feedback on each other manuscripts. We meet every two to three weeks for two hours.
**This writing group has transformed our perception of writing.** Group members will discuss openly writing methods or specific writing problems as if it was a statistical or a programming problem. We did not become writing experts, but we improved, and we keep on improving every day (as opposed to taking a lesson or reading a book).
On the [Scisnack](https://www.scisnack.com) **website** you can find some information on writing group including scientific publications. There is also a lot of learning content, including **videos, expert advice or book reviews**. Also, I have created a [small Prezi presentation](https://prezi.com/view/9PC5HDN0Ks1iBVWjOmcu/) about writing groups to motivate the new Ph.D. students to join us.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: By watching this [magnificent lecture by <NAME>](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtIzMaLkCaM) from University of Chicago!
It is eye opening! He shows how the value of our research and the reader are essential for a writer. He argues that we already have all of the skills needed for writing, but we don't know how to do it because we've been writing only inside school system and academia. We've been writing pieces for the teachers that were paid to read it and care about us, and that is not how the world, and science, works.
This lecture changed my thinking for sure.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/24
| 471
| 1,916
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated from CS from a university in Canada. Although I did pretty well, I cannot help but wonder what would have happened if I had gone to a different university. For example, I cannot help but suspect that if I had gone to Stanford or MIT, that my GPA would have been lower (but maybe not). And if it had, by how much. This is perhaps just an ego thing, but I want to know how much my achievements actually measure.
Is there at least a qualitative way to estimate how well/bad you would have performed in one institution vs another? I know that it's very volatile since it depends on courses taken and professors. But it should at least be somewhat consistent across the same field.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no way to do this for an individual. I suspect that if you had gone to MIT instead of wherever, you would have "played the game" at a higher level. The competition would have been more extreme, but so would be the helps. Knowing the stakes you would probably have worked a bit harder, etc.
For masses of people, statistics can tell you something about those masses, but not about individuals. If you did fine, be happy with it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This can't be done. Life is too much of a [chaotic system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory) to draw this kind of comparison. If you had gone to Stanford or MIT, perhaps you could've found yourself so outmatched by brighter minds that you quit due to depression in your first year. Or maybe you'd have been spurred on to do better, and reached new heights you'd never have dreamed of. Or maybe you'd have, as <NAME> put it in a comment, met the perfect guy/girl, formed a rock band, and dropped out to tour the world to sold-out venues world-wide. There's just no way to tell.
Don't be mired in the past and wonder about what might have been. Look at the future instead.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/25
| 926
| 3,666
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently graduated with a bachelor's degree in economics. I'm now applying to research internships and some of these need recommendation letters from faculty.
I did very badly during the first 2 years at college (having scored around 6/10 (=2.4/4) GPA in my courses until the end of my 4th semester) -- however, I learnt from my mistakes and became much more disciplined in my 3rd year, when I scored an average of 8/10 (3.2/4). At the end of 3 years, I had to graduate with a sub-3 CGPA of 6.88/10 (2.75/4).
I did really well on research projects and other quantitative projects at college, which is one reason why I've found professors to recommend me. I understand that my poor GPA will probably put me in a bad position, but what's done is done and I digress. One of my possible references asked me to draft a letter for him and that he will make changes as necessary before sending it in.
My question is: should I ask my references to talk about my poor grades (something along the lines of "While X does not have impressive scores in his undergraduate degree, it can be clearly seen from his transcripts that he picked up pace and discipline during his final year. I believe that X has taken home the importance of hardwork after a few hiccups in his academic life".)
Even if the above phrasing doesn't seem good, in general, is it a good idea to talk about your bad grades in a recommendation letter? Or is it simply better to let this go and concentrate on my strengths?<issue_comment>username_1: **It really depends on how the professor knows you.**
If the professor only knew you "after the change", the letter might say "I am aware of student's relatively low grades during the first few years, but by the time of my class, they were a top-performing student", that kind of thing.
If the professor has known you for years, it might be appropriate to comment on having observed this change, and expressing confidence that you can handle the role in question despite the low cumulative QPA.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is it a good idea to talk about your bad grades in a recommendation letter?
>
>
>
If not asked about it, why shed the light on it?
Your professor can talk about your points of strength and your efforts through the years. No real need to talk about everything in details.
If you really feel that the grades by them self are subject to questioning, it will be a good idea to mention them in that way but, in my opinion, everybody knows that the grades alone aren't really a factor and in fact, your grades getting better time after time is the biggest factor.
I would suggest, if you really need to talk about it, to say something among these lines:
>
> *X has shown big improvement through his undergraduate studies which proves, with no doubt, that he is capable of handling bigger projects.*
>
>
>
I am not a native English speaker so this might need some improvement.
Bottom line is to focus on the good side without really mentioning the bad/down side that got you there.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on whether or not they can speak to the "story".
Your letter of recommendation is an opportunity to turn your CV into a narrative, and if part of that narrative is your grades suffered early on for one reason or another, and that's been resolved, it's potentially worth talking about. But *not* if it's just "Joe used to be bad at this, and he's gotten better." They should be able to talk about your growth, how that came about, your development in new directions, etc.
TL;DR: Yes, but only if they can do it well.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/25
| 5,547
| 24,130
|
<issue_start>username_0: The situation: we have many subjectively understandable articles in English. But they will never be published publicly in any peer-reviewed scientific journals. Why?
Some reviewers seem to be very sensitive about the quylity of English. This all isn't about the fields where it is a must, of course. Sometimes, it seems that the reviewers are reacting to foreign names (Chinese, for example), not to a relative language quality. In a particular case, I saw an "awful English " rejection for papers proofread by licensed native translators and editors. Don't read the latest as a point, proof or blame. It's a subjective experience, not with one of our articles, about some U.S. journals, taken as an illustration.
In academia - institutes are willing to pay editors and translators for well-known reasons. What is outside? Most people outside of academia prefer not to pay that much (Elsevier's 2K Euro for average 9K words) for publishing their own work. It can be too much even for organizations (low budgeted theoretical math, etc.) not saying about small groups aren't making this for profit or "3rd world".
Is there an inexpensive way for those whose English isn't ideal?<issue_comment>username_1: Discrimination by peer reviewers based on people's perceived language does happen. It's happened to me.
There are no translation or editing services which are both cheap and good. Your best option is to get someone else to pay the bill. Find a generous colleague who is good at Academic English and also good at the topic of your paper, and ask them to help. Then your colleague's employer will be paying the bill.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You don't have good options. Either get good at English, or get help from people who are already good at English. The nature of scientific writing makes it difficult for non-specialists to check your English well, which is why copyediting companies often offer to match your paper with specialists in your field, which in turn makes it expensive because there aren't many specialists around who are willing to do this kind of work.
However, the price you quote - 2k EUR for a 9k word paper - seems very high. Here's a quote by [Editage](https://app.editage.com/order/ncf/english-editing?source=website&_ga=2.149036786.513930270.1623898381-119276646.1623898381) which comes in at $0.09 per word. That's $810 for a 9k word paper. The editing comes with a guarantee that if your paper is rejected due to English issues, they will do more copyediting on it for free. (I am not affiliated with Editage.)
Of course, you could argue that $810 is still pretty expensive, but I freelanced for one of these copyediting companies in the past and I can tell you that the copyeditors tend to be unhappy with the low pay. The papers that they are assigned tend to be awfully written and takes a serious amount of work to fix to the point where the copyeditor is almost an author. It's dull, mind-numbing work that's done purely for the sake of the money, especially since the paper is usually not very interesting.
So when you write
>
> It can be too much even for organizations (low budgeted theoretical math, etc.) not saying about small groups aren't making this for profit or "3rd world".
>
>
>
Keep in mind that *everyone* in the process thinks they should be paid more.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Please excuse me for the very long text, but I feel that this problem needs to be discussed with clarity and nuance, in order to avoid offending anyone. I am worried about being downvoted for writing so much, but I am sincerely trying to help anyone who is facing the same frustrations as the OP.
This is a topic that hits close to home, as I have been deeply involved in this issue for many, many years. It is also a very sensitive topic that leads people to think that they are being discriminated on a regular basis. To be clear, I do agree that there are reviewers who unfairly reject papers based on things such as perceived language and foreign names.
However, from my long experience, I think that these bad reviewers do not represent the majority. In most cases, it is correct to say that the quality of English writing in academic papers is often insufficient, even when the papers were proof-checked by a native speaker. I will carefully explain the reasons below and offer some suggestions for addressing the problem. But first, I think that I need to give some brief explanations about my personal background, so that people understand where I'm coming from, and to make it clear that my aim in writing this text is to help, not to berate non-English native speakers.
I was not born (and never worked) in an Anglophone country, and have no native English speakers in my family, and my real name could never possibly be mistaken for that of an English speaker. Until the age of 8, I had no meaningful exposure to English language as well. However, my parents saw fit to put me in weekly English classes in a language school, and I ended up loving the language so much that I spent considerable amounts of time not just consuming media and various types of literature in English, but also writing and speaking extensively in English. I have published a number of papers in English books and journals, and done many presentations at academic conferences in the United States and the UK. Not once has my writing been criticized for being poor; on the contrary, I have been repeatedly commended and praised for the quality of the writing and speaking. I do not write this to brag in any way, but just to encourage others that they too can keep improving in their English communication skills, if they remain strongly committed to it.
I also loved other languages besides English, and so I've spent years working in academic institutions in East Asian countries such as Korea, China and Japan. I have published papers in Chinese and Japanese journals, and therefore I know very well how difficult it is to write an academic paper in a language that is completely different from your native language. During this process, I edited English papers written by my East Asian colleagues many times, and they also edited the papers that I wrote in East Asian languages. All of us learned a great deal from these experiences.
Having explained my personal background and experience, allow me to describe the key problems regarding writing papers in English.
