date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2018/12/11
| 815
| 2,584
|
<issue_start>username_0: I found [this paper](https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~jrh13/papers/joerg.pdf) online and would like to cite it. I've looked up the rules for citing conference papers, but this is not a conference paper. It's also not a book and not a website and not an essay. It looks like [this image](https://www.wikihow.com/Cite-an-Essay#/Image:Cite-an-Essay-Step-8-Version-3.jpg) may have the correct format, but I can't tell exactly what information is what.
How do I cite any paper? (MLA is preferred, but multiple citation styles would be ideal.)<issue_comment>username_1: The first step is figuring out if it has been published in some form elsewhere. Recognize that people often put some draft version on their personal website to make the full text available, especially if they're not allowed to host the published version.
In this case inspecting the URL gives some hints\*. Consider omitting the "joerg.pdf" part, and go to [John Harrison's Complete publications list](https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~jrh13/papers/), which further links to [this page](https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~jrh13/papers/joerg.html). Both these pages can tell you that this document is a chapter in a handbook:
>
> History of Interactive Theorem Proving
>
>
> <NAME>, <NAME> and <NAME>.
>
>
> In <NAME> (ed), Handbook of the History of Logic, vol. 9: Computational Logic, Elsevier, pp. 135-214 (2014).
>
>
>
(The last link even provides a citation in bibtex form, but it uses the InProceedings form. I would probably use the InCollection style instead. Elsevier [seem to agree](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444516244500046).)
In MLA, book chapter references can be [written](http://www.easybib.com/reference/guide/mla/chapter)
>
> Last, First M. "Section Title." Book/Anthology. Ed. First M. Last. City: Publisher, Year Published. Page(s).
>
>
>
For this document, you'd have something like
>
> <NAME>., <NAME>., and <NAME>. "History of Interactive Theorem Proving." Handbook of the History of Logic, vol. 9: Computational Logic, edited by <NAME>, 2014, 135--214.
>
>
>
\*In cases when the URL doesn't reveal anything, consider searching for the title and authors in a search engine. This can often lead you to a more official version.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Use Google Scholar with the title in the search box to find:
>
> <NAME>, <NAME>, and <NAME>. "History of Interactive Theorem Proving." Computational Logic. Vol. 9. 2014.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/11
| 1,292
| 5,458
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose a secondary source proves that poverty was rampant in the Middle Ages by using a variety of primary sources (or statistics from other secondary sources). If years after reading this secondary source I decide I want to make the same claim (that poverty was common), would it be plagiarism to make this exact same statement using the exact same sources (supposing I actually noted and remembered them)?
In other words, can you plagiarize an objective fact or claim when it's backed up by concrete facts, regardless of whether or not someone else has made the same claim?
If that example above is too vague, let me paraphrase with a problem that I have encountered recently. I once read a source that said that <NAME> (who led an attack on Vienna hundreds of years ago) had his good and his bad qualities because he was ruthless in war yet was very chivalrous domestically. If I can't find this source again, can I just find other sources that talk about his ruthlessness and his chivalry, and then make the same conclusion?
My personal opinion is that yes, this is totally fine, because these conclusions are not the author's own voice, but rather what evidence shows to be a fact. If a source tried to make the claim that Suleiman had bipolar disorder, then this would have to be cited since this is not a fact but rather a subjective interpretation. However, an identical piecing together of "microfacts" to create "macrofacts" does not seem like something that could be categorized as plagiarism.
Notwithstanding, I'd like some second thoughts on this. Am I correct?<issue_comment>username_1: You cannot plagiarize facts, but you can plagiarize conclusions based on those facts. That sounds like what you are actually talking about here. The fact that Suleiman attacked a certain place on a certain date is a fact. But when someone gives a reason for it, that is a conclusion, not a fact. It may even be that his reputation for being chivalrous is an opinion (conclusion) or an inference based on certain facts, but it is not, in itself a fact.
You will probably need to think a bit more about this distinction before you proceed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You cannot plagiarise an objective fact of a conclusion based on evidence. However, it would be plagiarism to present the argument leading to that conclusion based on the evidence as your own. You can still present a novel argument or interpretation of the data, even if it leads to the same conclusions. It would be worth acknowledging prior arguments and pointing out the differences with your own reasoning. You should work to avoid it being misunderstood as presenting an existing theory as your own, especially if you’re presenting a novel theory based on the same data or sources (rather than supporting the theory with new data).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: To answer this question, one need look no further than the dictionary, which defines “plagiarism” as
>
> the practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own
>
>
>
What you are describing absolutely fits this definition. You read ideas that were published by another researcher some years ago, tying together some historical facts and drawing conclusions from them about Sultan Suleiman. Now you want to republish those exact same ideas in your own name (with immaterial differences in which sources you rely on to justify the exact same claims), without citing the source or even the fact that you read these ideas in an unnamed source you are now unable to locate.
Sure sounds like “passing off someone else’s ideas as your own” to me. So yes, of course it would be plagiarism. All those rationalizations about “not the author’s own voice”, “objective conclusions” and so forth, are just that - rationalizations. If you want to publish a paper, find something original to say, and don’t mislead your readers about the provenance of your ideas.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Can you plagiarize a fact- or evidence-based, objective conclusion/claim?
>
>
>
Yes, of course! If not, then I could copy every scientific result or mathematical theorem I ever read and publish them as my own.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I used to work for a copyright attorney. My understanding is that you can't copyright a simple idea a person might come up with independently. For example, you can't copyright the story idea that <NAME> only pretended to be shot. However, if your story goes on to include other concepts, like "and after that, <NAME> then lived the rest of his life pretending to be a freed black slave," then they've probably got you for copyright infringement. One can only copyright the unique expression of an idea.
As for ownership of historical facts, no such thing. You just can't copy how an author expresses what they know, nor can you steal their exact research work and claim it as your own (i.e. using someone else's conclusion and then citing their list of sources).
Still, the author must prove in court that you had access to their specific work, that you actually read their work, and that you probably didn't get the idea from somewhere else (such as general reading of sources over your life). In deciding court cases, one generally presents a preponderance of the evidence to win. There should be a high bar, otherwise society can't share and use knowledge.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/12/12
| 1,613
| 7,115
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is in the field of life sciences, *i.e.* a field in which the order of authors is not determined randomly but reflects author contributions (whatever that means); in other words, being first author is better than being second, which is better than third etc - except for the very last authors, who are generally the lab heads.
We're publishing a paper and two teammates have a disagreement on the order in which their names should be listed. We basically explored several strategies that were at the time all quite reasonable, so there was really no way to determine if one made more sense than another. We found that testing strategies one by one rigorously (one person per hypothesis to validate/debunk) was the most productive way to move forward. Our paper describes several mechanisms that we demonstrated could work for a certain problem.
Team member A tested several hypotheses, including one of the four that made it to the final paper.
Team member B tested more hypotheses (they were working on the project full-time, as opposed to A), and demonstrated that they were not scalable / valid strategies for our purposes. Interesting, useful for us, but not paper-worthy.
Each one of them has a pretty strong claim for having a better authorship position:
Teammate A designed and 100% tested one of the strategies that did work and that we chose to report in the paper, so their contribution is quite obvious. On the other hand teammate B spent more time on the project, debunked working hypotheses (not publishable but it had to be done at some point) and helped with the validation of other designs that worked - a contribution of 40-50% of the work on two different parts of the project.
Obviously results include a part of chance (picking the correct hypothesis/molecule/group/dataset), but time spent on the project is not a perfect metric either (working smart matters more than working long hours).
Without asking for a definite answer, how do you generally weight the importance of "what the paper shows in the end" vs. "the important but not article-worthy preliminary work"? In other words, how do you measure "contribution"? I would like to come up with a rational and objective way to determine who contributed more significantly - at least by the journal's standards.<issue_comment>username_1: In my field, this would clearly be shared (first) authorship.
As for the exact positions, in my experience one of A and B would also have been spending a lot of time as a de facto project lead that determines the course of the project and does most of the writing. In fact, in my field this would almost always be B, unless A somehow has the capabilities of effectively leading multiple projects and delegating vast proportions of the work in those projects.
I don't place a lot of value on happening to find the right solution for a problem. The way you describe this, it seems almost stochastic: A proposed four solutions and got lucky, B proposed more solutions but didn't get lucky. Obviously the situation and value of contributions changes if B could not have found the solution, but A (possibly because of greater experience) could have.
Two other considerations: first, exact position on a paper can have very different values for different people. A first first authorship can be absolutely vital for scientists who are rounding off their PhD or postdoc, whereas scientists who aren't rounding off could also obtain this in a next project. Second, maybe there are ways to even out the author contributions? One way would be to do another project together and flip author positions for that one. Another way would be that the person who doesn't get author precedence can present the work at conferences for the first year. And maybe there are better ideas that someone in your lab can come up with.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Weighting contributions in a fair way can be all but impossible. As you noticed, contribution is a vector with many dimensions (time, effort, results, novelty, and whatnot). All attempts on sorting complex contributions on a single dimension axis will need agreement
* not only about the respective **extent** (which is difficult to measure),
* but also about the **weighting** of the elements (which needs mutual consent, as there is no "correct" answer).
If the authors disagree about ordering of their names, they are obviously assuming different matrices for projecting the contribution vectors to a one-dimensional value (or are greedy).
To resolve conflicts like these, you can always mention the authors in *alphabetical order* - maybe including the dept. chair (and add a tiny notice to the paper in order to show you did that).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You have answered your own question: 'working smart matters more than working long hours.' In your example you state one person 'made a contribution of 40-50% of the work on two different parts of the project', presumably less than the other person. This is telling.
The only metric that is accepted is the contribution to published work. This is supported by the fact that we never include all the contributions by people which made a publication possible; if so then your authorship would be several billion names long [reference every paper written since the mid-20th century].
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: If we took a generic view of research, it could be argued that both positive and negative results can be worthy of the top billing. However, each paper usually has a single focus. **Whoever's work is most closely associated with that focus would be the lead author**; everyone else provides substantiating or supporting material.
From that perspective, Person A sounds like the lead author and Person B is a supporting author - although perhaps worthy of special mention in the acknowledgements, subject to faculty policies on acknowledging authors in papers they authored. It might seem unfair to the work B put in, but if B's contribution is "not publishable" as you put it, it would seem odd to publish the work with B as lead author.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I think the explorations that failed can be as valuable as the one that succeeded, *and should be reported along with the success*.
See [What to do when you spend several months working on an idea that fails in a masters thesis?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/30995/what-to-do-when-you-spend-several-months-working-on-an-idea-that-fails-in-a-mast/31082#31082)
This argues for B as lead author. which, along with the fact that they worked harder/longer might settle the question.
(I am fortunate that in mathematics the convention is alphabetical order.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Who actually wrote more of the paper? If there's a measurable difference in terms of who put how much down on the page, then the person who wrote more gets authorship priority. Nothing gets published until the paper is written, so this can be a good and equitable tie-breaker in this kind of scenario.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/12
| 463
| 1,958
|
<issue_start>username_0: The number of journal on the topics tends to be quite high and most researchers of the field have yet to take on the habit of sharing their preprints on archive repositories (ArXiv or others).
Do you have any recommendation as to the best way to set up an efficient watch on what comes out ?<issue_comment>username_1: * [Google Scholar](https://scholar.google.com)'s Follow feature, which sends you an email when you (or a given researcher) publish, receive a citation, or work related to yours (or the given researcher) is published;
* [Google Scholar Alerts](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_alerts?view_op=list_alerts), which sends you an email when Google Scholar discovers new results for a given search term;
* [Google Alerts](https://www.google.com/alerts), which sends you an email when Google Search
discovers new results for a given search term.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are different ways of keeping up to date that come to my mind:
* Using your favourite article indexing database listing articles in your field (e.g. [Scopus for life/biological sciences](https://www.scopus.com) or [Web of Science](https://images.webofknowledge.com/images/help/WOS/hp_my_citation_alerts.html)). Most databases allow you to set up 'Search Alerts', when results of a certain search string change. This can be done either via E-mail or RSS feed. Usually you can customize how often you get notified about such changes (daily/weekly summaries)
* Some citation management programs automatically notify you of recommended and related articles depending on your own collection of articles. For me, this often not only includes the newest research but also older classics and other highly related articles that might not necessarily be very recent.
* Thirdly, you can follow your peers on twitter and be notified of their most recent works that way. With the advantage of being able to start off discussions.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/12
| 1,255
| 5,054
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in mathematics, currently working on an article (article A) from two leading researchers in my field published in an 0.72 Impact journal.