1. It is a fact that the quality of English education in most East
Asian countries is still not good, despite the amounts of money
being thrown by governments at this issue. It is also a fact that
when undergraduate students start their first year of study at
East Asian universities, they are deeply unprepared for writing
academic papers in English. The level of English that they were
taught in high school is barely enough to write a personal blog,
much less an academic paper.
2. If I am to be blatantly honest, everyone is to blame for this
situation (both schools and students). Most teachers of English in
pre-university education in East Asia have very poor training, and
have low motivation to improve their students' skills. In the end,
the only thing they care about is teaching the basic skills necessary
to pass the exams. The English textbooks barely go beyond teaching
simple sentences or short paragraphs. Therefore, at the end of high
school students have had almost no exposure/training at all with
long-form texts.
3. In regards to the students, they are often over-optimistic about
their English communication abilities, because of getting decent
scores at high school English exams. I have seen these exams and I
can affirm that the level of English required to pass these exams is
quite inferior to that needed to write a decent academic paper. They
almost have never tried to paraphrase anything in English, and
paraphrasing is an absolutely crucial skill for successfully writing
papers. This is one key reason why texts written by East Asian
university students and faculty are often flagged by plagiarism
software for having sentences too similar to those of other papers.
Argumentation skills and critique of previous literature are also
insufficiently explored in high-school East Asian education.
4. To make things worse, teenage students cannot predict the future;
they do not realize that in their future years at university, they
might have to write academic papers in English. Therefore, during
their teen years, they spend their free time consuming English media
such as dramas, comedies, or animation shows, instead of learning
English from political debates, documentaries, academic lectures,
long-form discussions about difficult topics, etc. The average level
of English displayed in Hollywood media is completely inadequate for
helping students write academic papers. Furthermore, learning too
much English from such entertainment sources will instill very bad
language habits that will be difficult to unlearn in the future.
One more thing that must be made clear, is that even native English speakers have a hard time writing good-quality texts. East Asian students often think that native speakers have an easy time writing the papers. In fact, most native speakers will have to rewrite their texts a few times before having a paper that is good for a well-reputed journal. Even I usually rewrite my English papers 7 to 8 times before being satisfied with the results. All of my academic colleagues are just as diligent with their writing: before submitting their papers, they will ask input from as many people as possible, and spend a lot of time rewriting their texts until everything is clear.
The same thing applies for papers written in Chinese, Korean or Japanese. My East Asian colleagues don't just write something and immediately submit the paper; they also have to rewrite the texts until their colleagues and supervisors are satisfied. I thought my Chinese and Japanese skills were good until I had to write a paper for the first time... My colleagues had to rewrite almost every sentence from zero until it had a reasonable quality for being submitted to a journal. Just like English journals, well-reputed East Asian journals will also reject papers if the quality of writing is not good enough. In fact, from my experience, they are even more strict about quality of writing than many English journals. The requirements for English text quality vary from field to field. Journals in fields such as Urban management, Tourism Policies, Geography, Education, Engineering, Remote Sensing, Cultural Heritage Studies, etc. tend to be less demanding in terms of English quality, whereas fields such as Linguistics or Medical Sciences will be much less tolerant of mistakes.
As a result of all of these things that I just described, the quality of English academic writing by non-native university students is already very poor to begin with. Even though a non-native university student may claim that they put all of their effort into writing an academic English text, the fact is that the text has so many problems to begin with, that it is often impossible to fix the problems without completely rewriting almost every sentence. Of course, this creates a huge problem regarding who is the author of the paper (the student, or the editor?).
Now, let us look at the problem of the English proof-reading industry. Let's ignore the fact that most companies are scams employing non-native undergrads under low paying conditions. Let's just focus on those companies that actually employ skilled English writers, and therefore charge insanely high prices. In order to write a successful academic paper, it is not enough to have an editor who can write correct English, they also need to have at least an above-average knowledge of your academic field. Many times, I was approached by colleagues who had had their papers edited by native speakers. It was clear from reading the first paragraphs that these editors had no expertise in the academic field, because they misinterpreted my colleagues' intended meaning, and wrote for example sentences that contradict established knowledge in the academic field.
In the first time that I edited an English paper for a colleague of mine, I was still very young, and too scared to offend my colleague. There were many problems with text structure, how the various sentences link with each other, repetitive use of the same words, and it had many redundant statements. Even though it was necessary to rewrite all of it, I did not want to my colleague to be angry with me for changing everything. I know this, because I've seen some colleagues who are sensitive, and believe they have a perfectly reasonable command of English; they would get upset when I needed to rewrite a whole sentence that they thought was perfectly fine. I often had to explain in detail the reasons for changing each sentence, which was very exhausting for me.
In the case of this first paper, I did only the minimum changes necessary to make each sentence grammatical, and explained this situation to him. He sent the paper to the journal, and it was almost rejected, but it was changed to a request for a revision. There was a warning saying that unless there were significant improvements to the text's quality, the paper would be rejected. Therefore, in order for the English text to be publishable, I asked for my colleague's understanding and permission, and extensively rewrote the text from zero. The revised paper was accepted and published. As a thank you, the colleague agreed to help rewrite my texts written in East Asian languages. Technically speaking, I made such profound modifications to the whole text and contents that I should have been considered a co-author. Indeed, I was offered to be a co-author numerous times, but I always rejected such requests, because I was doing this as a friend, not for obtaining personal gains. (Note that this whole answer is not revised or rewritten, and may contain small mistakes!)
The key point of this long text is that native-speaking editors do not have the authority to completely rewrite a text from the bottom up. Even if you pay a lot of money to these editing companies, the editors can hardly do more than fix basic grammatical mistakes, and highlight text passages that are problematic. If they start to severely rewrite the text, then the editors must be considered at least co-authors, if not first authors. This is the main reason why papers edited by native speakers will often be rejected by major journals due to poor text quality. The reason is that there are much deeper problems with the text as a whole, beyond just fixing the basic grammar of each sentence, and the editor is not authorized to fix such problems (at least, not without rewriting the whole thing).
The harsh, cruel reality is that non-native English speakers will have to do at least 3-4 times the amount of work done by a native speaker in order to get a decent quality text suitable for a good journal. I know this, because I had to undergo an insane amount of work, suffering and rewriting in order to write my papers in East Asian languages and get them published in good East Asian journals.
Now, what can be done about this situation? There is no perfect solution, except lots of hard work, and lots of exposure to English academic papers and lots of time spent writing. Trust me, I am not asking people to master high-level prose; a lot of work and practice is necessary just for writing average-level academic texts. the fact is that students were exposed to all sorts of inappropriate English during their teen years, and now they have to suffer a lot to make up for it. In one of the universities that I worked in China, the whole faculty of Pharmaceutical Studies was restructured around English teaching. The appointed dean of the faculty is a native English scientist, and every single thing inside that faculty is conducted in English (classes, materials, etc.). This is a very extreme measure, but the fact is that after doing this, both Chinese students and faculty members started having much more success in getting papers published in English journals. What else can be done by each student in order to improve their papers?
1. Focus all of your energies and time on SPEAKING and WRITING.
Most students only read and listen passively to English materials,
and these skills are not enough for doing public presentations or
writing papers. Find some room or place where you can speak things
out loud. Get a textbook that teaches academic English, and read the
texts and sentences with a loud voice, not just with your mind. Also
spend as much time as you can trying to write your own thoughts and
scientific ideas in English, for example in a blog or on your
computer.
2. Use the method of "shadowing" to improve your English diction
and pronunciation. Go to Youtube, search some TED presentations
related to your research topic (or any topic that you are interested
in), and start shadowing, first at slow speed, then at faster
speeds. If you don't know what "shadowing" is, there are many
Youtube videos discussing the method. Doing "shadowing" is extremely
tiring, even for just 3 minutes. But if you are persistent, and keep
doing a little bit every day, after 5 or 6 months you will start to
notice meaningful improvements in your overall language skills.
Record your own voice, and see how close your pronunciation is to
that of the native speaker in the TED presentation.
3. Use Google's search function tools and Google Books to
double-check if your English sentences are grammatical or awkward.
Let's look for example at the OP's sentence: "Don't read the latest
as a point, proof or blame. It's a subjective experience, not with
one of our articles, about some U.S. journals, taken as an
illustration." I would break this sentence down into smaller pieces,
and separately check each of them on Google. This can be achieved by
using double quotes (""), and the asterisk (\*) wildcard . On Google
Search (or Google Books), I would put for example "Don't read the
latest as a point". If Google says there are no matches, or
recommends a different sentence, then you need to fix something. You
can search Google for "Don't read the latest as \*" and it will
search for different sentences that use this kind of language. Or,
search for "Don't read the \* as a proof", and see what kind of
results you get. If you get good matches in Google Books or Google
Scholar, then you can get a better understanding of whether the sentence
works or not. Of course, this is extremely time-consuming, but after
you do this for a while it will become much easier to write papers.
You only need to make this huge effort for your first two or 3
papers, then everything will become much easier.
4. If you still have doubts about certain sentences, use Stack
Exchange, and other forums where people ask questions about how to
write academic English.
5. Before submitting a paper to a certain journal, ALWAYS download
at least 5 or 6 papers previously published by that journal, which
are similar to your research topic. Take LOTS of notes about how
those papers organize the information, how they explain their
arguments, how endnotes and bibliography are written, etc. This will
help you to tailor your paper in order to better match the
objectives of the journal.
6. Get as many comments from colleagues and profs about the clarity
of the text structure and overall ideas. Rewrite the text until the
overall structure is clear, and the arguments flow smoothly from
sentence to sentence. My academic colleagues usually ask 15-20
friends to give comments about their papers, and usually about 5 of
them will send very useful comments.
7. There are many Youtube channels that teach about paraphrasing
and how to write academic English. Be sure to check them out, and
take many notes! For example, check the Youtube channel "English
with Beth B".
8. If you have a native English-speaking friend, ask them to fix
your text, and tell them to not be afraid of rewriting large
sections if necessary. If you can, pay them some small cash, or help
them in any way you can (at least give them a thank you in the
Acknowledgements section).
9. At the end of this whole process, you can finally pay a
professional editing company to proofread your text. If the overall
text structure and ideas are well-organized, then the editor can
safely make small fixes to the grammar, and tighten up the text, and
the paper has a good chance of being accepted by the journal with
minor revisions.
If you really commit yourself to doing these things for one year, then you will see some dramatic improvements in your skills. Remember, the beginning is insanely hard, but the benefits of training yourself will last for the rest of your life.
No matter what, do not become discouraged if you are struggling to produce English papers. Keep fighting and striving to improve yourself. Good Luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: There are a few issues here, so I'll give some suggestions for each. I'll address your specific situation regarding writing in English, but the same general advice applies regardless of the language of a paper/journal.
---
**Discrimination on the basis of percieved name-origin:** I would be highly surprised if there is any substantial discrimination of this kind in academic review. Perhaps others have anecdotally seen it, but I've never previously heard of such a thing occurring in present academia. Blind review of papers removes the name of the author from consideration in the first place, and even when the review process is not blinded, in most fields the names on existing published papers (which you are often citing in your research anyway) run the gamut over ever race and ethincity of people there is. It would be extremely strange if a reviewer was to discriminate on this basis.
It is unclear from your post what causes you to believe that this has occurred. (Is it really impossible that a "licensed translator" could have awful English, leading a paper to be validly rejected on that basis?) As I have said, I would be surprised if this is occurring in any substantial magnitude. In any case, if you're worried about this, a possible solution is for authors to *target publications that use a blinded review system*.
---
**Trying to get papers with low-quality English published:** I actually think it's really important that academic journals hold the line on the standard of written communication they expect. Clear writing and proper use of the English language is important, even when presenting technical papers. So if reviewers are very sensitive about the quality of English, good on them. Now, this is obviously something that creates a barrier for researchers who have low-quality English-writing skills, but that is not substantively different from the barriers facing researchers who have other deficiencies in their academic skills.
In terms of a solution, in the absence of a funded translator I see three inexpensive options: (1) the author could consider their English-language deficiency as a deficiency in necessary academic skills and work to improve it (i.e., *learn to write better*); (2) the author could *try to find a co-author with good English-writing skills* who can take on the task of revising the paper up to a good standard of writing; or (3) the author could *seek assistance from an "academic study skills" centre* at their university (most universities have something like this to help students or researchers whose language skills are poor).
The latter two methods are obviously much simpler in the short-term, and getting a co-author ensures that there is ample help, but it then requires sharing credit more on the academic work. If the underlying substance of a paper is good then it should be fairly easy to find a co-author for a rewrite, since rewriting a paper more clearly is not a lot of work relative to the substantive work of the research itself.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/09/25
| 810
| 3,548
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question is triggered by the (somewhat off topic there) [comment thread](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/117390/725) about an employer who does *not* want to appear as affiliation for a paper, and the subsequent thoughts of whether an employer can deny an employee the right to give them (employer) as affiliation for a publication.
My question is whether affiliation means
* the author publishes on behalf of the affiliated institution, i.e. while the author takes personal responsibility with the content of the publication, the affiliated institution also approves the work (typcially to the extent that their facilities were used and possibly they did pay the author wages for performing the work).
The relationship between institution and work may be somewhat more loose if there's a disclaimer that the publication expresses the author's personal opinions and not necessarily the insititution's.
*versus*
* the author is merely employed at (or associated as student with) the affiliated institution, without any implication of whether the institution approves of the work or not, did pay the employee vs. the author did it in their free time, etc.
Or, in other words, how much of a connection to the publication does an affiliation imply?
---
This is similar to the [questions posed in this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/38306/725).
---
Edit: of course, affiliation is part of the address. But assume here that "how to contact the author" is taken care of in the correspondence (email) address.<issue_comment>username_1: Affiliation could mean anything, or nothing at all. In most cases it doesn't mean that the organization approves or even knows of the publication beforehand. In some companies you sign a contract that lets the organization vet your public work, but not in others and not in most universities. In those companies it usually only means that they approve of the fact that you are publishing, but not necessarily of the content. There can be exceptions, however, as when you are working with sensitive information, such as trade secrets.
When I published, I listed my employer (a university) as my affiliation, but that was for identification purposes only. I probably still would, though I'm retired. I might, instead list *none* or *independent researcher* or my DBA (Doing Business As) persona.
I think that publishers want it almost entirely for identification purposes, nothing more. However, for some affiliations, you have a sort of implied aura that gives the editor a warm and fuzzy feeling.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Generally listing affiliation serves two purposes:
1. For readers it helps with locating authors to contact them (for questions on their work, collaboration, reprints, etc.)
2. The institution, be it a university, a graduate school, a hospital, etc. can list the published research wherever they need to show research activity record. This is often critical for funds and resources allocation.
Usually, the principle of academic freedom (which notably *isn't* about a right to skip classes as many students seem to believe) should imply that the views are of the author alone. In reality I think you can't prevent readers, especially in the general public, from inferring some sort of endorsement by the institution. Thus papers published by prestigious universities' affiliates might be seen as more "valid". Within a research field I have not seen significant evidence of this though.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/25
| 1,245
| 5,259
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been a faculty member at two universities. Both have been very "disorganized," generally speaking. By "disorganized," I mean things like: Faculty are not formally hired until after the semester begins (due to administrative failure to sign contracts on time); courses are scheduled in rooms that are far too small for the number of students enrolled; facilities are poorly maintained (e.g., it's not uncommon for windows to break or heat to stop working in a room and not be fixed for months); HR departments don't answer email or even phone calls; pay checks are sometimes late or inaccurate, etc.
Is this a common experience at most universities, or just the ones where I've taught? Both of the places where I have been are well-known institutions -- not elite schools, but ones that are prestigious enough, and which you wouldn't expect to be poorly run.
For that matter, does this type of stuff happen in non-academic jobs, too? I have only ever worked in academia, so I don't have a lot of perspective on just how much disorganization is normal for a workplace bureaucracy. I kind of suspect academia might be a special case because it's run in large part by administrators (department heads, deans) who typically have no actual management training. But I suppose managers in the corporate world might have little idea what they are doing, too.
These are both private universities in the United States, by the way.<issue_comment>username_1: Sure, universities are disorganized, but so are many companies. They are human organizations. The alternative is probably worse, however. Some places (both universities and companies) are rigidly hierarchical with many rules. You do what you are told to do. "My way or the highway." People, don't, in general, like to work in such places.
Good companies permit quite a lot of chaos since ideas grow out of that chaos. If you are in one of those hierarchical places it isn't a great idea to be innovative. The same is true in universities.
In most universities, much of the administration is made up of older faculty members who thought they could do a better job than they saw being done. Sometimes they are right, but not always. I was a long time into my career before I wound up at a place where I thought the administration was, at all levels, doing a good job. Unfortunately that didn't last very long as some of the good people left and were replaces with inferior models.
Another reason that universities have some chaos is that everyone there is pretty smart. Mostly, pretty smart people have ideas. Mostly they want to see those ideas implemented. Often, however, they think they are pretty smart in areas beyond their training. It can be a chaotic sort of place. It is, in a way, like a herd of horses on the move. They "organize" themselves mostly by bumping one another. Kicking is minimized, but not unheard of.
The chaos of ideas is a good thing, actually. But, *no*, disorganization isn't inevitable.
---
However there are two additional concerns, one for public and one for private universities.
Some US publicly funded universities are severely constrained by the politics of the day and the refusal of legislators to deal with rising expenses by increasing revenue (taxes), and so default to cutting services. But that is a different, external, sort of chaos over which a public university has little control.
Private universités also have, sometimes severe, financial constraints as most have little access to public monies and depend overly on revenue obtained from student tuition. This can lead to very constrained budgets. Some take the shortfall from faculty salaries, but there is a stronger tendency to cut corners on physical plant and some services.
Education is an expensive proposition, not a profit center. Its product is a bit ephemeral.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I worked at three different Universities in Germany and I can not confirm such a level of disorganization. Of course we are having problems because we are public entities, which means e.g. that we can not freely decide where to invest or to shift money from cost center A (e.g. personal) to cost center B (buildings), or hire as many people as we like, or pay the wages we thing are appropriate, but those problems are minor issues compared to the ones described.
It is correct that many management positions are held by amateurs (like me ;-) ), but this is manly the academic part (research, dean, ...), but our "true" administration is in the hands of professionals lead by the head of administration (in Germany "Kanzler") who usually has a management background and expertise.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I've worked as an adjunct in the US, and it's certainly true that I didn't get my contract until the second week or so of semester on more than one occasion.
I believe it happens because academics in the US have much more freedom (fewer institutional rules to follow) than academics in other countries or in private industry. As a result, they find it hard to get around to tasks unrelated to their key interests (usually research).
Private universities in the US seem to do this more than public ones, in my experience.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/25
| 1,773
| 7,602
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was a first year PhD student and have mentioned before I was forced to quit although hardwork and grants. Now the head of the school admit that the supervisor was wrong and he had nothing to do with the supervisor which is awkward, he also confused about another student who hadnot passed his viva after years of work and publishing in top tier conference.
In to the retrospect, they asked me whether to sign a resignation letter or to be fired and asked me to sign in the moment, but I refused and asked them I will take the letter and do it later during this week.
They asked you have to do it during this week ( obligatory), could any one recommend me whether this is good direction to sign this letter as it is first time for me and I am not aware of many LEGAL stuff.
PS. For more details why this happened:
I am a first year PhD student, I was working in a new topic, I found a problem in research and then I proposed a methodology and verified it. My PI said from few months ago that it was good what I did verbatim. Then I got two grants from top conferences although I waited a lot of time to do experiment in other lab, and this lab was not happy because I proposed different approach than they use, but I explained what I proposed and how it could solve. Honestly, I worked so much hard as you can imagine, but in the same time I noticed that my PI is underestimating from my ideas sometimes and have sharp looking at me without any reason, at the beginning he didnot want to publish anything or attend conference without any reason, sometimes he didnot listen to me and I made correction for him which was critical for research, but I did in very polite way
He began to catch small mistakes in report for instance which was very trivial and inflate it and never acknowledge the two grants I got and I did other stuff for free like videos for the group and sketching which he was astonished by it.