I have an idea to generalize their results and publish my first article (paper B) but I have two problems:
**In one of the proofs in paper A, the authors made a passage "crucial" which is not quite correct, according to several discussions with my supervisor .**
What should I do with this situation? should I try to find another proof for the theorem and write it in a paper?
**In paper B, I will use theorems similar to those of Article A, but weakening the assumptions assumed in A.**
Do you think there is any chance that this can be considered plagiarism?
---
Any other advice about what to do in this situation is welcome, and I would especially appreciate answers from mathematicians, as I have the impression that standard practices differ significantly from field to field.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> What should I do [when a published result contains a mistake]? should I try to find another proof for the theorem and write it in a paper?
>
>
>
You cannot use their result as-is, because it is incorrect. If their result is sufficiently interesting, then you could perhaps publish a paper that corrects their result, otherwise, you could include a correction in your paper before using the corrected result.
>
> In the paper B, I will use theorems similar to those of Article A, but by weakening the assumptions assumed in A. Do you think there is any chance that this can be considered plagiarism?
>
>
>
No.
You should make it clear that the theorems introduced in Article A are incorrect, and you should clearly motivate the introduction of your similar theorems that correct the originals.
This isn't plagiarism.
---
The [OP clarified](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121525/generalization-of-results-obtained-from-a-paper-that-may-be-false/121529?noredirect=1#comment322083_121529) their plagiarism concerns as follows:
>
> my proofs will be similar to those used in paper A, except that I weakened the hypotheses.
>
>
>
Before stating your proof, you could explain "The following proof builds upon a proof by Original Authors [Theorem X, Paper A]," you could go further and explain "novel aspects appear in the first, third and fourth paragraphs" or "novel aspects will be highlighted in the proof" (with suitable highlighting in the proof, e.g., "this aspect is new," possibly parenthesised).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I agree with the other answer that plagiarism isn't a concern, but I don't necessarily agree with "You should make it clear that the theorems introduced in Article A are incorrect." This could actually do bad things for your career if you don't tread carefully. I'm not saying you should hide the truth because of politics, but there's likely a middle ground here.
First, it's not clear from your question how bad the mistake is. You say:
>
> they made a passage "crucial" which is not quite correct
>
>
>
I find this statement hard to parse, and would appreciate clarification. As you know, pretty much every published article has mistakes, even if they're just typos. And a mistake has to be much worse than a typo before the math community considers it a big deal. In my observation, any mistake that can be fixed with standard techniques is not considered serious. (In the sense that the authors will still get credit for proving the theorem, even if the mistake regrettably gets past peer review.) Admittedly, "standard techniques" is a blurry line, but you need to think about which side of it you're on, because the right course of action depends heavily on this.
If their proof is relatively easy to fix, then the theorem will be considered theirs, not yours, and you should sell your new paper accordingly in the introduction, i.e. focus on what's really new in it. Then give your own proof of their theorem (or whatever special case you need) "for completeness" with the mistake fixed. If you can also simplify the proof or its presentation, that will make editors and referees feel good about including it in your paper. At the point of the mistake, make a small remark like "we are not able to verify this step of the proof in [citation], so we have provided our own argument."
If the mistake is somewhere in the middle, I would err on the side of not treating it as a big deal, and do more or less as in the previous paragraph.
If the mistake is really crucial, your first step should be to contact the authors via email and ask about it. Preferably, you and your advisor would send a joint email. If they agree with your objection, give them your ideas for fixing the mistake, and offer/ask to work with them. If they don't agree, then you are in a difficult situation, and it's hard to give general advice. It would depend on how important the theorem is, how much work you've done on it already, who the people are, etc.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/12
| 324
| 1,492
|
<issue_start>username_0: In some cases a specific journal is one of the most important and relevant places for a research topic. So, is this normal and acceptable (for a pre-Ph.D. researcher) to have several papers published in that journal? I once heard from a professor that it may affect the CV in a destructive way.
If I have several papers published in the same journal, will people think that my papers were published not because they were good, but because I was somehow able to bypass the peer review process?<issue_comment>username_1: It would depend on the journal, of course. There should be no negative effect if it is a high quality, respected journal such as one associated with a professional society. A predatory journal would be a different matter of course. But the several papers in the same high quality journal have been reviewed by a fairly large number of independent reviewers.
Whether the editors would continue to accept papers from the same person is up to them, of course.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think anyone would conclude that something fishy must be going on, just from the fact that you published multiple times in the same journal -- if it has peer-review.
However, since you mention the impact on the CV, where you decide to publish signals where your expertise lies. Among different journals with similar prestige, you may want to decide based on which audiences you want to address and where you see your specialty.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/12
| 548
| 2,455
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to do research by myself and with my friends, but I don't want to apply for a degree. What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing research without studying for a degree?<issue_comment>username_1: Your question is a bit underspecified, but if I understand it correctly, perhaps the following will help.
Research is about learning what is true about some aspect of the world or the mind. Carrying out research is good mental training and gives you the basis both for future study and for a profession. So, it is worth doing, just for that, without regard to any results. Doing it in a group, as you suggest, is also good as you can help teach each other as you go.
On the other hand, carrying out research without professional guidance, as a beginner, can lead you to waste your time, both in understanding what is important to study and what is already known. One reason for beginning a research career as a student of a degree program is that your advisor can keep you from falling into such traps. The advisor can, most likely, point you to resources that would be difficult for you to find on your own. There are specific techniques used in research in specific fields that you may also not be aware of without access to an experienced guide.
It is also, arguably, easier to publish if you are associated with a known institution. This isn't a requirement, actually, but it has some effect.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **The main advantage is that you will not be subject to publication pressures**. Graduate students and other 'professional' researchers must "publish or perish". If you're doing research as a past-time, then you won't have these pressures. Of course, if you're the kind of person that is motivated by pressure, then this might be a disadvantage.
**The main disadvantage is that you will not receive a degree**. This may not be an issue for you personally, but not having a terminal degree (Ph.D.), will disqualify you from applying for certain kinds of government and/or foundation grants that can support your research.
**My suggestion:** If you are interested in research without becoming a graduate student, I strongly suggest that you take a research affiliation with a local university. Research affiliations cost the institution nothing, but will give you access to the large network of other people that are (hopefully) also interested in your research area.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/12
| 3,837
| 15,255
|
<issue_start>username_0: My supervisor and all his other doctoral students are practicing religious, while I am not, I am "non-religious".
We never discuss religion together, but sometimes they all leave to pray together, and leave me alone, which makes me uncomfortable.
Surely, if they knew I'm "non-religious," it would annoy them.
---
How do I react to a situation in which they all go to pray except me?
Do you think I have to open this debate with them, and close it once and for all?
Should I pretend to be like them, pray with them?
EDIT: I am in a predominantly Muslim country, MENA (Middle East and North Africa), and not being Muslim is not very welcomed in general. For example, eating during the month of [Ramadan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramadan) is not legal, and can be a source of physical or mental violence in the street. So even if my supervisor is kind enough as well as his other doctoral students, they will be disappointed if they know my situation.<issue_comment>username_1: ~*Note: I am an American, and while I studied at a largely international college with large populations of all major religions, my answer may not accurately reflect cultural expectations in other countries.*~
First of all, I do not think that you should pretend to be religious if you are not. It sounds like it would be quite uncomfortable for you, and could lead to many negative feelings if they found out that you had been lying.
Instead, it sounds like you should have a conversation with your professor. It is not reasonable to ask him or other students to refrain from praying. However, it seems like your biggest concern is that it feels awkward and you do not want them to judge you for being non-religious. The easiest way to deal with this is to tell your professor about your concerns and ask honestly if he is bothered by it.
Tell him that you have noticed that he and the other students go pray together and that you have felt uncomfortable by being the only one who does not because you worry that he could be annoyed or feel disrespected by your lack of participation. He will likely say that it does not bother him that you are not religious, although he may be curious as to why you are not if that is the norm.
At the end of the day, if he is uncomfortable having a non-religious student, he may not be a good fit for you. Knowing that will allow you to decide what to do next. It may be possible to change advisors or it may not, but you won't lose anything by having a polite and honest conversation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are situations in which you need to be sensitive to others and they should extend the same courtesy to you. However, there are some places in which religious feeling is so strong as to overcome such sentiment. It can be dangerous in many ways (academic, physical,...) to disagree with religious "consensus" in such places. There are some colleges in the US, in fact, in which this is a problem.
However, to "fake" being a member of a religion is equally dangerous, so you need to be careful. I don't know what people's assumptions about you are. But if they are aware that you aren't a member/adherent of the dominant faith you are probably best advised not to participate. If they are not aware and are making assumptions that you are just an apostate then it can be very dangerous.
If your professor has an open enough attitude you can speak with him/her for advice. But the first rule is to be safe. If you are in a place in which you are required to be a "believer" and you are not, you should work to find a more compatible place. Religious sentiment is often other-than-rational.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> how do I react to a situation in which they all go to pray except me?
> Do you think I have to open this debate with them, and close it once
> and for all? Should I to pretend to be like them, pray with them?
>
>
>
It is up to you. If you feel encouraged to accompany them, then you can tell them to inform you, and tell them that you want to accompany them. Otherwise you should not go even if they invite you, you should tell them not to invite you as you do not prefer to.
Religion is something personal. Even in Muslim countries, no one can force you to pray.
In my opinion you should not open debate about this unless if you are interested about knowing more about what they are doing.
Your supervisor has certain rules and regulations to evaluate you. None of them can be praying. Even in the most religious countries. So you should not worry.
And no, you should not pretend to be like them and pray like them. If you do this, you are wasting your time. Your prayers should have meaning to you, and should make you feel better. If this is not the case, no one need it from you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I am in the U.S., obviously a very different culture.
The way I think things OUGHT to work is this: If these people you work with have different religious beliefs than you and so periodically go off and pray or do whatever related to their religion, they should not pressure you to participate or penalize you in any way for not participating, and likewise you should not pressure them to not do this. They have the right to practice their religion, and you have the right to practice yours or not practice any.
I don't see why this should be any different than any other difference of interests. Suppose I worked with a group of people who, say, all loved to eat Italian food, and I don't like Italian food, and periodically they all go to lunch together at an Italian restaurant. It would be rude for them to pressure me to eat Italian food just because they like it. But it would be even more rude for me to say they shouldn't eat Italian food because I don't like it, or to complain that I am left out because I don't share their taste in food.
I think you should just accept that you don't share this particular interest with your co-workers and that this inevitably means that you will not share certain activities with them. I'd say, so what?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I also spent a few years in a MENA country in an academic environment. As you say, eating food/drinking water in public during Ramadan was illegal, as were certain standards of dress, however my experience over the years was that this did not in any way mean that the individuals I lived and worked with (including those who were practicing Muslims) were by default unaccepting of my non-religiousness. I am curious why you say
>
> Surely, if they know I'm "non religious" it will annoy them.
>
>
>
and
>
> So even if my supervisor is kind enough as well as his other doctoral student, but they will be disappointed if he know my situation.
>
>
>
Perhaps you have more reason for believing these than you have included in your question, however, in my personal experience, none of my Muslim friends/co-workers ever expected me to conform to their religion. I certainly never pretended to be Muslim, and like other answers, suggest that you do not do this as this is likely to make the situation more awkward ('I converted to fit in' is probably not the best answer to give to an observant member of any religion).
My advice is that perhaps this does not need to a bigger issue than any other lifestyle difference that you might have with your co-workers, and not to read too deeply into it (as in assuming they have some kind of expectation of you), unless they give you reason for it. Government polices do not necessarily reflect individual expectations. By all means, if you feel unhealthy pressure or feel unsafe, don't stay. Otherwise, similar situations where there is a difference in lifestyle/culture between members of the group occur all the time.
Perhaps another group you join might go out regularly for coffee/alcohol when you are unable to join for dietary/religious reasons, or in another group everyone else has kids, so leaves early, or do play-dates on the weekend. But in such situations, the activity you have to miss out on is surely not the only way to build rapport/respect within your group and strengthen your relationship with your supervisor. So if there is no actual pressure for you to have the same religious beliefs, try to decide if you're bothered by their religious belief. If not, then focus your energy on finding some other topic/hobby that you have in common. If both you and they are respectful of differences, there may be no debate to 'open'.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: I grew up in a Muslim-majority country. Do's and don'ts:
* **Do** show respect for the religion. That means avoid doing things like comment on how inconvenient it must be to pray five times a day, don't offer non-halal food, don't invite people to lunch during Ramadan, etc.
* **Do** do as they do, if possible and not inconvenient. For example if you take lunch together, order/pack something halal. Unless you have special dietary requirements that require you to eat pork, don't eat pork when with others.