Until I present my work in the committee which every one told me that they do it to see every thing is okay and every one pass, this committee is my PI, another professor who have never worked in my research topic and asked questions was very sketchy and the head of the school also not related to my domain they see presentation and report no exams no other things, so just presentation and report. Of course this PI made badmouthing behind me and that what I know later and it was mentioned that I didnot do a good bibliography and he doubt the methodology although I got the same results as the real experiment based on physics approach, but he doubts. I was shocked and I confronted this PI, why you didnot tell me from few months ago when you said it is good, he lied and I told this PI, if you have doubts could you please tell me what are these doubts like 1,2,3 and what you suggested, he didnot say anyword and go. In conclusion, he wasnot specialized in this new topic, even when I am doing any proposed formula he accuse me that I stole it or from where I had come with this equation, I did that on my own, it is quite hurting because he accused me many times of any schematics drawings, sketches formula that may be I stole it, and I tell him that I did that on my own, and BTW I have never ever stole something so that can interpret his actions. In conclusion, this PI told me your are independent and he didnot like that and also know that I worked hard but he dont want to continue in this research this is after making badmouthing about me as I am not eligible to continue and even the committee yesterday which the head of the school told me I know you are very good and you did a good work, but no one can speak, the head of school recommended me to find another lab in different country. Sorry for English grammar mistakes and typos.<issue_comment>username_1: Sure, universities are disorganized, but so are many companies. They are human organizations. The alternative is probably worse, however. Some places (both universities and companies) are rigidly hierarchical with many rules. You do what you are told to do. "My way or the highway." People, don't, in general, like to work in such places.
Good companies permit quite a lot of chaos since ideas grow out of that chaos. If you are in one of those hierarchical places it isn't a great idea to be innovative. The same is true in universities.
In most universities, much of the administration is made up of older faculty members who thought they could do a better job than they saw being done. Sometimes they are right, but not always. I was a long time into my career before I wound up at a place where I thought the administration was, at all levels, doing a good job. Unfortunately that didn't last very long as some of the good people left and were replaces with inferior models.
Another reason that universities have some chaos is that everyone there is pretty smart. Mostly, pretty smart people have ideas. Mostly they want to see those ideas implemented. Often, however, they think they are pretty smart in areas beyond their training. It can be a chaotic sort of place. It is, in a way, like a herd of horses on the move. They "organize" themselves mostly by bumping one another. Kicking is minimized, but not unheard of.
The chaos of ideas is a good thing, actually. But, *no*, disorganization isn't inevitable.
---
However there are two additional concerns, one for public and one for private universities.
Some US publicly funded universities are severely constrained by the politics of the day and the refusal of legislators to deal with rising expenses by increasing revenue (taxes), and so default to cutting services. But that is a different, external, sort of chaos over which a public university has little control.
Private universités also have, sometimes severe, financial constraints as most have little access to public monies and depend overly on revenue obtained from student tuition. This can lead to very constrained budgets. Some take the shortfall from faculty salaries, but there is a stronger tendency to cut corners on physical plant and some services.
Education is an expensive proposition, not a profit center. Its product is a bit ephemeral.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I worked at three different Universities in Germany and I can not confirm such a level of disorganization. Of course we are having problems because we are public entities, which means e.g. that we can not freely decide where to invest or to shift money from cost center A (e.g. personal) to cost center B (buildings), or hire as many people as we like, or pay the wages we thing are appropriate, but those problems are minor issues compared to the ones described.
It is correct that many management positions are held by amateurs (like me ;-) ), but this is manly the academic part (research, dean, ...), but our "true" administration is in the hands of professionals lead by the head of administration (in Germany "Kanzler") who usually has a management background and expertise.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I've worked as an adjunct in the US, and it's certainly true that I didn't get my contract until the second week or so of semester on more than one occasion.
I believe it happens because academics in the US have much more freedom (fewer institutional rules to follow) than academics in other countries or in private industry. As a result, they find it hard to get around to tasks unrelated to their key interests (usually research).
Private universities in the US seem to do this more than public ones, in my experience.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/25
| 562
| 2,394
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to ask a more general question that relates to a renowned mathematician’s recent proposed proof of a famous hypothesis, which seems to be widely considered not even close to being correct – that it’s not just not correct, it’s “not even wrong”.
Since now, all the top mathematicians have declined to comment on his proof, seemingly out of respect for the mathematician.
So my general question is: for a well-established mathematician, shouldn’t they be given feedback, even if their work isn’t correct? Why not give a rejection, so that they are informed?
I would think that a long-time mathematician who has won the top awards in their lifetime can actually handle the criticism – they wouldn’t have become a master at their craft without overcoming a great deal of failures and negativity in their career. In that sense, it is actually *more respectful* to tell a researcher when they are wrong.<issue_comment>username_1: The person we're talking about has his place in mathematics cemented whatever he says or does in the latter days of his career. The mathematicians who have been asked to comment on the latest claim know this and do not feel the need to tarnish his reputation by commenting publicly on it. Those who know him well may choose to tell him in private what they think, which he may or may not accept.
At its core, this is a very private story about aging and all of its associated effects. It is magnified by the fact that the person in question is a giant in his field and the *public* nature that comes along with everything he says. But I'm sure all of us with aging parents/friends/loved ones can relate to the fact that there are no easy ways to deal with this; dealing with it in public does not seem the right approach to me.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: *Don't.* That would be a one-word answer (somewhat ironic). But to **generalize** the question, be very careful of giving negative feedback to **anyone**, ever (whether a mathematician or otherwise). Most people just don't like it. If it is imperative, try to show factual things that are actually wrong, and why (I once showed a Computer Science professor that the steps in his program were needed to run backwards, which when he understood, he appreciated). If you do give the negative feedback, be sure to maintain politeness and courtesy at all times.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/25
| 999
| 4,207
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was watching a math PhD thesis defense on YouTube and it seems that after about an hour of the talk, a committee member tells the audience to leave except for the graduate committee and the PhD candidate.
What typically happens next? Is there a separate defense session with the graduate committee?
For reference: United States<issue_comment>username_1: That varies from place to place, even in the US. Your advisor will give you the best advice. But yes, a private session with your committee is pretty common. They want to assure themselves that you are "seasoned" and have both the required depth *and breadth* to be awarded the degree.
Again, your advisor will tell you what to expect, but it is possible to get questions that are unrelated to your thesis, or even to your specific subfield. In mathematics, members of a committee often have different specialties and may want to know what you can say about their own field as they may have only a sketchy knowledge of yours and of your thesis.
Don't, in general, expect it to be just a presentation. The public part needs to be a bit less technical in tone, since many of those present are looking for an overview. That isn't enough, of course. You need to say what you did and the key ideas that got you there.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In the U.S. (1993), the committee meets in private, to `'vote'`. I passed. At my University, one wasn't allowed a second-chance, which sounds like a difficult rule, but it was intended to protect students from 'you must do this to pass, that, and the other thing'. By the time you go to the defense, your thesis should have been read by your advisor and one or two more members of the committee.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I will answer in the context of my PhD defense and the defenses of my students, who are in various versions of public health.
There is a separate session with the graduate committee. This can last a long time, or it can be fairly brief, and in my experience, there's not a strong correlation with length of time and success.
In that session, somewhat harder questions, ambiguous questions, etc. can be asked. What would you do in X circumstance. Push the conclusions of your study a little farther. On occasion, and I dislike it when this happens, there's objections from one or more faculty members about core issues in the thesis. It's far less structured than a presentation, and is, while not hostile, definitely critical. I got asked several questions with the intent to stump me, including one that was intended as a lesson for the future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Each experience is different. In my experience, the entire defense was public. The committee asked questions throughout the presentation, then more at the end if they had any others. There was also a fair bit of discussion and asking my thoughts on potential research directions. After this, they offered anyone in the audience the opportunity to ask questions. After everyone was satisfied, then they asked people to step out (including me) to briefly step out. When they opened the doors they announced results.
Each committee chair may do this differently but *my* experience was as follows:
1. Ask everyone (including candidate) not on committee to step out briefly. Doors close.
2. Candidate and audience brought back in.
3. Defense presentation (questions during).
4. Questions after by committee.
5. Questions from audience (if time permits).
6. Everyone not on committee (including candidate) step out. Doors close.
7. Doors open. Result announced.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: This sounds very much like the practice in my country of Austria. The defense is public, i.e. colleagues and friends of the defendant can watch.
After the defense, the committee will ask everyone, including the defendant to leave, during this time, the committee will work out the grade. After they reached a conclusion, they ask to defendant in, again, to tell him/her the grade of the defense.
Since, the debate of the members of the committee regarding the grade is a private affair, all people have to leave the room.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/26
| 787
| 3,255
|
<issue_start>username_0: In [our lab](http://nbjl.nankai.edu.cn/) (at Nankai University, in China), students often write papers where they are first author. However, we use a convention where the last author signifies the student's teacher. I feel that this is uncommon.
I have not heard of this done outside of our lab, but maybe this is more common than I would guess.
**Question**: How widespread is the use of "last author = teacher" on student papers?<issue_comment>username_1: As pointed out by others in the comments, this is very common in my field (Operations Research); at my institution this is the norm and is common in other disciplines.
A professor told me during my PhD that the marginal benefit of having their name first was small compared to having the student's name first. Moreover, papers coming from a masters or PhD usually deserve to have the student's name first anyway.
I'm sure the community will have various opinions but I find this a good practice unless there's a clear contribution level issue.
---
Updates:
It is common to place students first then rest of contributors in alphabetical order. Further, as @BryanKrause points out ([comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/117463/how-widespread-is-the-use-of-last-author-teacher-on-student-papers/117465#comment309631_117465)), it may be beneficial to *not* have your name first if it helps make the case you're capable of supervising the research process.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In many social sciences (Anthropology, Psychology, Sociology) last author signifies the supervisor of the student's work, including Ph.D. or Masters supervisor, postdoc adviser, sometimes undergraduate supervisor of an honors thesis, or a graduate student in that role. In Engineering and more applied social sciences (industrial-organizational psych, human factors, or applied vision science) it also often is extended to be the individual who holds the grant and funds the work.
I have seen this convention cause feelings of unfairness or even suspicions of misconduct among those who arrive in Engineering labs from fields uninitiated to the practice. I usually advise these individuals that 'when in Rome'...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Norms differ between fields. In economics, the supervisor typically is not added as an author for a student's paper, unless the contribution of the supervisor was at the level of a coauthor's. The benefit to a student of having a solo-authored paper relative to a coauthored-with-supervisor one is usually greater than the benefit of another paper to the supervisor. In the recommendation letters for job applicants, the thesis committee members go to great lengths to emphasize that the job applicant's papers (solo or coauthored) are independent work and the supervisor or other coauthors had minimal input.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Very field dependent, and possibly even regionally dependent. In my field, the last author is the person who contributed least. First is the person who wrote the paper, then in decreasing order of how much work they put in, including supervisory work not directly related to the paper (so teacher/supervisor would probably be second or third).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/26
| 674
| 2,644
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a statement of purpose for PhD applications, should one talk about their undergrad research like
>
> I did X ...
>
>
>
or, should one (rightfully) say
>
> My advisor and I / we did X ...
>
>
>
Would admissions committees be concerned that the applicant "lacks confidence", when they talk about their research work and emphasize that it's work between them and their advisor? Would committees rather hear the applicant talking solely about their own work?
(Option no. 1 seems a bit ... wrong.)<issue_comment>username_1: I was taught that it should be “This was planned” and not “I / we planned this” or
“XXX was built or carried out” and not “ I built this” or
“analysis of the results show..” not “my or our analysis shows...”
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: This is an XY problem. Saying "I did X" repeatedly is wrong and offputting, and saying "My advisor and I did X" repeatedly sounds weak and annoying to read. Neither is the right option alone.
You should adjust the phrasing so that subjects are simple, mostly either "I" or "we", and explicitly credit yourself for things you actually did on their own. After all, you did have some independence, right? It's not like your advisor was over your shoulder every minute of every day.
Bad example:
>
> My advisor and I were looking for a project in field X. My advisor gave me a project to apply X to Y, and my advisor and I planned the general strategy after my advisor taught me the basics, so that after two months, some progress was made, though my advisor decided that the data analysis would have to be redone. Later, a paper was drafted with the editorial support of my advisor, which is now, after having been submitted, under review, at Journal Y.
>
>
>
Better example:
>
> I wanted research experience in field X and approached Prof P, who agreed to be my advisor. My project was to apply X to Y, and after a brief reading period I began two months of independent work, during which I picked up techniques A, B, and C. However, I found these techniques were not powerful enough for the problem at hand. We decided on a change of strategy, and I modified the analysis with techniques D and E, which I used to produce compelling results. We have written up and submitted these results to Journal Y.
>
>
>
Of course you would use fancier language in the real thing, but note how the second example makes you sound like an actual sentient human being, while the first makes you sound like you were just passively "along for the ride", even though it technically makes the exact same claims.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/26
| 1,977
| 8,354
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a master's student about to start writing my thesis. After I wrote my research proposal, my advisor said that when I write my thesis, I should make it less "popular" (I believe he referred mainly to the introduction, where I presented the field and the subject in a rather detailed manner and broke it down in a way that average people could understand why I am proposing to do this research) and more "dry" and "scientific".
So I'm assuming he means that I should strive to direct the text to experts (as scientific publications usually are), and not begin from the very beginning of the subject and not "build up" the introduction too slowly.
The problem is that I always feel that I DO need to explain the background when starting to write a new piece, as each text stands on its own and should be complete in itself. I need to find some way to set the stage on one hand, but not too tediously on the other hand. I guess this is part of the art of writing, which develops through experience, but I was hoping someone here could offer some helpful ideas to achieve this.
I found [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/53982/first-sentence-of-a-research-proposal) and its answers related to my question and interesting to read, but that doesn't answer my question.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I am a master's student about to start writing my thesis...my advisor said that when I write my thesis, I should make it less "popular"...and more "dry" and "scientific".
>
>
>
I think you need to establish exactly what your supervisor wants. As you've described it, I strongly disagree with your supervisor. But, I suspect the situation is more nuanced. Ultimately, I think the best style combines popular and scientific, especially in a thesis, which I think should be more accessible than a research paper.
Good writing delivers the idea to the widest audience.
>
> I'm assuming...
>
>
>
Check that assumption!
>
> ...he means that I should strive to direct the text to experts...and not begin from the very
> beginning of the subject and not "build up" the introduction too
> slowly.
>
>
>
As described, I again strongly disagree with your supervisor, but, again, I suspect the situation is more nuanced. You probably cannot start from "the very beginning of the subject" (at least for many subjects), because the subject might be millennia old and starting from the beginning probably merits an entire book, but you need to start from a reasonable point, perhaps one that anyone can understand or perhaps one that your fellow students can understand (it depends what the subject is).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a common issue when inexperienced people write their first papers. It's tempting to write down everything that went into your personal understanding of a subject, rather than just starting from what's known and focusing on the new things you did.
Imagine if you looked up a recipe for a pie and the first 80% of it detailed the history of wheat cultivation, how wheat is made into flour, the way the tablespoon and teaspoon were defined as units of measure, statistics on the average consumption and enjoyment of pie throughout the 20th century, and so on. Imagine if you looked up the text of a new regulation and it started with "This law could be passed in our state legislature because, in 1773, the Boston tea party...". Imagine if a car repair manual started with the history of the wheel.
It's important to tell the public why science is important and why your studies make sense, but a paper isn't the place to do it. It's also not the place to give a full exposition of every technique you used. If you must, just put references to review articles or textbooks.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Whenever you present something - be it in writing, a talk, or a lecture - consider your audience. A fairly common rule of thumb for a Masters thesis is that you can assume that your readers have all the background knowledge that everyone with a Bachelors degree in the subject would have. (Adjust as needed if you're in an interdisciplinary field.) The other, more crass rule is that the most important audience you're writing the thesis for is the set of examiners (possibly just your professor). If you now write a thesis in a way that includes *everything*, so that it's readable by *everyone*, well, guess what? It now becomes a very tedious read for your *actual* audience, because it just repeats stuff they already know.
So, no, not every every piece of writing needs to stand on its own. It is fine to assume some knowledge, but it does require striking a fine balance. For a thesis introduction I think you can cast a fairly wide net - in a combination of scientific and popular style as username_1 puts it - but too much is always too much. Indeed, figuring out how to write the introduction is often one of the hardest parts. Even if you have a good idea of what your audience knows, you still need to figure out *how* to write it. Is there a "hook" you can use, a fascinating question to start off with? See the question on [How to write a strong introduction into a research paper?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/12170/17254) and links therein for some ideas.
Concretely, in your case, I'd ask your advisor to recommend a couple (in their opinion) good example theses (either from previous students in the group, or from elsewhere). That should give you a better idea of what your advisor expects and values. Do this soon! The earlier you do this, the more time you have to think about how to improve on this style.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: An important concept that every aspiring writer should be aware of is [Genre Theory](http://canlitguides.ca/canlit-guides-editorial-team/close-reading-prose/what-is-genre-theory/). Genre Theory deposits that for every field and purpose, one or multiple different "genres" (types of text pieces) exist, each geared towards a specific audience and with a structure that has emerged to serve a specific purpose. Writing a thesis proposal in your field is one such genre. Before writing, it is key to understand what exactly your genre is. This includes:
* The typical outline (not just the section headers, but what *content* and line of argument is actually expected below each header)
* Typical terminology and phrasing
* The purpose of the text
* The target audience
The best way to understand your genre is through text analysis. Go over existing proposals (both, good and bad examples can be useful), and carefully examine not only what they write, but also how the argument is structured, what recurring phrases there are, in which order content is presented, and towards what audience they write.
In your case, it sounds like you have some misconceptions regarding, at least, the target audience and purpose of the text. A thesis proposal is *not* written for the general public. The goal of such a text is not to communicate to the general public, but to your advisor and/or committee.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I think it's great to want to explain a topic from the beginning, but a thesis (or research paper) is not the right venue for this.
I would assume the knowledge of an above average final year undergraduate in your field at your institution for a thesis. So I wouldn't explain things they already (should) know. Ideally the thesis would also be interesting to such an audience. But ultimately it is up to your supervisor who may have a different view. Naturally a research paper would assume more advanced knowledge.
I sometimes find writing about a topic from 'the beginning' is helpful for me to understand it better. So it can be worth doing. For example, I have written rough sets of course notes in various topics which I could refer to or even develop into teaching materials if the need arose in the future. You may also find being involved in outreach activities to schools rewarding.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Assume whoever is reading has the same level of expertise as you (minus what is in the paper) and continue with that tone throughout the whole paper.
Then have an addendum with personal history on the topic. Mention/summarize the addendum in one sentence in the the introduction.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/26
| 645
| 2,716
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am rather new to the academic so I am bit insecure about the whole process. I have a small question regarding the publication process.
Context:
Recently I submitted a paper to a physics journal. Two referees were consulted by the editor and recently we received their comments. While one referee recommended publication after a small remark was answered the other referee recommended against the publication. He did not criticize the validity of our work and only said that our manuscript did not add any new physics to the literature. In our rebuttal letter we showed that in fact our approach is very different from the literature (one of the motivation to do the study) and we come to different and new conclusions compared to the present literature.
Question:
Recently we resubmitted our manuscript together with our rebuttal to the comments. I saw that our manuscript was sent to one referee. So my question is: what is the workflow of the editor in such a case? Did he sent the manuscript back to the referee who was against the publication or did he consult a new third referee? How is such a case handled by the editor?