* **Do** dress conservatively. If your institution has a dress code, follow that. If you're female, you can usually refuse to wear the hijab if it makes you uncomfortable (depends on country however), but still dress conservatively - e.g. don't wear something sleeveless, and wear hemlines that go below the knee (this rules out wearing shorts in public).
* **Don't** pretend to be Muslim. You can't fake it. Learning [how to pray](https://raleighmasjid.org/how-to-pray/salah.htm) in the religion takes time; the chant is nontrivial as well.
* **Don't** pretend to be Muslim #2: just as important, once you identify as Muslim you could be bound to obey [a different set of laws](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia). Sharia criminalizes things which are fine in contemporary Western culture, such as homosexuality. If you're homosexual but identify as Muslim, you could bring the religious police on your head.
* **Don't** pretend to be Muslim #3: in some countries, if people believe you are Muslim, it can cause you a lot of inconvenience. It doesn't take much to become associated with the religion ([extreme historical example](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sol_Hachuel), [less extreme modern example](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wong_Ah_Kiu)), and once you become associated, it can be really hard to [leave the religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam). Potential problems you could face go up to [death](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Apostasy_laws_world_map.svg). In the meantime it's not just you that's affected: in many countries, there are restrictions on Muslim persons marrying a non-Muslim; plus any child born to a Muslim is automatically a Muslim.
**Exception**: if you were originally a Muslim but no longer believe in the religion, you don't have good options. The above advice will still bring the religious police onto you, because you're now an apostate. You would either have to pretend to be Muslim (at least you should know how to pray) or leave the country and work elsewhere.
tl; dr: Leave religious people to practice their religion and don't criticize them for it. They should do the same to you.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_7: It depends on which country you are talking about in the middle east. I'm from Iran and I would say not participating in religious practices is really common among young people and if somebody attends those religious practices will be mocked heavily. For the rest of my answer, I assume you are living somewhere maybe in the Arabic countries of the middle east. Also, my answer is not really depends on your relationship with the ones that have strict religious beliefs (it means you can replace your supervisor or his students with anybody else like your friends, family, etc.). Also, I assume you are a Muslim by birth (it means you are Muslim cause your mother and father are Muslims) and then you changed your mind based on your personal thoughts.
You mentioned that all of them will pray at the pray time but you don't join them, and some people here suggested that it may implicitly implies that you are not a believer and if they didn't tell you something until now, it's quite OK in their opinion. Unfortunately: **It's not true!**. It means at the best they just think you may have a good religious reason (e.g. had sex last night and didn't wash your body) and because of that good religious reason you can't join them. Or, for whatever reason you prefer to pray privately.
The main key point is: **Did ever your supervisor or his students tell you why you don't participate in their religious practices?**
It is a really serious problem if you are Muslim by birth and when you grew up you changed your mind to not to be a religious person. In fact, in Islam beliefs, it's not like you can change your mind after sometime and they welcome you and wish you good luck with your personal thoughts and ideas! It could cost you your life (seriously!). But as far as I know, their rule is that if somebody don't believe in Islam or for whatever reason changed his/her mind to not follow Islam's rules, you would be safe as long as you don't express your ideas in any way to the public and your society. This means if your supervisor or his students asked you about why you don't participate in their religious practices? You need to have a really unimportant or common reason for it and not saying I don't believe in your beliefs! I mean you should say I'm a practitioner certainly but for some reason like being sick at the moment, I could not attend those practices with you. Otherwise, if you want to express your true beliefs that you don't believe in Islam, it will lead to a lengthy discussion with them about why you don't do it and they will try to convince you and if you don't accept their ideas it makes the problem bigger and bigger. *So, for every time just bring a fake reason and move on, or better idea is: to not to be there when they are practicing their religion.* Also, username_2 suggested you to change your location. Honestly, it is not really easy to relocate to somewhere else when you are from middle east and it may be your long-term goal rather than a short-time answer to your question and your situation that you are trying to deal with it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: They already know you are not an observant Muslim. If they thought you were one, they would have invited you to go with them. If you actually were one, you would have asked where to go for prayers at the first prayer time on your first day there.
They seem to have accepted you do not pray at the Muslim prayer times, and have no problem leaving you without putting any pressure on you to join them, which is what you would be trying to get in any conversation about the matter. On the other hand, they feel a deep obligation to pray at certain times, and I assume you do not want to try to stop that.
This seems like an "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." situation. You already have everything you could possibly gain from a conversation about the matter. On the other hand, discussing religion at work is always high risk.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/12/12
| 1,819
| 6,774
|
<issue_start>username_0: Edit: Right so I forgot this really big thing. My question is actually under this framework: [Why are US PhDs different from European PhDs?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43313/why-are-us-phds-different-from-european-phds)
1. After the basics of topology, linear algebra, abstract algebra, elementary analysis and complex analysis, what are essential topics for the average pure math US PhD program?
2. **If there are none**, then how do you know? **If there are**, what are they?
* Guess if there are: They are the **basics** of the following topics:
+ Algebraic topology, such as Part II of Munkres Topology
+ Algebraic geometry and commutative algebra, such as the rest of the second half of Artin Algebra
+ More group theory, such as the rest of the first half of Artin Algebra
+ The algebra topics in Dummit Foote Abstract Algebra that are not in Artin Algebra
+ Elementary differential geometry, such as Tu Manifolds
* Guess as to what isn't included:
+ basics of complex geometry
---
**My context: (Feel free to just ignore this bottom part if it makes my post too long.)**
1. I was recently rejected for a pure math PhD program in [Country A](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/75677/7), where I live, for not having a strong enough background in "essential topics".
* 1a. The professor said I was not ready for a PhD or even an MPhil in pure math. I asked if he meant for [Country A](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/75677/7) (I was very careful to not use the words "only" or "just"). He claimed that it was for all "reasonable" universities.
* 1b. He claimed that the average first year Country A PhD student (before starting the programme) in topology or geometry would know the basics of algebraic topology, complex geometry, Riemannian geometry and more algebra than the elementary abstract algebra. Some of the specific concepts are Gauss-Bonnet, branched coverings, Kähler manifolds, Poincaré duality, Euler characteristic, etc. Also, there's stuff about Riemann surfaces required (eg Mittag-Leffler and Riemann-Roch. I'm guessing also Abel-Jacobi, Riemann-Hurwitz, Poincare-Hopf and the list of 2-name concepts goes on.)
2. I am wondering whether my background is more similar to an applicant to a US-style grad school than to a European-style grad school.
* 2a. Consider [Johns Hopkins University](https://mathematics.jhu.edu/graduate/admissions/). Its maths phd requirements are the same as the "straight phd" programs in the top 3 universities in [Country B](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/75677/7), where I'm from and where I got my bachelor's and master's degrees in (unfortunately applied) math. (These 3 universities have "regular phd" which require master's or equivalent and "straight phd" which require only bachelor's or equivalent.) Both JHU and top 3 universities in [Country B](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/75677/7) are actually even less than what I put as my 'guess' above.
* 2b. But anyway going back to JHU, it even says 'Nevertheless, the department does admit very promising students whose preparation falls a little short of the above model.' In other words, JHU isn't even as strict about these elementary requirements, but this [Country A](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/75677/7) university is extremely strict about these highly advanced requirements.
* 2c. I just find it very hard to believe that my rejection from this Country A university isn't related to these [US vs European questions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43313/why-are-us-phds-different-from-european-phds) that I've asked before. I would like to think that my rejection is that European universities simply require more. I don't quite have a chance there without further studies, but I do have a chance in the US. (And worst comes to worst, there's always [Country B](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/75677/7).)
3. You can see the previous revisions for more details.
---
Gonna copy some comments into the post:
1. >
> If you're fact-checking this professor, what he said is kind of stupid. If you're trying to assess your preparation for whatever an "average" program is, you need to check with them. – <NAME> Dec 17 '18 at 16:41
>
>
>
* (I think this comment is about the "reasonable" thing.)
2. >
> I honestly don't understand what you're after here. All programs will say they want an undergraduate major in math or a related field. (...) A mid-ranked school will probably expect basic abstract algebra and calculus with proofs. (...) – <NAME> Dec 19 '18 at 16:57
>
>
>
3. >
> (...) It is very likely true that more than half require no more than the GRE topics, if that is useful information. – <NAME> Dec 20 '18 at 4:52
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: If you want to know why ETS does something, ask them. The test needs to be broad enough so that most UG curricula are well covered, but not much broader than that. It tries not to disadvantage anyone in its coverage, though most students will find questions there that are about things they haven't studied. And you can still do extremely well even leaving some questions unanswered.
On the other hand, anything that you study will give you some additional mathematical background before you start to dive deep into a research area. You probably don't have time for all of them, so just choose something that seems interesting. If you already have a research interest, you could start there.
I'll note that the last time that it was possible for a single person to know *all* of mathematics was early in the 20th century. It has expanded too much since for it to still be possible as it once was.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: These questions are essentially unanswerable, because universities in the US are quite diverse in their expectations.
The average person earning a PhD from the department I work at knows less mathematics (and is certainly less capable of doing research) than the average first year graduate student at Princeton.
The average person earning a BA/BS with a major from the department I work at knows less mathematics than the average junior major where I was an undergraduate.
The average person entering my university as an undergraduate knows less mathematics than I did when I was 14 (and starting high school).
Of course these are averages and there are exceptions.
Do you want the answers for my university, or for, say, the University of Minnesota, or for Princeton?
(And, as for the ETS, they mostly are catering to be accurate for the middle of the normal distribution, which means universities like mine, because that's where the people are.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/12
| 1,237
| 5,348
|
<issue_start>username_0: Assume a university allows students to audit classes informally, so they're not enrolled and don't pay, but they attend classes anyway. Obviously, no one has obligation to allow these students to attend anything and therefore doesn't even have the obligation to check their exams and such.
In case this is relevant, my intention is for math classes.
(12 hours ago, I was rejected for a math PhD program, and the professor told me I could audit. I told the professor that 6 months ago I asked the math department if I could, but it said no. The professor told me "Don't ask; just go!" The professor suggested I audit some classes and try to do some of the classwork. I didn't think of many questions about this, but I think I won't go since the commute is 4 hours by train or 70 us dollars by taxi, and I can ask all my questions on stackexchange anyway. Thank God for the Internet)
I don't think students really learn from just attending the classes even if they ask questions in class. Exams of course are great ways to learn, but what I had in mind is asking further questions either during the professor's consultation hours or in further auditing the teaching assistant's tutorial classes.
It sounds like the questions of auditing students in class, tutorial or consultations is taking up time that could instead be used for the registered students, but I think anyone who speaks up is making a contribution by asking something anyone could wonder. Therefore, the professor or teaching assistant could clarify to the rest of the class before anyone else would ask, which actually saves time.
(I don't want to first ask the professor because it might be disrespectful if the answer is a definite no anywhere in the world. If the answer here is maybe/yes/double check with the university/go ahead and ask the professor/"Don't go; just ask", then I will be inclined to ask the professor)<issue_comment>username_1: The easiest answer to this would be to simply *ask* the lecturer. A simple "Hi, I'm auditing this class, is it ok if I drop by your office to ask a few questions during office hours, if you have time?" would probably suffice. If the lecturer doesn't mind, then you're good to go.
I would probably not agree to auditing students attending office hours/tutorials, especially in large classes. Generally speaking, auditing classes is fine, as long as you do not put additional strain on the lecturer/course apparatus. If I start accepting office hours from one auditing student, I'll have to do so from all of them. If my guest students start attending tutorials and take up other students' time from actual registered students, I would probably intervene.
This is me, and other lecturers can have different attitudes towards their auditing students. The best thing to do is to ask.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Since it hasn't yet been mentioned in an official answer, let me note here that, in the US, at least, *auditing* is a formal relationship between a student and the university. You need to pay for the privilege of sitting in on a course as if you were a regular student. You get a line in your transcript marking the course as audited and receive no grade. Whether you are allowed to take exams (for no grade) or not depends on things, perhaps just on the professors willingness to grade them. If the course is a large lecture, with break-out sections, you are probably permitted to attend these as well and ask questions as any other student would. Among other things, formal registration allows the professor to get an official list of who should be present in the classroom.
Actually, a professor could get in some trouble for letting you *sit in* with no registration of any kind. Not only are you taking up resources that others are paying for, there are liability issues. If you are hurt in some way, or have a grievance, or if you harm another student when the university doesn't know about your presence, the situation can be quite dire.
I think it is a mistake for a professor (in the US) to permit this. But if they permit it, they will probably also permit you to come to smaller sections, though you will be consuming even more time that should be devoted to others. But, I think, an individual professor permitting this without the knowledge of the university is a poor, possibly dangerous, practice.
However, the question of "taking up resources" is a delicate and subtle issue. If such a student asks a question in such a situation are they "consuming resources" or are they "contributing to the class"? Normally, my view is the latter. Questions from students contribute to the learning of everyone, provided they are properly thought out. This is true independent of the *official status* of the student.
I'll also note that in the past (maybe in the present) in at least a few graduate schools, a math student would never consider taking an advanced course unless they had (officially) audited it first - possibly more than once. In such places, such courses can be extremely rigorous, so you want a heads up (and practice on exercises) before you take the course "at risk" (i.e. for a grade). Part of that was just student paranoia and obsession over grades, but the courses were very rigorous requiring a lot of self-learning.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/12
| 889
| 3,898
|
<issue_start>username_0: My former master adviser published an article, which is derived from my master thesis, in a predatory journal without my consent. He put my name as the first and corresponding author and his name as the second author. I just found it when Researchgate sent an alarm to me that you have a new publication! Right now, I'm a PhD student in the US and he is a professor in a different country, which these kind of activities are common and there is not strong infrastructure against research misconduct like the US or Europe. I don't want to make my CV dirty by putting an article in it, which is published in a predatory journal. I sent an email to the editor and editor-in-chief of this journal in order to retract the article but I didn't receive any response after a week. I'm wondering is it possible to request a DMCA take down to Google by myself to at least remove it from Google Scholar or Google search or it needs to inform my current university and they do an action?<issue_comment>username_1: You could try having it removed. Predatory journals may not comply with your request or have anyone respond to you. This will also probably destroy your relationship with your former advisor, which you may need at some time if you need a recommendation etc. If you think your relationship is already destroyed completely, this may not matter.
If you never list this article in your CV, webpage, google scholar profile etc., and never cite it, it may not do any damage to your academic reputation. You say you're a PhD student in the US, so this is probably from your masters or undergraduate work. If you do well and publish a few good first author papers during your PhD and some good shared authorship papers, I don't think an early paper in a predatory journal you don't record yourself is going to matter a lot. People would just assume you were young and inexperienced then and you've grown as a researcher since.
I would be more concerned with the content of the matter. Does it contain any false results, embarrassingly bad language, un-cited work or plagiarism? Something like this is definitely more damaging and you should try to have this removed. Would you have been fine with the exact same paper in a good journal?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would follow up with your advisor one more time, and give them a deadline to respond otherwise you will follow up with their institution. Do you have someone at your university you could talk to- a local advisor perhaps? If you don't get a response, report him to his department and the university.
As for the journal, I've heard emailing these predatory journals and threatening to take legal recourse often works with a hard deadline. Try following up again with legal action in the subject matter. Tell them they are violating copyright law and you have been in touch with a lawyer and will be pursuing action by X date.
Also consider, there was no copyright transfer, so the paper could be published in the legitimate journal, ideally with an editorial note on the paper explaining what has happened.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I don't want to make my CV dirty by putting an article in it, which is
> published in a predatory journal
>
>
>
All you need to do is just to forget about it. You don't have to waste time on contacting your advisor or Google.
1. Nobody read predatory journals. The amount of papers in good venues are already too much.
2. Nobody will remember your name until you have a strong publication record with different sets of authors. (Otherwise people only remember the most well-known authors)
3. When you are somebody to be searched for, you probably have other publications that appear in the first search results. Researchers are busy, nobody have time for an old paper that has not been cited, in an unknown journal.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/13
| 2,348
| 10,142
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had a final exam today in my dynamics class. I took the exam with Adaptive Services because of my medically diagnosed ADHD, Anxiety, and OCD (among other things). I have been studying since Thanksgiving break and felt pretty confident going into it. I was even in the library just this morning teaching my classmates how to do things before the test.
Well, as soon as I was handed my test and opened it, I completely blanked looking at the first question. I was luckily that I had the extra time, because I started remembering things slowly, but before I knew it the 3.5 hours have already passed and I was out of time. I ended up getting 3/5 questions done (don't know if they were right), and made progress with the others so I am hoping the partial credit will be enough.
This is already my second time taking the class; I had to withdraw last Spring. I really don't want to be forced to take this class again: it is very time consuming and rigorous, it is a prerequisite for all my other classes (so if I failed I cannot move on), and, the main reason, I know the material.
Unfortunately, I really don't think it will be enough. I am devastated. I have been having a lot of trouble with my university lately, and I have strongly considered dropping out after last Spring. Failing this class will probably be my tipping point. I don't want to drop out, but I can barely afford it to begin with, failing the class could cause me to lose financial aid, and I can be far more productive doing something else than retaking a class I already have a strong understanding of.
**I am wondering whether emailing my professor might be a good idea.** I don't want to come off as defensive or making excuses. I'll be the first to admit I'm not the best test taker, I am lazy when it comes to school work, I don't get the best grades, etc. so I fear that it will look like an excuse to my professor. I just want to say something along the lines of:
>
> Dear Professor, Thank you for a good semester, I enjoyed your class but I am nervous of how the grade on my final will come back. I have been studying very hard and felt like I had a good grasp of the material going into it, but as soon as I sat down and looked at the first question I blanked. Over the course of the exam, I was able to work some stuff out but I don't know if it is enough and I'm afraid it won't be. I am not expecting any type of compensation or anything, but I wanted to bring this to your attention incase there was anything that could be done. Thank you, happy holidays.
>
>
>
Do you advise sending this mail?<issue_comment>username_1: Contact your mentor / advisor / tutor either before the results come out or after - they should be able to advise you within the parameters of the institution.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Sending an email to your professor is fine. It also sounds as if you are doing your best, understand the course well enough to at least pass, and are not making excuses or asking for undue favors. Your professor will know this as well and will be much more willing to help you out because of that.
As @DreamConspiracy points out, I'd state more clearly what you hope to achieve by sending this email to your professor. This might be something like: "Is there any way for me to retake the exam in case I get a failing grade?"
If you are worried about losing financial aid, maybe you want to also contact the financial aid office. How are your ADHD, Anxiety and OCD implemented in your aid package?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: To answer the stated question: Yes, I think it would be a good idea to email your professor, and to do it before any results are published. That will let them know that you are serious about the material as much (or more than) the grade. It wouldn't hurt to tighten the wording (as others have said) to be specific about your goal.
Something else that I think you should do would be to contact the Adaptive Services and see if your accommodations are appropriate. Maybe even ask one of the fellow students you were working with to be a "reference" to show that you knew the material. Not being a special education specialist, I can't tell you what accommodation(s) would be appropriate, but this seems to me to be a case where the accommodations in place are not allowing you to be able to showcase your abilities.
Tying this back to communicating with your instructor, are you better at verbalizing your answers? If your anxiety is more pronounced when dealing with paper, (and less so when having face-to-face time), perhaps trying to arrange a time to speak with your instructor will give you a chance to highlight that you know the material, and can communicate it, just not easily through paper. If you can chat with your instructor, and they can see that you know the material, they may be more willing to 'round' any numbers that need rounding.
In other words, the instructor may be able to justify to themselves that your performance on the written test was not a good display of your knowledge, which enables them to justify giving you a better grade than the test score would indicate. I don't know the details of how scores turn into grades for this class, but, if a curve is used, many instructors are willing to give a bit of 'forgiveness', if they have a good relationship with the student, and the student can otherwise show their mastery of the material.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Although there is nothing wrong with contacting your professor, there are a few preliminary things you should bear in mind before sending this email:
* Unless there are alternative assessments still outstanding, once final exams are complete, it is usually the case that the only thing left for your professor to do is to mark them objectively, take account of any formal applications for special consideration, and give you your grade. If you are not applying for special consideration it is unlikely that there is anything for the professor to do other than mark your exam and give you the resulting grade.
* If you are seeking additional opportunities to redeem your bad exam performance, you should say so explicitly. It would be useful to first **consult the course outline**, and see if there is any basis in there for the professor to give additional assessment. If the assessment structure of the course is fixed, it is unlikely that you will be given any additional opportunity for assessment (unless you repeat the course, which would let you re-take all the assessment again).
* Failure of a course may be a big deal to a student, but it is a completely mundane and unremarkable event for the university and its teaching staff. Universities deal with student failure all the time, and they have procedures in place to deal with students who fail one or more of their courses. If this occurs in your case, it is likely that the university will just follow their normal procedures (e.g., requiring you to repeat the course, etc.). In terms of wanting to know "anything that could be done" it is likely that what will be done is just to mark your test as normal, give you whatever grade you earned, and then apply the normal procedures in the event of failure.
* You do not need to explain or apologise for a bad result on an academic assessment. Professors see lots of student assessments, ranging from excellent results to dismal failure. Professors are aware that students vary in their command of the course material and their general ability in examinations. They also know that there are lots of reasons for a bad exam performance, so they will not automatically attribute this to an absence of effort.
* Lastly, I note that some other commentators are suggesting that if you play your cards right, your email might make your professor "willing to help you out". I would hope that your professor would not show you any favouritism, and would apply the assessment requirements of the course equally to all students. Since you are not making a formal application for special consideration, and you have not identified any basis for an additional opportunity for assessment, there is a possibility that your email might be interpreted as seeking favouritism (despite your denial of this).
These are some things you should bear in mind, and you may wish to adjust your proposed email accordingly. As I said, there is nothing wrong with contacting your professor in this case, but just be aware that your fate may already have been sealed.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: **I disagree with the other answers. I would not send this mail (or any version of it).**
To rephrase your request in a deliberately harsh light, it is effectively this:
>
> I know I probably failed the class, but could you pass me anyway?
>
>
>
Of course the professor will say no. And they should. Tests may be an imperfect measure of knowledge, but that's what is used. It would be highly unfair of this professor to sneak you extra points or to give you a re-do that no one else had.
Further, I do not think your medical conditions play any role in this. If the accommodations that you obtained were insufficient, you should have changed them before the exam. (Consider trying to do this before your next exam!).
**On the other hand, I realize there is a good counterargument: what do you have to lose?** Maybe you'll get lucky and he'll be willing to push you over the top. Only you can decide if you're willing to do this despite the above points: personally, I find it so distasteful that I would not. If you decide to do it, consider talking to him in person rather than sending a mail.
**Either way, open and direct communication with the professor throughout the course is a good idea.** Even if he fails you, it might be worth asking for a meeting to get advice about:
* whether he recommends that you retake the class (versus changing majors or dropping out)
* what to do differently if you do retake the class
* whether there is any way he can approve you taking more advanced classes despite your low grade in this class
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/13
| 3,045
| 13,174
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergrad in the US taking an upper-level biology course with ~30 students. My professor has been grading some assignments in what I, and other students in the class, realize is quite unfair. For example, we had to post to a discussion online and respond to our classmates' posts. When it was graded, I received a 17 out of 20 total points. Upon looking at the rubric, there was a section for "initiative" - if you were one of the first 10 students to submit the assignment, you received the full points. I submitted my assignment pretty close to the due date, but it was turned in completely on time! I know professors reserve the right to grade how they see is best, but come on... If the assignment is turned in on time, how can the professor be allowed to take points off for not doing it early? This was not stated in the syllabus, and the rubric was provided only after grading was done.
Does this seem like a fair and legitimate way to grade students? Should I look into reporting this to someone higher up at the university? (Who?) I did already provide a course evaluation that raised these concerns.
Some other examples that I believe are not fair to students:
* She often says that she grades off the "best" student's work. Like for written assignments, she would say that she had to look at all of them, decide whoever's assignment was best, and then grade everyone based on that student's work. This makes everything a huge competition which is very frustrating.
* We had a poster project where other students and some professors were invited to come in and see them. She had observers put stickers on their "favorite" poster and those who received the most stickers received extra credit. However, many just put their stickers on the ones closest to the door.<issue_comment>username_1: Why not ask your professor what she is trying to achieve with this grading before escalating? There is a clear discrepancy between how you expect to be graded (by common standards) and how your professor is actually doing that.
I understand your frustration, but I would like to add some nuances:
1. She is rewarding early submissions. She may be doing this to try to teach all of you better time management. It is debatable whether this is the best way of doing that. Given such a system I'd be a bit worried that a not-very-early submission could cause a failing grade.
2. She is grading off a standard as set by excellent students. In the US, it's very common to grade on a curve which inherently contains a comparison with fellow students. However, the details are typically different.
3. She is rewarding visibility/popularity. In industry and science, these are also commonly rewarded. One could even go so far as to say that securing a poster position close to the door is part of increasing visibility, although I think that's overly harsh.