Thank you very much
A concerned newbie to the field.
Cheers<issue_comment>username_1: There's a very very good chance the single invited referee is the one who said your work had no novelty. That's because the other referee has already recommended acceptance for the work. Unless you revised your work such that it's not acceptable anymore (did you?), there's no point sending the paper back to that referee.
Inviting a third referee at this point would be rather premature in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, it *can* happen e.g. if the second referee says he's too busy to look at the manuscript again, but it wouldn't be the typical next step. It's only if the second referee still says it's not acceptable that the editor might invite a third opinion as a "tiebreaker".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can't know. Having been an editor for the past decade, I'm pretty sure I've done all of the following three options:
* I disagreed with the reviewer who said that there is nothing new in the paper and ignored that person in the second round of reviews.
* I agreed with the reviewer who said that there is nothing new in the paper, felt that the comments by the other reviewer had been addressed, and didn't send the paper to that other reviewer again because it would just be a waste of their time.
* I couldn't figure out who is right and sent it to a third reviewer to get a tie breaker and a second (actually third) opinion.
Point being: There's no way you can know. Have patience with the process and see what happens.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/09/26
| 796
| 2,609
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently stumbled upon a published article entitled "ANCOVA versus change from baseline had more power in randomized studies and more bias in nonrandomized studies," which has an errata stating the following:
>
> The publisher regrets that in the above-mentioned article the title was changed without the author's approval. The correct title should read:
>
>
> “ANCOVA versus change from baseline: More power in randomized studies, more bias in nonrandomized studies”
>
>
>
If I am to cite the paper, should I refer to it by its published title (as I did in the reference list below) or by its corrected title?
References
----------
* [<NAME>](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435606000813), G.J.P. (2006). ANCOVA versus change from baseline had more power in randomized studies and more bias in nonrandomized studies. *Journal of Clinical Epidemiology*, 59(9): 920-925
* [<NAME>](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435606003830), G.J.P. (2006). Erratum to “ANCOVA versus change from baseline had more power in randomized studies and more bias in nonrandomized studies”. *Journal of Clinical Epidemiology*, 59(12): 1334<issue_comment>username_1: In this case I'd use the corrected title, and add make sure to note that the paper is [corrected](http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2017/03/how-to-cite-a-corrected-journal-article.html), e.g.
* <NAME>, G.J.P. (2006). ANCOVA versus change from baseline: more power in randomized studies, more bias in nonrandomized studies [corrected]. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(9): 920-925
Note that this is also how the paper is [listed in Pubmed](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16895814). I also recommend citing the erratum next to the paper.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'd use the published title, because you're citing a physical document, not a document that hypothetically should have been published. (If a book was printed with the wrong title, then you'd surely cite that title, rather than the title that should have been used.) You could mention that the title wasn't approved by the author, e.g.,
>
> <NAME>, G.J.P. (2006). ANCOVA versus change from baseline had more power in randomized studies and more bias in nonrandomized studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(9): 920-925. (The article was mistakenly published under the aforementioned title, the correct title should be "ANCOVA versus change from baseline: More power in randomized studies, more bias in nonrandomized studies.")
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/26
| 682
| 2,870
|
<issue_start>username_0: The Australian government pays for the research study fees.
Who will, in such case, have the intellectual property rights for the research: the PhD student or the university?<issue_comment>username_1: Laws vary and I am neither a lawyer nor Australian. But in general, unless the grant or university rules say otherwise, things you create are (or at least should be) your own. Some universities try to make a claim (various places in the world) and you may have signed away some of your rights previously, but in the absence of that the IP is yours.
Check locally for the correct answer, of course. If the rules seem arbitrary or unfair, you can explore, locally, what it would take to counter them.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As with most things when it comes to the question of intellectual property (IP) ownership, the question to ask is: Who is paying you to do the work?
If it's a general PhD stipend scholarship from the government then the default position is that the student owns all the IP and the project is classified as a "Student Project". Some government contracts *may* have a clause which stipulates that, if challenged (i.e. in a court), then the government provider will have the final say on IP ownership, however this is extraordinarily rare. In the case of a Australian government scholarship, I believe you can be assured that you own the IP as a student.
If your stipend is funded by an external company or cooperative research centre (CRC), chances are your PhD project is classified differently. As examples, the university may declare your project is a "University Project" or "External Project" as opposed to a "Student Project"; this is usually declared in the fine print for your Milestone 1 position or Intellectual Property student deed poll which either the university or the external will want you to sign. Once you have signed that document the default position most likely is that the external company owns all the IP. You may have partial ownership or some sort of inventor rights but, at this point, your IP "default position" is more akin to that of an employee (i.e. where the paying employer owns all IP) than a student despite the substantial pay difference.
(My experience here is as an Australian PhD student here who paid $X,XXXs for an IP lawyer after my external company gave me quite a colourful IP deed poll to sign which needed some amending...)
As a bonus tip of advice, make sure to **READ** the IP deed poll (most academics, staff and students *very foolishly don't and sign away a LOT of their own power and hard work*). Check also for clauses on Background IP, as you may not even be allowed to sign background IP which you're claiming is yours but legally isn't (i.e. if you've come from another university or company and are using their IP).
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/26
| 610
| 2,594
|
<issue_start>username_0: I start by describing the situation: a friend of mine is a master student in Italy, and is going to graduate soon. She wrote her master thesis and submitted it, and should have her final exam (the one in which the thesis is discussed) in about a month. In the meanwhile, she is sending PhD applications.
A professor that she contacted asked if he could read her master thesis. The problem is that I am not sure if she can (and should) send a master thesis to a third party before her exam.
What do you think of it? Do you think it could be a problem? The thesis is not meant to be publicly available before the final exam through the university site, but I've read the regulations and this kind of issue is not mentioned at all.
To give some context:
* There is no copyright involved. The thesis is going to be available on the university site for free, but only after she has her final exam.
* The professor knows that the person is going to graduate soon, but maybe he did not realize that he was asking for an unverified thesis.
* She works in the field of pure science, where people usually have a "sharing" attitude.
Thank you very much for your attention.<issue_comment>username_1: She should probably ask her advisor for advice on this, but in general, informal sharing shouldn't be any problem. She should, of course, note that the thesis is still undefended and subject to revision.
In almost all reasonable cases the copyright is hers in any case. There should be no legal issue in any case, since it isn't being offered for publication and the work is hers.
If her application goes ahead at the other institution, she should probably want to send the final version later, and promise to do so now.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The detailed specifics of this will likely depend on her university's policies.
In most situations I am aware of, the student retains the copyright of her thesis. She should be allowed (from a legal perspective) to distribute her work in whatever way she sees fit. Likely the best thing she can do in this situation is speak with her advisor. If her advisor is desiring to publish any papers from the thesis, he/she may not want the work shared with a third-party.
It may also be possible that the student in question here only send a portion of her thesis to the third party. A pre-print, if you will. It should be sent with a note specifying that the thesis has not been defended yet and is subject to final revisions and review. Open and full disclosure is the best option here.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/09/26
| 2,125
| 7,906
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did a masters 8 years ago. am 38, unemployed, and don't have any fund.
I want to go to the USA for a PhD. But, **probably** won't get a visa for having a study gap and/or being unemployed and old (on most occasions refusal letter would reply "*You haven't satisfied us that you would leave the country after the designated period of your study!*"). So, I am planning to get a PhD in Saudi university so that I can later go for a PostDoc in the USA.
**QS** ranking:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tIlMf.png)
Looks like Saudi Arabia has a number of world-class universities. I heard they also pay scary amount of money to PhD students.
I heard that admission committees in US universities often find hard times evaluating weight of degrees from unfamiliar universities while selecting potential research students, and instructors.
**How familiar are Saudi universities in the USA in the field of CS? Are they good enough to support my goal?**
**Note.** *The rationale behind going to Saudi Arabia is, it has a very good relationship with the USA. I can save some money, and then get visa by showing that fund.*
***Note.2.*** *some users asked in the comment section why I am considering KSA why not Singapore, Hong Kong, etc. Well, as far as I researched, universities in SEA has issues in their learning cultures. As far as I understand, they prefer **memorization** based learning. I also heard that a large number of students in Taiwan, Japan, and so on commit **suicides** because of study pressures*.
* [**Taiwan:** Pros and Cons from a Master’s Degree Student](https://nihaositgoing.com/2017/09/09/university-in-taiwan-pros-and-cons-from-a-masters-degree-student/)
* [5 Challenges You Will Face Studying Abroad in **Japan**](https://www.goabroad.com/articles/study-abroad/5-challenges-you-will-face-studying-abroad-in-japan)
* [**Singapore** schools: 'The best education system in the world' putting significant stress on young children](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-06/best-education-system-putting-stress-on-singaporean-children/6831964)<issue_comment>username_1: *First, let me answer about the reputation/ranking of Saudi universities:*
I should warn you that Saudi Arabian universities have a reputation for "gaming" these rankings you are relying on.
What they do is pay researchers at western universities to accept a second affiliation there. This allows the Saudi university to list them as faculty and claim credit for their publications and citations and thereby boost their ranking. In reality, these researchers are rarely if ever present and do not contribute to the academic environment there. Perhaps they visit for a week and give a few talks, but they do not supervise students or teach courses there.
For more details, see this question and the links in it: [What should you do if a co-author has an unethical affiliation?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47505/what-should-you-do-if-a-co-author-has-an-unethical-affiliation)
The answers to this question also show how people in the west react to this.
So the reality is that Saudi universities have a very questionable reputation in the west, despite their good performance in international rankings.
Note that I'm not saying these are bad universities, but simply that you should be wary of the rankings and the claimed faculty. Every university seeks to maximize it's reputation, but Saudi Arabian universities have a reputation for going overboard with this.
---
*Now the second part of your question -- how does going to a Saudi university play into your academic career goals given that you want to end up in the US:*
Generally speaking, moving to the US after PhD is much harder than before. This is my personal impression and is [supported by data](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/116404/44249).