All in all, I think your professor has some good ideas but her implementation leaves something to be desired. Also, all of this should be clearly stated in the syllabus. I'd have a conversation with her about this, possibly argue for a higher grade for yourself, but I'd very much consider how much time and effort you want to put into this after that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with [this answer by username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/121579/75368). I would first talk to the professor about it before escalating it. The idea that 2 marks are awarded for being the first ten - which are not bonus marks, strikes me as a bit unfair, where even if you did the assignment "perfectly" but were number 11, you could never get a perfect or near perfect score. Students also have varying commitments, and if its not handing in late then I dont think this is a fair way to grade. But you need to lay this out in a rational and respectful way.
The second part seems to be common practice - I've used this method before, where you grade off the best few papers. Essentially its actually kind of like a bell curve. Think of it as - with the instructions of the assignment, the course material and the student level of learning, this was one of the best outcomes in terms of product. I may have been expecting more, but if these are examples of the best assignment that helps situate how hard you should be marking. When I have a test I do the same thing - if the highest grade in the class is 56/60, then I grade them all out of 56 - I also remove questions if a majority do not answer correctly - the intent isn't to trick students, but to test their knowledge. If my test is too hard for at least one student to get perfect, then I dont think all the questions were fair.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: "Fair" and "wise" are two different things.
First, I don't think this is wise. It serves little purpose. It doesn't even teach time management. Students should be given a deadline, and they should be penalized if they don't meet that deadline. If you're trying to teach time management, you might break a project into chunks and create interim deadlines.
Is it "fair"? In a sense, since all students are under the same rules, it is fair. In another sense, because students have no control over when other students turn in an assignment, part of the grade is out of one's personal control, and that could be considered unfair.
If the prof would like to teach "initiative", I'd recommend two due times, with the early submission time earning the initiative points. If everybody makes that due time, they all get the points. I still think it's silly, but more fair.
Making sure the best performing students in the class get the best grades is a fairly common practice. My preference is to make expected levels of mastery known, and grade to those. The top levels should be very challenging, and the students with the most aptitude and those willing to work hardest should be able to achieve A's. Same outcome, but it doesn't create a competition between students. If everyone works very hard and they all get A's, that's fine. If the metrics and rubrics are laid out right, it usually doesn't happen (you need to be careful to avoid grade inflation).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: **Life isn't fair.**
That is the first lesson here. You will have to learn to cope with blatant discrimination, outright lies, and clearly biased situations. This professor, intentionally or not, is helping to teach that here. You even found evidence of that in the rubric, which is clearly unfair and biased towards the students able to post more quickly.
Absolutely, that is not fair. But the question of fairness is itself not the right question. *Is it wrong?*
~~No. It's in the rubric.~~ Possibly. It depends on how it is applied. This is where ethical code of conduct may apply. If it does, be exceptionally careful and detailed in documenting the problems before reporting them.
**It is not the student's job to correct the teacher, admonish the teacher, or dictate to the teacher.** The student is there to learn the lessons of the teacher. Disclaimer: This generalization doesn't take extreme situations into account.
Accept that even if the professor is deliberately unfair and biased, you are still accountable for your own actions and responsible for yourself. This empowers you to take the action necessary to succeed here.
If you completely disagree with the professor, lack understanding of what is being done, or cant explain the actions in any reasonable manner then you should approach your professor outside of class with enough time to discuss your grievances.
In your comments you mention how there seems to be contradictory information provided, such as being told that X action will benefit you when the reality is not doing X is penalizing you. This is something I would ask the professor about directly. There may be something you're missing or it may be a communication problem.
**Your understanding of the problem is incomplete.**
Here you've focused on the professor, what is fair, and how you can compel them to change. The class isn't about the professor, it is about you. Take advantage of your situation and what you know here.
The professor has a syllabus and given rubrics out for clearly defining how the work is going to be graded. This means the rubric defines what is a good assignment, not your perception of what is good.
If the rubric requires you to write the best novel in the world but will take off a point for every instance of the letter "e" in the novel, then you wont find many competitors to "Gadsby" out there.
Study the syllabus. Study the rubric. Use them. They work both ways. Ask for the rubric with the assignments if it isn't provided. You seem like someone that excels within defined boundaries. Ask for those boundaries. If there are none, arbitrarily make some up for yourself and adjust from there.
If your goal is the compel the professor to change, then use the rubric and syllabus to *your* advantage. Exploiting the rubric is an effective way to force the professor to take action. A heavy warning here, this puts you into an adversarial relationship with your professor and usually unexpected negative consequences appear in other ways. I don't recommend this at all, even as a last resort.
You're far better off learning from "Its not what you know, it is who you know" and just befriend the best students in that class. Your grade will likely go up just by interacting with them more as you will see what the curve leans towards.
Edit: Changes to the question fundamentally altered the answer's direction.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Of the practices you described, the one that stood out to me as being very clearly unfair is the marking off of points for not submitting work early enough when the submission was still done ahead of an officially-announced deadline, and where no indication was communicated to you of any expectation that you should submit even earlier than that official deadline to qualify for full points. This is 100% unfair and illegitimate, pure and simple, and you would be completely reasonable to complain about it.
As for the other things you mentioned:
1. Using the best submission as a reference for grading purposes sounds like a reasonable and accepted practice. While it is also reasonable for you to want to be judged based on your own abilities according to some objective set of expectations, the fact is that teachers do not always know what is reasonable or realistic to expect of students, so when we are grading work, we may calibrate our expectations by first of all looking at some fraction of the assignments (or even all of them, if it’s a small enough number), and then deciding that the best work is what we consider appropriate for the highest grade. Knowing what the best assignment looks like can be a reasonable heuristic to guide one’s attitudes in grading the work of the other students. Of course, a sensible instructor will not get too carried away with this approach, and also be mindful of the possibility that they have some exceptionally brilliant or precocious student in their class and be careful not to have that negatively affect their view of the other students’ work. And perhaps your professor isn’t a sensible person and doesn’t implement this methodology in an optimal way, I can’t say for sure. But generally speaking, this particular practice doesn’t sound outrageous to me.
2. The issue with the posters sounds unfortunate to me. Probably the professor’s idea of using popularity as a factor in grading the posters wasn’t as well thought out as it should have been. Perhaps if she realized that posters that were close to the entrance of the room enjoyed an unfair advantage she would find a way to make the grading more fair, so it would be a good idea to bring the matter to her attention. So yes, I see this is as somewhat unfair, but it looks like an unintentional sort of unfairness that I would get less outraged about (as opposed to holding students accountable for imaginary submission timelines that aren’t communicated, which is really quite egregiously wrong as I discussed above).
3. Generally speaking, turning things into a competition between students may be frustrating for you, but it’s an accepted practice, and considered reasonable, among other reasons for the reason I mentioned above that professors often need to know how their students are performing as a group to calibrate their expectations of any individual students. (Again, experienced instructors know how to avoid taking this to an unhealthy extreme, and perhaps your professor hasn’t learned that lesson yet.) Also, note that this methodology can actually work in your favor rather than against you - for example, if I always graded students “objectively” purely based on my own internal expectations and without taking into account how the class is performing as a whole, I’m sure there would be times when I might get things horribly wrong and give way too many students a failing or very low grade. So grading on a curve does have some practical benefits also from the students’ point of view.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/13
| 617
| 2,455
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently listened to a [talk given by <NAME>](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVHcdgrqbHE) about problems that [GNU/Linux](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux) are currently facing. In it (roughly 26m48s into the video) he mentions that keynote presentation time slots are being purchased by companies at GNU/Linux conferences. That is, companies are paying the conferences in order to get to be keynote speakers at said conferences.
This made me think, does this kind of thing happen in the academic world too? Are there serious conferences (that is, not the type of conferences we so often get spam emails about) where some or all of the keynote talks have been chosen due to some company/organisation/person paying the conference money in order to get their person to speak there? If so, is this disclosed to the conference participants in any reasonable way?<issue_comment>username_1: Many ~~Most (if not all)~~ conferences rely on corporate sponsorship.
It is frequently a condition of a sponsoring company that such sponsorship gains them a speaking slot... or alternatively, that a given speaker's invitation is conditional on their company sponsoring the event.
So, quite simply, if a speaker is affiliated with an event sponsor it is likely that there is a connection.
Source: I'm quite a regular conference speaker...
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Some conferences exchange corporate sponsorship for various perks. Those perks may include a keynote speaking slot. Thus,
* *This kind of thing happens in academia.*
* *Perhaps more so at serious conferences, because those conferences are more attractive to sponsors.*
Perks may be advertised, e.g., on web pages soliciting sponsorship. Hence,
* *This may be disclosed to conference participants.*
* *But, possibly not in a reasonable manner, since participants would need to discover sponsorship perks.*
Some perks may be privately negotiated, without disclosure to conference participants.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In Computer Science, I think this is fairly rare at "quality" academic conferences. Most reputable conferences decouple the keynote choice from the sponsorships. That being said, I was once involved in a conference as an organizer, where someone else suggested that if company X sponsored it, they could be invited to give a keynote. I hit the roof. But it's evidence that some people do play that game.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/13
| 428
| 1,916
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I have to study for an exam, like organic chemistry, I know that I should be studying my notes and, most importantly, practice problems.
However, when you have to review for final that is cumulative, you have to go through potentially hundreds of problems assigned. I understand the best case scenario is that you budget your time throughout the weeks to do them all, but some problems are just repeats of a very simple concept (sometimes with a nuanced variation).
My question is: how do you determine out of all the problems assigned which ones would be the most effective to study for the final/an exam?<issue_comment>username_1: Some books list problems that increase in difficulty, so do the first one, the last one and one or two from the middle...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Ignore the textbook problems and concentrate on the course material. This can be past-year exam papers or simply the homework problems assigned.
Once you're fully familiar with these, you'd have some idea what kind of questions can be expected, and can work through the textbook problems with that knowledge.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Perhaps the obvious answer, but I would select a random subset, taking about two problems from each section (~20 problems total). In some courses, I would skip the first few chapters (e.g., by the end of a physics course, you probably won't need to review unit conversions or vector addition).
Then I would try to solve this random subset under test conditions. Some of the questions might be too easy or too specific; such questions can be swapped out. But the essential thing is to actually do a few questions from each section end-to-end, don't just think about it, read the answer, and declare victory.
After spending a few hours on the above, you will be in a position to allocate your remaining study hours among the topics.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/14
| 835
| 3,451
|
<issue_start>username_0: My professor assigned a final paper due the 12th, and while our exam period extends to the 23rd of December, all my exams were scheduled on the 11th and 12th and a couple before. As this was one of my more interesting classes, I asked the professor if I could have a couple days' extension, because I'd rather not rush the paper but actually engage with the sources. While some might prefer to get on break early, having back-to-back *final* exams is extremely exhausting, and having them spread out would be much preferred in my eyes. So I explained the circumstances and requested an extension (well in advance) but never got a response. After a couple days passed, I tried again to no avail. I have emailed the professor before and they responded but now seem to be ignoring me. I was one of the only 3 students to have perfect attendance out of a class of about 50, so I thought they would understand my genuine interest. Also, I know 3 other students who got like two week extensions on earlier papers, so I thought it should be fine. Any idea on how to proceed?<issue_comment>username_1: Assume your professor is busy and that your request is denied since it hasn't been accepted.
Turn your paper in on time.
If you didn't turn it in and your deadline has already passed, you've made a really bad mistake. Finish it absolutely as soon as possible and beg for forgiveness. It doesn't matter if someone else was granted an extension at some time, you were not granted one this time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In situations like this I'd advise talking to the professor in person at their office hours. No response to your E-mail could indicate refusal of your request or just that your message was lost in the inbox of a busy professor.
Additionally, the professor might recognize you from class and remember previous interactions, questions and your attendance record.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I explained the circumstances and requested an extension (well in advance) but never got a response. After a couple days passed, I tried again to no avail.
>
>
>
Most professors will work with you if you have multiple finals on the same day. In your case you had ~4 finals and a new paper within a five day period, so your request does not seem unreasonable.
My guess is that the professor just skimmed your e-mail, saw you wanted an extension, frowned, and deleted it. He probably didn't take the time to realize that you were a good student with an overloaded exam schedule. Indeed, I had to read your post several times before I got it, so his confusion is understandable.
So, I think it would be reasonable to talk to him in person and explain how packed your exam schedule is. You're not just another student who wants more time; you're reacting to the university's poorly-designed exam schedule. Of course, he may decide that 5 items in 5 days is not unreasonable, but I still think it's reasonable to ask.
>
> My professor assigned a final paper due the 12th
>
>
>
I can't help but notice that you posted this just after midnight on the 14th. Is your paper late? If so, that changes the situation completely; I think it is highly unlikely he will give a retroactive extension. You should turn your paper in ASAP. It's maybe worth explaining the circumstances and referencing your e-mail, but you should expect some deduction (hopefully he accepts it at all).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/14
| 887
| 3,741
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently reviewing a paper, which has this statement in the acknowledgements:
>
> The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting
> the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States
> Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world-wide
> license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript,
> or allow other to do so, for United States Government purposes.
> [Source](https://www.osti.gov/stip/sti-and-copyright)
>
>
>
As a reviewer, I could simply ignore it. However, it seems rather weird to me, since usually after acceptance you have to sign a form which deals with exactly this kind of right transfer / copyright etc. The editors and referees do not have any legal power over this anyway.
Does my role as a reviewer also include to mention this to the editor who should forward it to the publisher, or should I simply ignore it, on the risk that this statement potentially collides with the journal policies?<issue_comment>username_1: I think it is pretty unlikely that the editor isn't already aware of this, but, yes, you should mention it somewhere in your report to the editor. It amounts to a restriction on what the publisher can claim as "reserved rights".
It says, in effect, that if the publisher, accepts this article (and obtains its copyright) the publisher must thereby grant the U.S. Government a license of a certain sort. This means a conditional transfer of copyright.
My guess is that this is fairly standard for work produced by the government and in some cases, work produced by others on government grants. The government doesn't want to create a work and then have to pay to use it internally (i.e. for U.S. Government purposes).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You can mention it to the editor in your report, but you do not need to. Your job is to evaluate the correctness and other merits of the manuscript's contents, not to deal with issues such as copyrights. Those are the job of the editorial staff. Moreover, the editors and publisher are probably experienced in dealing with the copyright requirements of government employees and should know to be on the lookout for situations like this.
If you want to mention it, I would suggest saying something like:
>
> I noticed an statement about copyright in the acknowledgements, something that I had never seen before. I just wanted to bring this to your attention so it does not get missed.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The article (i.e. its contents and references) are within your remit as a reviewer.
Checking copyright details and investigating any the legal ramifications will not be relevant to the review you should be doing.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: It is your prerogative what to do about this, but it is not your legal duty to review the copyright procedure. It is a publisher's legal duty.
What you mention about standard procedure about copyright transfer agreements or licenses is not obvious, given that it's dependent on the publisher's procedure what this entails. Open access publishers, for example, do not require any transfer or exclusive license. Most publishers share their procedures online, but most do not check this (nor is comprehension of these agreements obvious, see also [this study](https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2253))
U.S. federal works are not copyrightable under 17 U.S.C. § 105, so it makes perfect sense the authors state this if they are federal employees. Previously, works by federal employees (for example <NAME> in *Science*) have had their copyright claimed by publishers upon publication, which is against this law.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/14
| 2,753
| 12,170
|
<issue_start>username_0: My real love is scientific computing, but I'm generally interested in nearly every academic field — through undergrad I've had research computing positions in social psychology, electrical engineering, volcanology, and pharmaceutical sciences. Now I've graduated, and I'm at a different university doing data analysis in cognitive science. I like it, but I have a long list of places I'd like to live and fields I'd like to learn more about, and my "career plan" is to move every 3–4 years and work at a different university in a different field, always doing scientific computing/data science though. I'm not too concerned about getting a huge list of academic accolades or getting a PhD right now; I'd rather just be doing interesting work.
I've mentioned this to several professors and graduate students who have asked about my plans, and they always react as if I've said I want to run off and join the circus. Is there some truth to how they react? Am I hurting my career this way?
**I'd like to clarify that I just want to be doing data analysis.** It seems like nearly every lab needs people to do this, so I don't see how I'm a funding leech.<issue_comment>username_1: As a data scientist myself, I have found it rather difficult to be a journeyman data scientist in academia. Yes, people need their data analysed; no, they do not want to pay for your full salary, benefits, and office space. Nor are they necessarily going to hire an outsider to analyse their data. They can get their postdocs/grad students to do it.
I have met repeated resistance to being taken onto projects as an outside data analyst. Certain STEM disciplines are especially bad with this. Because I have a PhD, I can find full time positions that allow me to be housed in a department, teach classes in that department, and then take on outside projects as I find them. These outside projects are never enough in and of themselves to provide enough work for me to retain my job. The fact that I can do independent research and teach classes is what allows me to do what I do.
I just think being a journeyman data analyst in academia can be a rather tough life, and you may not have much freedom to actually decide what type of subjects you are exploring. In my experience, you may rank below even the master's students and will possibly be paid subsistence level pay.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm pretty sure that the funny looks are because people are making the assumption, probably warranted, that you will be fairly shallow in the work you do. Normally academic research is narrow and deep, so this plan seems too unlike what they expect. Some fields take a long time to learn and even more time to be able to deal effectively at the frontier of knowledge. Someone who wants to do a lot of relatively simple (in their view) things has less value, by far, then another who is a well known expert in a specialized field.
Along with this worry is that you wouldn't be a lot of help in leading students to a research (narrow, deep) career as you are a sort of "dabbler" in things.
I don't criticize your plan. Being a polymath (even a shallow one) can be a rewarding life. But deep and narrow is what is more valued in academia.
At non-research institutions (primarily small undergraduate colleges) you might find a better reception. But even there, not having a doctorate is usually a deal-breaker.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the other answers have mis-understood the OP's goal. He explicitly says that he wants to be a scientific programmer assisting other folks' research programs, not pursuing his own. Such positions do exist at every major research university. How common they are varies by subfield. In my experience physics departments generally leave all the programming to their students and post-docs, while life sciences department will hire quite a few software developers and data analysts, just as they hire a lot of wet-lab technicians. There is a lot of computational work to be done these days that requires fairly mature engineering skills, but is not novel research. Having your chemistry Ph.D. student set up a secure and robust web application is probably not a good use of their time.
To respond to the OPs question: what you want is not impossible, but you'll have to be lucky to pull it off. While there are scientific programmer positions at every major research university, there are not a lot of them compared to the non-academic world, and they generally don't pay nearly as well. I think PIs find hiring for these positions difficult and time-consuming, so they prefer folks looking for long term positions. Sometimes, one of the functions of these positions is to provide some overlap in institutional memory. Bit rot sets in rapidly each time a student graduates. If you aren't even going to stick around as long as your average Ph.D. student, your utility to the PI is diminished.
On the other hand, many of the grants that fund these positions are time limited. Projects that only last two to three years seem to be pretty common. That would seem to match pretty well with your goals. Unfortunately, at least in large departments, there seems to be a small cadre of programmers that get shuffled around projects as funding comes and goes. You'll be competing with those folks, and as they have a known local track record, it puts you at a disadvantage. For the same reason, constantly switching fields, would also put you at a disadvantage. Software skills are highly portable, but there is always some domain knowledge that's crucial as well.
I think your chances of success will be better if you stick to one field, say the life sciences. It will also help if, early on, you can find work on a high profile project, with a prominent PI.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Core Facilities
---------------
One opportunity you may consider is seeking employment in some kind of core facility. At least in the United States, research intensive universities often have centralized organizations available to assist research from any discipline needing their services.
Often these are organized around specific equipment (such as specialized genomic sequencing) or other resources (such as animal care). However, I have definitely seen examples that are dedicated to providing computing services, including programming and statistical analysis.
Being employed at a research core facility would likely offer you the opportunity to focus on the tasks that you love, without needing to develop your own research agenda or teaching. However, the pool for these jobs is significantly smaller.
An example of such an organization is the University of Kansas's [Center for Research Methods and Data Analysis](http://crmda.ku.edu/).
Non-Academic Positions
----------------------
A second opportunity could be leaving academia. I've made a career as a data analyst and I've switched industries reliably every 3-5 years. Currently I work in a university analyzing their research and grant performance data, but I've also worked in both private firms and other governmental agencies. Outside of academia it is far more common to see people leave for greener pastures on a regular basis.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Have you considered working on the supercomputing side? My university frequently makes hires in that area, and not only in engineering — some are for positions that assist faculty with supercomputing facilities, and the like. These facilities are usually funded centrally from the university, and/or with large external grants, and so can hire a lot more freely than departments or units with one-off data analysis needs.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: To offer a different perspective: the behavior you're describing would be very welcomed by most companies. At most places that are hiring data scientists, 3-4 years of tenure is more than they get from many/most people they hire. Intellectual curiosity like you're describing can easily be seen as a good thing in interviews.
There's certainly no shortage of companies with data in all kinds of different domains who are desperate to hire experienced and interested data scientists to analyze and make sense of their data. Heck, even staying within the same company, you could pretty easily switch the field you're working in. My last job, I analyzed fraud data, mapping data, weather data, product recommendation data, server log data, all kinds of location data, food data, and marketing data, all in under two years.
Many companies publish their results publicly. Some do this through peer-reviewed journal articles, but many more publish through blogs and conference talks. So if you're looking to advance the state of public knowledge in a given field, I think you can do that at a company- in fact, most would be pretty excited to hear that you want to help them get publicity by making findings public.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: My current job is actually somewhat similar to what you are looking for. (A software developer / analyst that assists various research groups on a short term, 6-18 month, basis.)
It is entirely possible to do this sort of work long term, but there are at least in my experience several things that you will want to keep in mind. (To simplify, I will refer to the group or groups you would potentially be interacting with as 'the clients').
* One of the core values that you will be able to provide the clients is a bridge between them and their universities greater IT sector. This means that you will not only likely be the one doing analytical / development work, but also interfacing with people that are setting up and maintaining the infrastructure, are in security and governance, etc. For this reason, you will be far better off finding a large university that does a wide variety of research, rather than moving universities constantly.
* The pay for such positions, in comparison to their workload is far below that of industry. (In my area, about 50-60% of what similar work would make in industry). Working at a university does have a variety of other benefits, but if pay is an issue for you, you may want to look elsewhere.
* Even with having a lower pay than industry, developers and analysts are expensive. (Expect roughly after benefits that you are going to cost your employer twice your salary.) If you are going to want to have a position working solely on client problems, and not general IT/university systems, your likely going to need to be funded mostly/exclusively by the client's grants. While this seems reasonable on the surface, depending on the university's culture and environment there are several caveats:
1. Your mainly going to be working on medium sized projects. (Multi million, decade long projects tend to have their own full time, long term staff members. These are common if fields like physics.) Smaller short term projects (<100K) are not likely to have the money to support a separate analyst, and even less likely to have that money put aside for IT/Analyst work.
2. While I understand you are wanting to just do the analytics, expect to be doing a lot of software development. In general most of their analytics are going to be done by PhD students. (Far cheaper, and learning how to analyze and conduct research is why they are there.) However, depending on the field, they may be far less likely to be capable/interested in doing development work.
3. I mentioned this briefly before, but depending on your university's culture, researchers might not even be thinking about including funding for a position like yours in their grants. You will likely need to be very proactive to find funding for yourself.
4. You are going to likely be working directly with clients, This can be both a positive and a negative. (The benefits and woes of this have been more than adequately described elsewhere, but I would definitely make sure to read up on it before finalizing any plans.)
If you have any questions about this type of system, I would be happy to try and answer them.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/14
| 1,764
| 7,633
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got an externally funded research grant as a lead researcher to carry out a project at a UK University, together with other senior co-PIs. The grant would pay my salary for the duration of the project as a postdoc, which would be 6 months. Due to several administrative and other issues, the project kept being delayed (outside of my control), by what the funding finished, but the project deliverables were not produced. I continued working on the project in the hope that we could finish it at some point, but other issues came up, preventing the project from being completed.
It has been now 4 months that I've been working as a postdoc in this project without any pay, and I can't continue living without any money to support myself. I got some legal advice from a lawyer about this where I was told I should just walk out since my contract finished and I have no obligation to work without a contract. However, being an ECR (early career researcher), it would be extremely damaging for my future career to abandon this project halfway and not get any publication from it.
After several meetings with the PIs discussing what to do with the project, and pointing out I need money to survive, their conclusion was that I must finish the project deliverables, without any further pay, as they are blaming me for the delays in the project (which is not the case, as I stated before). They are also threatening me (indirectly) with damaging my reputation as a scientist, blacklisting me for future grant applications (the senior PIs are in several grant committees in my area of research) and just in general destroying any chances of me having a future research career.
At this point, I have no idea what to do to get out of this problem... It seems my only options are either to quit academia entirely or accepting to being exploited and work without pay.
On top of all this, I discovered recently the grant has some small amount of leftover money from non needed consumables, which I requested to be redirected to my salary. The PIs refused this, as they are saying they will only pay me this amount if the project is finished.