The main reason is that, after your PhD, you are evaluated on your research and your recommendation letter writers and connections matter a lot. Thus you want to have research exposure in the US and you want to have connections in the US and letters from US professors. The easiest way to do that is to be in the US.
Before your PhD this doesn't matter so much, as you are evaluated on your potential.
Another reason is that, as you move up the career ladder, positions get more and more competitive. This makes everything, including moving countries, harder.
Of course, countries like Canada and Israel are very close to the US in terms of research connections. So doing a PhD there will be almost as good as doing one in the US.
If you are having trouble getting into a PhD program that you want, then doing a Masters is probably a good idea, especially if you get a good recommendation letter out of it. It isn't critical where you do a Masters.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I am from Saudi Arabia. I also remember there is a KAUST (King Abdullah University of Science and Technology) faculty here as well.
First, do your best to go to KAUST. You can be accepted in elite US institutes and yet be rejected from KAUST. It is a serious grad-only institute. So go for it if you can. It is much better for you in both money and research output.
Second, The bribing thing for ranking isn’t as accurate as it seems to be. While definitely one institute had serious issues in this regard, large number of Saudi universities didn’t go that way. Actually, and I have seen this in STEM fields, nowadays some grad students have co-supervisors overseas from a reputable institute. I also don’t think Saudi universities provide good stipends for their grad students. My suggestion is to go for a good (usually young) supervisor who published in top venues in your field (for example, if you’re into AI look for faculties who published in ICML/AAAI/AAMAS/IJCAI/CP). There are a few of them. Contact them in advance and see if they can supervise you. My ranking for the universities in the picture in CS is: KAUST - KFUPM - KSU - KAU. I know a couple of profs in Canada and they’ve done their PhD in KFUPM.
My own suggestion: Saudi universities are not set up for grad school. The system is so old and needs dramatic change. Look for a better environment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: First: if you want a postdoc position in the US, what will matter are your qualifications, not your bank account.
I am faculty at KAUST, and I was born and studied in the US. KAUST does not game the rankings in the ways described in the answer by @username_1 (though he's correct that other Saudi universities have done this).
I don't put too much stock in bibliometric measures, but KAUST is currently [ranked #1 in the world in citations per faculty](https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2018) (to see this, go to that page and click 'rankings indicators' and then 'citations per faculty'). None of those citations are due to any kind of fake affiliations; they are KAUST researchers who live and work at KAUST.
KAUST faculty come from the world's top institutions and we send many of our graduates on to postdoctoral positions at top universities in the USA, like Princeton, Caltech, MIT, etc. Of course, many of them also go to industry and to other countries.
We are a very small and highly selective institution; we only run graduate programs and we have less than 1000 students, but again I think that choosing a graduate program based primarily on financial incentives is a mistake. It's true that all our admitted students are on generous scholarships. You need outstanding qualifications to get in, and admission is even less likely if (as it appears) your main goal is to save money.
**Edit**: I don't think my answer should be *the accepted answer* to this question, since I've only dealt with one very small institution.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/26
| 1,098
| 3,245
|
<issue_start>username_0: Like, this document, for instance:
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc791>
It's an official Internet Engineering Taskforce document that defines things like network protocols, etc. Often times there's really no specific individual(s) credited as the author(s), and even the official title can seem ambiguous.
The information on the title page is:
---
**INTERNET PROTOCOL
DARPA INTERNET PROGRAM
PROTOCOL SPECIFICATION**
September 1981
prepared for
**Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Information Processing Techniques
Office**
1400 <NAME>
Arlington, Virginia 22209
by
**Information Sciences Institute
University of Southern California**
4676 Admiralty Way
<NAME>, California 90291
---
So what's the official title and who get's the credit; DARPA, IPTO, ISI, USC, or IETF? I was going to do something like below, but I thought I should check with you guys.
---
DARPA. (1981, September). Internet Protocol Specification. *RFC 791*. Retrieved from <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc791><issue_comment>username_1: There is a post about [how to cite RFCs using BibTeX](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/110201/23580) which says:
```
@techreport{rfc4180,
author = {<NAME>},
:
:
url = {http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4180.txt}
}
```
Taking the first entry in the [link posted by @Anyon](ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc-ref.txt):
`RFC0001 | | Crocker, S., "Host Software", RFC 1, DOI 10.17487/RFC0001, April 1969, .`
Then a BibTeX entry would look like:
```
@techreport{RFC0001,
author = {<NAME>},
title = {Host Software},
howpublished = {Internet Requests for Comments},
type = {RFC},
number = 1,
year = {1969},
month = {April},
issn = {2070-1721},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
institution = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC0001},
url = {http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1.txt}
}
```
I have inserted the DOI entry based on <https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/3803/142724>.
Then, in APA style, the reference would look something like:
`<NAME>. (1969). Host Software. RFC 1. doi:10.17487/RFC0001`
The Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) publish a number of journals and conference proceedings in which RFCs are cited, so finding an example there may also help.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The [APA Style blog](https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2012/05/missing-pieces.html) walks you through citations with missing info. There is also how to [cite a book with no author or editor](https://www.apastyle.org/learn/faqs/cite-book-no-author.html). You seem to be using DARPA as the author, but from the title page, it seems mote likely that ISI/USC is the institutional author. If you dig deeper, the linked document lists Postel as the editor. In that case you just do a book without an author, but with an editor: <https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/reference_list_books.html>
>
> Edited Book, No Author
>
>
> <NAME>., & <NAME>. (Eds.). (1997). Consequences of growing up poor. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/09/27
| 1,377
| 6,017
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there any reason why most non-governmental organizations (NGOs) tend to publish non-peer reviewed literature? I have seen some NGO scientists as co-authors, even in some important papers, but most of their production is reports which are not peer-reviewed. While it is true that most NGOs do not do basic research, some of their reports could easily be converted to reviews, and some of their projects to applied research.
Do they want to avoid peer review for political reasons in order to be able to convey the message they want? In my view their message would be much stronger if it came from a peer-reviewed article. Is it also a matter of time as peer-reviewed articles take a long time to get published?<issue_comment>username_1: I can think of a couple of reasons:
1. Peer review is slow. NGOs want their paper to influence policy now, not in one or two years from now.
2. Peer review journals have a different audience than grey literature. NGOs typically want to communicate with people like policy makers or journalists, and these are less likely to read peer reviewed journals.
3. Related to point 2: in order to effectively communicate with their intended audience they need a different style of writing and presenting their arguments than what is common and acceptable in peer reviewed journals.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: **Because they are not incentivized to**.
Publishing in peer reviewed journals costs time, money, and is frustrating. These costs are more relevant in social sciences with a lower turnaround time than natural sciences, but are nonetheless a factor.
The main reason academics publish in these is because they are incentivized to do so by tenure and status. These incentives come from the need of measuring academics' performance (and that of their institutions). Among other things, academic institutions compete for the best researchers, phd students and funding -- and signal quality with their publications.
NGOs mostly do not have research as an intrinsic motive. The aforementioned competition is much less relevant for them. Therefore, many of them do not incentivize their researchers to publish in peer-reviewed journals. Given the lack of incentives, and the presence of high cost of doing so, few researchers in NGOs publish in peer-reviwed journals.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Expanding on the answer by @username_1:
I think it is fundamentally about why people in different settings do research.
NGO's usually do not do research for the sake of research. They generally have a social mission to accomplish, thus their research is conducted to that end. It is not to increase knowledge, as it is in academia. To accomplish their mission, they need media, financial and public support. If you need as much as possible of those things, would a fancy infographic work better than a peer-reviewed paper?
Thus, they need to make sure their research is as accessible as possible for their base, and a broad audience helps too. Supporters for NGOs come from every walk of life. Whatever the people around here happen to think, most people are not turned on at the thought of peer-reviewed research, if they even know what it is. The audience of any one peer-reviewed paper is often very small. Peer-reviewed papers are usually locked behind paywalls, use complex terminology and are nearly always so specialised they cannot be accessed, let alone appeal to a broad audience. NGO's probably aren't going to add much to their audience by publishing an extra peer-reviewed paper.
Academics, on the other hand, get pay rises and positions based on peer-reviewed publications, even if the publications happen to be whatever bit of data They could maybe, possibly turn into a peer-reviewed paper. So, cynic that I am, I have to point out that NGOs are not the only people motivated by money.
Edit: As for the added credibility - credibility doesn't have one currency, that being peer-reviewed papers. Something is not made credible by peer-review (especially with the many meta-analyses showing all kinds of problems in the literature, from bad statistics to publishing results selectively leading to positivity bias). NGO's are subject to a whole suite of regulations and audits, not to mention public opinion, that most academics never hear about. So, maybe they don't have peer-reviewed credibility, but they do have other standards.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Both NGO's and governments routinely commission and use non-peer reviewed work. Often because of the shorter turn around but mostly because it is intended for a different audience. I worked in a large government research organisation where this was a hot topic amongst the scientists. The organisation was routinely commisioned to provide reports for government and industry & many begrudged the time it took from the development of journal papers - on which their reputation and in some cases salary was based. However this was bread & butter work for the organisation. This is not to say the reports were not based on good science. Just that they were not suitable for journal submission.
When writing for government / industry journal style does not work. It needs to be more accessable to the non-specialist lay person.
While this may leave it open to criticism based on lack of rigor this need not be so. That is up to the author.
While it is unfortunate that many of the captains of industry & government are functionally illiterate when it comes to science this is the world we live in.
I have seen good policy set based on great work in this 'grey' literature.
Why? Because the freedom from publication strictures enabled the author to communicate key science clearly and succinctly. Would the work be accepted for publication - no. Did it have real impact and advance science, absolutely.
IMHO the key question does not revolve around the domain in which publication occurs but is it grounded in good science.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/27
| 974
| 4,181
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an external PhD candidate at a university in Germany, meaning that I have neither a post at the university nor funding. I know this isn't ideal, but my question is this:
My research is related to language education, and for my field work I'd like to compare students from a certain Asian country (mine) with German students. I have done the field work in Asia, and now I need to teach a class in at least two German universities to observe the students' attitude first-hand.
Would it be very outlandish to write an email to a department chair at a neighbouring university in order to propose a class in relation to my PhD project? I've checked their program, and the title of my proposed course isn't there. As this is for the sake of my project, I could do it voluntarily, although I'd be very glad if I'm paid. Should I state that as well (at least the first part)?
I have no idea whether an unsolicited application like this is common in academia (particularly in Germany). In any case I don't want to sound desperate or forcing someone's hand. Thank you in advance for your insight.
P.S. My supervisor is taking a sabbatical leave, so he's not around at the university, and I cannot easily ask questions like this.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, I think it is quite abnormal to suggest that a department takes up a course in their program for the purpose of research field work of a PhD student from another university. To me it seems unlikely that they are going to agree to that.
My field is not education research, but I have a hard time imagining that teaching yourself and evaluating something that goes on in a lecture on a higher level goes very well together.
Some points that you may want to consider to increase your chances of getting to do reliable field work:
* Maybe it is sufficient to sit in one or two sessions of an appropriate on-going course just as an observer? Find a suitable course, explain your plans to the instructor, and I think you'll have much higher chances of getting this done than getting to teach a course yourself.
* If your field work absolutely requires that you are the teacher, then I would propose that you look for a suitable course that already exists, and ask the instructor of that if you'd be allowed to teach one or two sessions in that course. Of course you have to show your qualification to do that, and it may be helpful if your supervisor could actually make or support that request (assuming that he/she is knowledgable in the field you're looking to teach in).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If - quite apart from your own research needs - you are eminently qualified to teach the module, it would not be outlandish.
However, modules are part of a complex intramural infrastructure and financial ecology. Even a tenured professor cannot just propose modules that he or she would like to teach. (This is why we kept module titles quite generic, so we could extensively repurpose our modules without officially changing title and code number.)
So, unless your proposal fits a *clear and present and pre-existing need* at that other uni, you are very likely to get thanks but no thanks.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Even if your advisor is currently on leave, I'd like to suggest asking her/him handling the issue.
While for a Master's level course, you *could* propose teaching a course to a different department, it is unlikely to work. Normally you need a PhD to be an examiner for a course, and since you don't have a PhD....that will be quite tricky. There may be exceptions for experienced influential external people not holding a PhD (e.g., high-ranking engineers from industry), but that will require some support from a professor within the department.
If there is really no way for you to get your advisor involved in asking (which is likely to drive up the success rate of your endeavor dramatically), you will need to find a professor at the department to teach at who is close enough in terms of research to serve the role of examiner for the course, and do an informal inquiry with that person to check if they are interested.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/09/27
| 1,154
| 4,958
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am teaching classes of a size of 20-25 persons.
During a class, what is the best way to get feedback from students? Concretely, I would want to get the following questions answered every ~15-20 minutes:
* Did the students understand what I was explaining?
* Are there any questions related to what was just discussed?
Ideally, I would also like to encourage weaker students to ask questions---without them being afraid of asking those questions.
Do you have any advise on how to best phrase such questions from my side?<issue_comment>username_1: One does not really understand the material until one has tried to use it. So to answer the question of whether students understood what you said, give a problem for them to solve. With a class size of 20-25, you could ask someone to come to the whiteboard and demonstrate a solution. Or perhaps if it's a simple conceptual problem, you could have a multiple-choice question and solicit answers with a show of hands.
As for whether there're any questions related to what was just discussed, the easiest (and obvious) way is to ask the students. Pause the lecture and ask if there're any questions. It's possible there'll be an awkward silence, but that's fine; just give the students ~30 seconds to think about what they don't understand and how to phrase the question. If you're in a culture that is shy by nature, you could do what I witnessed a famous scientist once do: "Since we're in Singapore, we'll skip the first question and go directly to the second question." That led to some giggles but then there was a flood of questions afterwards. If nobody asks anything, then assume they get it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm going to suggest that you are probably over-using lecture as a teaching technique. If that is the case, there is hardly any way to achieve the goals you set. Students don't learn something by hearing it once, or even twice. They learn by engaging with the material and that is impossible in the short term available in a lecture. At most, what you can elicit is a bit of ephemera from their short term memories. But that isn't learning. Let me suggest two techniques, but the first is, by far, the least effective.
1. Force the students to take extensive notes with paper and pencil. They can use full size sheets of paper, but should also each have a deck of index cards. Encourage/require the students to record on the index cards the three most important ideas from any given lecture (one idea per card). Take time periodically, if you like, but the end of the class period is likely enough, to ask them what were the most important three ideas. Students volunteer from their already prepared cards. You can accept or veto any idea. Do this every day. Also, encourage/require students to write questions on the cards and pass them to you periodically (this is your every 15 minute solution). Quickly sift through the questions and either answer them immediately or just incorporate them into what you do going forward. At the start of the next class, ask the question, what were the three most important ideas from the previous lecture. Again, volunteers can offer suggestions. Also, see my answer to a different, but related question at [CSEducators](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com/a/1168/1293)
2. The above, still assumes that you use lecture primarily, but this is not an optimal teaching technique. Instead, you want to learn about and use a flipped classroom. A search for "flipped classroom" on this site will reveal a lot of discussion. I point you to an [answer I gave](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/115160/75368) for slightly younger students but which also applies here. I try, there, to outline the idea. But the key to it is that in a flipped classroom you use the face time to work *with* the students, rather than to perform *for* them. In a situation like this, you have no doubt about their understanding as you are involved directly in developing it.
Of these two techniques, the second is much more likely to be effective. In CS, it also gives you the opportunity to use pairing and group work so that the students can reinforce one another's learning, so that not every idea needs to come from you and so that you don't need to individually reinforce the learning of every student. Lots of wins can be achieved here.
Since it came up in a comment, let me add that one reason to dis-favor lecture as a primary teaching technique is that students have different "learning modalities" and lecturing disadvantages some students - those who are not primarily visual or aural learners. Active learning, combined with other things, is much more effective as it reinforces the learning immediately and drives it deeper into the brain's pathways. Every student is different and instructors should realize that most students are not like themselves unless they are doing doctoral level education.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/27
| 451
| 1,762
|
<issue_start>username_0: Many scientific papers (at least in computer science) use present tense in the evaluation section to describe the setting of the evaluation (e.g., "In our experiments we **use** dataset A.)". Wouldn't past tense be more appropriate?<issue_comment>username_1: There are several reasons to use present tense.
1) It *is* present time for the reader. But everyone understands the work was done before.
2) There are several versions of past tense. It simpler not to have to choose among them by putting everything into present tense.
2) English has become the international language of science. For most non-native speakers, present tense is simpler to read. In a prior era when many must-read papers in my field were written in French and German, I was always glad present tense was standard for scientific papers in those languages.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Suppose we write it in simple [past tense](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_tense):
>
> In our experiments we used dataset A.
>
>
>
Which of the following does it mean?
>
> In our experiments we used dataset A. In this work, we also use dataset A.
>
>
> In our experiments we used dataset A. In this work we do something else.
>
>
>
Simple past tense implies some action is complete, so it's **naturally misinterpreted as the latter**. Moreover, throughout a paper, we might use "used" with both of these meanings, whereby each instance needs to be deciphered by the reader.
The other ways of writing past tense have similar issues (and are grammatically more complicated):
>
> In our experiments we were using dataset A.
>
>
> In our experiments we had used dataset A.
>
>
> In our experiments we had been using dataset A.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/09/27
| 797
| 3,304
|
<issue_start>username_0: Excuse me for keeping things abstract, I do not want to include more details than necessary.
I'm working on an internship. The internship goal is applying known (published) information and evaluating it in practice. I will conclude the internship by writing a report.
I want to include as much information as necessary in my report for it to be as comprehensive as possible for the reader. This allows the reader to decide if they can skip ahead (instead of me). I do not want to leave details out that may be critical for the readers understanding, even though they seem almost trivial to me, as that makes the report harder to read.
That said, my question:
Is it *good form* to repeat the core content of the original work in my report, or should I keep it as brief as possible? Is there an accepted middle-ground, or is it not that important as I think?
Of course I will not literally copy-paste content. I will cite the original work and explain exactly what my contribution is(n't), and refer to the original publication.
My fear is that it seems indecent to "copy" findings that someone spend a lot of effort on.<issue_comment>username_1: When you say "core content" I'm assuming you mean the conclusions and, perhaps, something of the methodology. The "findings" of the work.
If you properly cite the other work, you aren't copying it. You can quote it or paraphrase it accurately, so long as it is cited. But your basic inclination to be complete in this case seems correct. This is especially true if you need to interpret (and justify the interpretation) of the other work(s) in any way. If your readers need to make their own interpretations, things might be more confusing to them as well as being painful to have to find and read the other papers.
I'm assuming, of course, that a reader of your work won't need to actually completely digest the works on which you base yours.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> I want to include as much information as necessary in my report for it to be as comprehensive as possible for the reader
>
>
>
That is what *you* want. Is it what the organization where you're interning at wants to receive?
>
> This allows the reader to decide if they can skip ahead (instead of me).
>
>
>
Well, you could instead perhaps attach a summary as an appendix instead.
>
> Of course I will not literally copy-paste content.
>
>
>
Why not? Maybe it makes sense to attach a few pages as an appendix. After all, we're not talking about a scientific publication here but some internal report. Of course, there may be copyright issues to consider.
>
> Is it good form to repeat the core content of the original work in my report, or should I keep it as brief as possible? Is there an accepted middle-ground, or is it not that important as I think?
>
>
>
This is much too dependent on the specific context: What kind of report you're writing; the recipients' expectations (see what I wrote above); the length of that content relevant to the length of your own work; the question of whether the original content can be summarized, or whether it's already a summary etc. Personally I would be averse to quoting "too much". I'm not aware of some formalized rule for a middle ground.
Upvotes: 0
|