I am looking for any advice on how to deal with this problem, particularly if someone else faced a similar situation before in a UK university.<issue_comment>username_1: For some reason there is this belief in academia that people should work without pay. It's inappropriate. *You need to walk away.*
Even early career researchers are allowed to work for pay.
It would also seem that a 6-month grant would only be for a rather small project. Can the project be tied off quickly so that you can move on?
If the senior PIs are threatening to ruin your career, I would try to get some evidence of these threats. Also keep in mind that even if you finish the project, PIs who make threats to ruin you career are not all of the sudden going to become your best buddies. You could very well finish the project and still have your senior PIs blacklist you for further grants. You owe them nothing.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I think this really comes down to who are you working for. Nominally you are employed by the university, but the university really does not care about any deliverables you might provide and is happy for your to leave. Maybe you are *working for* the funder; if that is the case, they no longer think the deliverables you can produce are worth what it would cost and are happy for you to stop working for them. Your PIs also don't think what you can produce is worth it. In fact, as a postdoc, you are really working for yourself as you are really the only person who will benefit from your work. Your failure to get additional grant money means you can no longer pay yourself (via the university) and now you need to decide if you want to work for yourself for free.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You should not work without a contract. Whatever is the current academic state of this research project, if your contract is terminated you should stop working on it.
Yes, not delivering on your first funded project can be damaging to your career, but equally for the career of your "co-PIs". Arguably, as they are in more senior roles, they ultimately have more responsibility for supervising/training you through the project and making sure the results are delivered. They also can not, under any circumstances, to force you work without pay — this is likely to contradict University regulations and they can lose their jobs over it.
Not just this bizarre behaviour of your co-PIs, but also other details of your situation are unclear from your question or contradict the usual norm. There is usually one PI, the person who got the grant, and they are entitled to make decisions about funding, within remit and regulations of the University. Longer, multi-million grants may be led by several PIs, but your grant is 6 months only. In your question, it appears that you are "Lead Researcher" but not a PI on the project.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It is normal and acceptable for PIs to expect continued collaboration from a former postdoc on projects of mutual interest, even after the postdoc's employment ends. Furthermore, it is in the erstwhile postdoc's interest to see ongoing projects through to completion (and publication). It is very normal for big papers arising from a postdoc to be submitted well after employment is finished.
However it is **not normal or acceptable** for a PI to expect their former postdoc to continue working full-time without pay, and it is **unacceptable and abusive** to use threats of retaliation to compel a postdoc to provide unpaid labor.
In my opinion, you have two reasonable courses of action available to you. First, you might decide that you PIs have been abusive and unreasonable to the point where your relationship is not worth pursuing further. If you are traumatized, depressed, burnt-out, or terrified of interactions with your PIs, this might be a good course of action. And if this is the situation *it isn't your fault*.
The second option would be to check with your PIs whether there might be some degree of misunderstanding. You could seek an arrangement where you will work full-time elsewhere (with pay!), but where you continue to devote a significant amount of time to the unfinished project (say 10 hours per week). This additional work would be unpaid, but would come with a set of expectations about your authorship on the final products (these expectations should be discussed and agreed explicitly, preferably in writing). If the PIs find this relationship to be unacceptable, but remain unwilling to pay you, then it sounds to me like an absurdly toxic environment, and my advice is leave as quickly as possible.
Either approach involves searching for a job right away.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: By working without pay, you are fueling the very thing that is happening to you. It's similar to many other areas where college grads are underemployed, and employers take advantage of a college education and a bright and intelligent mind.
That said, if you quit and try to make an economic stand, you'll lose. Someone else will do it. All you can do is quit and know you did the right thing, but you won't be rewarded, and it will be most difficult, possibly more then you can know or I can describe here.
This is what, why, and how technology is developed. It is naive to think a professor somewhere was highly paid to develop Windows o.s., the windshield wipers on your car, and the other things we take for granted.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/14
| 930
| 4,081
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in an embarrassing situation. I have submitted my article three times, to three different journals, and always I get the same reviewer who copies and pastes the same reviews which actually make no sense.
With my first submission I had two review cycles, and two of the reviewers recommended accepting the article; however, this reviewer strongly rejected it. I submitted to another journal (it had binary review system), and again the same happened, same reviewer same comments. Now I have received a third rejection (this journal is also has a binary review system), from the same reviewer with an extra comment that now other related work exist. (Of course now other related work exists, because you have been rejecting the paper for two years.)
Before submitting my article for the fourth time, to a different journal, can I tell the handling editor that we don't want this particular reviewer?
If yes, how can we ask the handling editor without knowing the identity of this reviewer? Some journals ask for a list of reviewer to oppose at the time of submission. But how we can identify this particular reviewer?
Or, can we ask the editor who handled of previous submissions to disclose the identity of particular reviewer?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm pretty sure no editor would reveal the name of a reviewer, but you can ask. You can always ask. Just don't expect a responsive reply.
On the other hand, did you revise the article in light of the reviews or just submit the same thing to various publishers? Even if you don't agree with a reviewer, you need to rewrite, not necessarily accepting the advice, but "dealing with it" in some way. If you just send out the same thing, you can probably expect the same results from reputable journals.
Moreover, if you don't update the paper and send it to a lot of editors, you will build yourself a negative reputation with them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> can I ask the handling editor that we don't want this particular reviewer?
>
>
>
No, because you don't know who they are, and you have no way to find out.
>
> can we ask the Editor of previous submission to disclose the identity of particular reviewer?
>
>
>
No, definitely not. That would be an inappropriate request. The editor would likely suspect that you wanted their name in order to retaliate against them in some way. The editor would surely not comply, and might form doubts about your ethics, which could affect any future interactions you might have with the editor or the journal.
You could mention in your cover letter that you have had a problematic reviewer who said X,Y,Z, so that the editor would be forewarned. However, I think this only helps if objections X,Y,Z are self-evidently absurd, which is probably not the case because three previous editors apparently took them seriously. Also, it tends to draw attention to the fact that your paper has previously been rejected, which although it should not matter, may in practice bias the editor against it.
I would suggest instead:
* Edit your paper to address the reviewer's objections as much as possible. Even if their objections are completely wrong, you can clarify the paper to make it more clear that they are wrong. "One might think that X is a problem here. However, this is not the case, because of A."
* Regarding the "related work", you need to update your paper to discuss this work. Even if it didn't exist when you originally wrote the paper, it exists now, and when you sumbit to a new journal, it is your responsibility for your paper to properly address related work in the field as of the date of (the new) submission. You can say something like "After our work was substantially finished, we became aware of X" in order to assert that you had priority.
* Otherwise, be prepared for the possibility that you may get the same reviewer yet again. If so, you can make the case to the editor that their objections are invalid, and ask for reconsideration. But of course it will be up to the editor to judge.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/12/14
| 3,152
| 11,664
|
<issue_start>username_0: For those who aren't familiar, Lebron was so talented and sought-after in high school that he was able to [skip playing NCAA basketball and went right on to the NBA at the age of 19](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LeBron_James#Basketball). Have there ever been any academic researchers who showed so much promise at one stage (in undergrad or grad school maybe) that they were offered funding to set up their own research institution, or a high-ranking position they'd typically be unqualified for?
This is just a curiosity of mine and not a reflection on my career plans.<issue_comment>username_1: <NAME> doesn't have a high school, undergraduate, or master's degree. Just a Ph.D. in Math.
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Friedman>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The analogy is a bit weak for a few reasons. I realize Lebron also followed through on early promise, but at least in something like math (my field), it doesn't have to be a case of "promise", because it can be clear that someone is brilliant: they have results to back it up. Also there is no special big league that offers tons of money or that you need to get into while you are still young; being in grad school is comfortable place to do research and learn things.
A recent example that comes to mind is <NAME>. While still an undergraduate he published multiple papers including one in the Annals of Mathematics. This is one of the top few journals in math and is basically unheard of these days for an undergrad to publish there. But he still took a normal amount of time as a grad student at Stanford, it's just he became a full professor at Princeton the year after graduating...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not sure what aspect of LeBron James you are referring to. He was drafted straight out of high school. This is impressive, but there have been [45 others](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_high_school_draftees) who did that. Something like 15% of NBA first round picks are [one and done](https://theundefeated.com/features/all-the-nba-drafts-one-and-done-lottery-picks-a-scorecard/) picks, so realistically he was a year or two ahead. He won his first MVP award at 24, but there have been [14 players under 25](https://www.si.com/nba/photos/2014/05/06/youngest-nbamvp#3) to do that. Again, maybe he is a year or two ahead of his competition.
In academia, it the US a typical progression is 4 years undergrad, 5 years PhD, 2 years postdoc, 6 years pre-tenure. At any one of those stages a gifted and motivated person could skip a year (sometimes two). Being a year or two ahead is relatively easy.
What you seem to be asking about is skipping 5-10 years. This is much harder, but sometimes happens.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: <NAME> self-published a physics book at age 12 and then 3 more by the age of 14 (a lot of people do this, but you can look at the PDFs by clicking on the links [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Wolfram#Education_and_early_career) and I think you'll find that these could compete in quality to the works of many adults at the time).
That same link will tell you that he did not finish high school, or undergrad, but received a PhD at age 20 from Caltech. On the recommendation of <NAME> and <NAME>, he joined Caltech's faculty at age 21.
>
> Have there ever been any academic researchers who showed so much
> promise at one stage (in undergrad or grad school maybe) that they
> were offered funding to set up their own research institution, or a
> high-ranking position they'd typically be unqualified for?
>
>
>
To qualify into the PhD program at Caltech, one typically needs at least an undergrad degree, and <NAME> did not have one. As user [username_3 points out](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/121687/93303), entering a PhD program at Caltech is far more exceptional than entering the NBA straight from high school, when you look at the percentage of people that have done either. Entering the faculty at a university like Caltech at age 21 and only 1 year after finishing the PhD, was also probably less common percentage-wise, than entering the NBA straight from high school.
You ask about "setting up their own research institution", at first I was going to tell you that including this in your question was a bit extreme, but after reading more about Wolfram I found out that he set up the Center for Complex Systems Research (CCSR).
However <NAME> stayed in the NBA for a fairly long career and has continued to be (arguably) the best player in the NBA. Wolfram "academic career" was short relative to most other academics, because he shifted to doing other things such as:
(1) making software for academics
(2) making educational resources and doing outreach
(3) managing businesses that help academics
He did continue to do academic work and published a book with academically original content, but it wasn't received as well as the mid- to late-career achievements of LeBron James. His success in (1), (2), and (3) though can definitely be compared to the mid- to late career achievements of LeBron James.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: **In computational chemistry/physics:**
[<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Guy_Wolynes) became a professor at Harvard at age 23.
[<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_F._Schaefer_III) became a professor at Berkeley at age 25.
These appointments were at that time more rare (percentage-wise) than entering the NBA out of high school. Both of them went on to be world-leaders in their fields, but I think [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Schulten)'s **h-index of 152** is far above anyone else's in the field of <NAME> (computational biochemical physics) and the **165 h-index** of [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Truhlar) (also a professor from age 25) is far above anyone else's in the field of <NAME> (quantum chemistry). <NAME>lar's i-10 index of 1167 is maybe the highest in the world if divided by the number of co-authors (since in fields like medicine and particle physics, papers can have far more authors, meaning each one of them has usually put in far less work).
**I therefore claim that <NAME> is the LeBron James of computational chemistry/physics.**
All these metrics need to be taken with a grain of salt, but knowing the field quite well, I'm comfortable with making this claim.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: [<NAME>](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Bull), famous for his work on long-range artillery, obtained his PhD age 23. The rumour (which I cannot source) is that, at the time, he was the youngest PhD from the University of Toronto. A recognized genius of ballistics he would be (in)famous for his work on various super-guns.
[<NAME>](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Moffat_(physicist)) eventually got a position at the University of Toronto. He was awarded a PhD from Cambridge without ever obtaining an undergraduate degree; prior to his work in relativity he was a painter in Paris. His personal correspondence with Einstein may have worked in his favour.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: <NAME> never got his Ph.D.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_Dyson>
Really though, I think skipping the undergrad and moving directly into Ph.D. or direct research work would be more impressive and more direct to Lebron. (Don't have a good example.) But the reason I say this is Ph.D. students are often already productive working researchers. (So not completing or even skipping entirely the graduate degree is not as impressive.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: A couple more:
<NAME> was hired to teach advanced classes and actually founded a program (!) in geophysics at Columbia. He worked there for several years, not having finished his Ph.D. from Chicago, yet. See the biography by <NAME>.
Also <NAME> (the teacher in Stand and Deliver) was hired to teach at three schools in Columbia while he was still a student in teachers college. The Jay Matthews biography has the details.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: There are certainly many people who have entered academia who were child prodigies, who have taken an unusually rapid route into senior academic positions. A quintessential example is the Hungarian physicist, mathematician and computer scientist [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann). <NAME> was a child prodigy who learned differential and integral calculus when he was eight-years-old. By the age of nineteen he had published two important mathematical papers.
<NAME>'s father insisted that he go through the regular schooling grades for his age, but he also had private tutoring to supplement this. After his schooling, he enrolled directly in a PhD candidature in mathematics concurrently with programs in chemical engineering, the latter due to pressure from his father to pursue a profession with good financial prospects. He did them both concurrently, and after receiving his PhD in mathematics he became the youngest person ever elected *privatdozent* at the University of Berlin. Even before this he had published several mathematics papers at a level of original contribution that would exceed the contributions of most modern tenured professors.
If you haven't had a chance to read about the extraordinary genius of this guy then you are in for a real treat. He makes the basketball skill of <NAME> look pretty ordinary by comparison. Other brilliant physicists and mathematicians who knew him, including <NAME>, regarded <NAME> to be someone of super-human genius who could basically run rings around them. He had a photographic memory, and could recite *verbatim* books he had read years ago, including translating them to English in the process, reportedly without any diminution in speed. To entertain his friends he memorised pages of phone directories and then recited the contents of randomly chosen pages. There is a famous story about him doing a mathematical problem called the "fly puzzle" where he is reputed to have performed a difficult mathematical operation almost instantaneously in his head. The physicist <NAME> referred to him as being of a superior "species", an "evolution beyond man". Some consider him to have been the smartest person of the twentieth century, if not one of the smartest people ever to exist.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: In recent times, I don't think so. Even truly, remarkably, unfathomably gifted people still finish high school, undergraduate, PhD etc. The difference is that they tend to breeze through these steps extremely quickly, and while collecting many accolades along the way.
A good example I can think of is [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Scholze), a mathematician from Germany who was made a full professor at age 24 in 2012.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: A couple of world-class mathematicians had a similar career.
To name those who were not named by previous answers:
* [Hardy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._H._Hardy) won a nation-wide math programme (which he later helped to abolish) after two years in college, it essentially granted him a faculty position after some shuffling.
* [Gelfand](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Gelfand) bypassed both high school and university and went straight to postgraduate studies at 19.
* [Wiener](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norbert_Wiener) got his BA at 14.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/15
| 3,390
| 12,790
|
<issue_start>username_0: The graduate program to which I am applying has a centralized admission procedure, so individual professors cannot accept students. However, they recommend taking a look at the faculty, so that our research proposals are aligned with the work being done there. (Un)fortunately, the field I'd like to work in is quite unexplored, which might help me — but also makes it hard to find professors with a similar interest.
While browsing the faculty Web site, I found the professor whose research aligns most with my intended research proposal and whose page explicitly encouraged potential students to get in touch, so I emailed her to ask if (1) she thought our interests would be compatible and/or (2) she thought that someone else in the department could be interested in following me. It was a thoughtful email, a brief introduction and references to her previous work. It's been a week and she hasn't replied yet — and with professors I've learned that if they don't reply within a day, they probably missed your email, or they saw it but forgot it immediately after.
I really would like to follow up on my email, because the holiday break is approaching. I'd really like some feedback on my proposal before I submit it in early January. I also think that showing that I got in touch with the faculty would help my application. However, I also don't want to seem too insistent, because it might hurt my chances. Should I email her again? How long should I wait before I do so? Or maybe she did not reply in the first place because my email was inappropriate?
Also, there are a few other professors who might be compatible with my research proposal. Would it be good etiquette to email them too?<issue_comment>username_1: <NAME> doesn't have a high school, undergraduate, or master's degree. Just a Ph.D. in Math.
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Friedman>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The analogy is a bit weak for a few reasons. I realize Lebron also followed through on early promise, but at least in something like math (my field), it doesn't have to be a case of "promise", because it can be clear that someone is brilliant: they have results to back it up. Also there is no special big league that offers tons of money or that you need to get into while you are still young; being in grad school is comfortable place to do research and learn things.
A recent example that comes to mind is <NAME>. While still an undergraduate he published multiple papers including one in the Annals of Mathematics. This is one of the top few journals in math and is basically unheard of these days for an undergrad to publish there. But he still took a normal amount of time as a grad student at Stanford, it's just he became a full professor at Princeton the year after graduating...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not sure what aspect of LeB<NAME> you are referring to. He was drafted straight out of high school. This is impressive, but there have been [45 others](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_high_school_draftees) who did that. Something like 15% of NBA first round picks are [one and done](https://theundefeated.com/features/all-the-nba-drafts-one-and-done-lottery-picks-a-scorecard/) picks, so realistically he was a year or two ahead. He won his first MVP award at 24, but there have been [14 players under 25](https://www.si.com/nba/photos/2014/05/06/youngest-nbamvp#3) to do that. Again, maybe he is a year or two ahead of his competition.
In academia, it the US a typical progression is 4 years undergrad, 5 years PhD, 2 years postdoc, 6 years pre-tenure. At any one of those stages a gifted and motivated person could skip a year (sometimes two). Being a year or two ahead is relatively easy.
What you seem to be asking about is skipping 5-10 years. This is much harder, but sometimes happens.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: <NAME> self-published a physics book at age 12 and then 3 more by the age of 14 (a lot of people do this, but you can look at the PDFs by clicking on the links [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Wolfram#Education_and_early_career) and I think you'll find that these could compete in quality to the works of many adults at the time).
That same link will tell you that he did not finish high school, or undergrad, but received a PhD at age 20 from Caltech. On the recommendation of <NAME> and <NAME>, he joined Caltech's faculty at age 21.
>
> Have there ever been any academic researchers who showed so much
> promise at one stage (in undergrad or grad school maybe) that they
> were offered funding to set up their own research institution, or a
> high-ranking position they'd typically be unqualified for?
>
>
>
To qualify into the PhD program at Caltech, one typically needs at least an undergrad degree, and <NAME> did not have one. As user [username_3 points out](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/121687/93303), entering a PhD program at Caltech is far more exceptional than entering the NBA straight from high school, when you look at the percentage of people that have done either. Entering the faculty at a university like Caltech at age 21 and only 1 year after finishing the PhD, was also probably less common percentage-wise, than entering the NBA straight from high school.
You ask about "setting up their own research institution", at first I was going to tell you that including this in your question was a bit extreme, but after reading more about Wolfram I found out that he set up the Center for Complex Systems Research (CCSR).
However <NAME> stayed in the NBA for a fairly long career and has continued to be (arguably) the best player in the NBA. Wolfram "academic career" was short relative to most other academics, because he shifted to doing other things such as:
(1) making software for academics
(2) making educational resources and doing outreach
(3) managing businesses that help academics
He did continue to do academic work and published a book with academically original content, but it wasn't received as well as the mid- to late-career achievements of LeBron James. His success in (1), (2), and (3) though can definitely be compared to the mid- to late career achievements of LeBron James.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: **In computational chemistry/physics:**
[<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Guy_Wolynes) became a professor at Harvard at age 23.
[<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_F._Schaefer_III) became a professor at Berkeley at age 25.
These appointments were at that time more rare (percentage-wise) than entering the NBA out of high school. Both of them went on to be world-leaders in their fields, but I think [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Schulten)'s **h-index of 152** is far above anyone else's in the field of Peter Wolynes (computational biochemical physics) and the **165 h-index** of [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Truhlar) (also a professor from age 25) is far above anyone else's in the field of <NAME> (quantum chemistry). Don Truhlar's i-10 index of 1167 is maybe the highest in the world if divided by the number of co-authors (since in fields like medicine and particle physics, papers can have far more authors, meaning each one of them has usually put in far less work).
**I therefore claim that <NAME> is the LeBron James of computational chemistry/physics.**
All these metrics need to be taken with a grain of salt, but knowing the field quite well, I'm comfortable with making this claim.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: [<NAME>](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Bull), famous for his work on long-range artillery, obtained his PhD age 23. The rumour (which I cannot source) is that, at the time, he was the youngest PhD from the University of Toronto. A recognized genius of ballistics he would be (in)famous for his work on various super-guns.
[<NAME>](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Moffat_(physicist)) eventually got a position at the University of Toronto. He was awarded a PhD from Cambridge without ever obtaining an undergraduate degree; prior to his work in relativity he was a painter in Paris. His personal correspondence with Einstein may have worked in his favour.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: <NAME> never got his Ph.D.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_Dyson>
Really though, I think skipping the undergrad and moving directly into Ph.D. or direct research work would be more impressive and more direct to Lebron. (Don't have a good example.) But the reason I say this is Ph.D. students are often already productive working researchers. (So not completing or even skipping entirely the graduate degree is not as impressive.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: A couple more:
<NAME> was hired to teach advanced classes and actually founded a program (!) in geophysics at Columbia. He worked there for several years, not having finished his Ph.D. from Chicago, yet. See the biography by <NAME>.
Also <NAME> (the teacher in Stand and Deliver) was hired to teach at three schools in Columbia while he was still a student in teachers college. The Jay Matthews biography has the details.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: There are certainly many people who have entered academia who were child prodigies, who have taken an unusually rapid route into senior academic positions. A quintessential example is the Hungarian physicist, mathematician and computer scientist [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann). <NAME> was a child prodigy who learned differential and integral calculus when he was eight-years-old. By the age of nineteen he had published two important mathematical papers.
<NAME>'s father insisted that he go through the regular schooling grades for his age, but he also had private tutoring to supplement this. After his schooling, he enrolled directly in a PhD candidature in mathematics concurrently with programs in chemical engineering, the latter due to pressure from his father to pursue a profession with good financial prospects. He did them both concurrently, and after receiving his PhD in mathematics he became the youngest person ever elected *privatdozent* at the University of Berlin. Even before this he had published several mathematics papers at a level of original contribution that would exceed the contributions of most modern tenured professors.
If you haven't had a chance to read about the extraordinary genius of this guy then you are in for a real treat. He makes the basketball skill of <NAME> look pretty ordinary by comparison. Other brilliant physicists and mathematicians who knew him, including Nobel laureates, regarded <NAME> to be someone of super-human genius who could basically run rings around them. He had a photographic memory, and could recite *verbatim* books he had read years ago, including translating them to English in the process, reportedly without any diminution in speed. To entertain his friends he memorised pages of phone directories and then recited the contents of randomly chosen pages. There is a famous story about him doing a mathematical problem called the "fly puzzle" where he is reputed to have performed a difficult mathematical operation almost instantaneously in his head. The physicist <NAME> referred to him as being of a superior "species", an "evolution beyond man". Some consider him to have been the smartest person of the twentieth century, if not one of the smartest people ever to exist.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: In recent times, I don't think so. Even truly, remarkably, unfathomably gifted people still finish high school, undergraduate, PhD etc. The difference is that they tend to breeze through these steps extremely quickly, and while collecting many accolades along the way.
A good example I can think of is [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Scholze), a mathematician from Germany who was made a full professor at age 24 in 2012.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: A couple of world-class mathematicians had a similar career.
To name those who were not named by previous answers:
* [Hardy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._H._Hardy) won a nation-wide math programme (which he later helped to abolish) after two years in college, it essentially granted him a faculty position after some shuffling.
* [Gelfand](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Gelfand) bypassed both high school and university and went straight to postgraduate studies at 19.
* [Wiener](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norbert_Wiener) got his BA at 14.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/15
| 794
| 3,460
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am using a somewhat obscure mathematical technique in one of my papers, and there is only one reference text (so far as I am aware) that collects all the important examples of the technique that I need. However, I am leery of pointing my readers to this book without a warning, because the reference book has numerous problems.
The book was clearly compiled from a number of earlier sources, including the original research literature. These were put together without much care. Notation for the various functions involved changes from one table to the next. (The same object may be referred to an upper case *U*, lower case *u*, or a cursive letter.) Even more seriously, there are many misprints, some of which are more obvious than others.
I feel like when I reference this text, I should put some *caveat lector*—something like, "Details about the transformation and all the important examples that will be needed in this paper may be found in [1]; however, the reader should be advised that [1] contains multiple typographical errors." But that sounds somehow unprofessional to me.
Is that kind of statement unprofessional sounding? If so, how can I convey the information that this is a poor quality source—it just unfortunately happens to be the only comprehensive source in existence.<issue_comment>username_1: Citing the original sources (as suggested in Comments by @MorganRodgers and @SolarMike) would generally be preferable even if the flawed book were perfect. By doing so, you credit the discoverers directly and give a sense of the timeline of various advances in the field.
However, I think it would be a mistake for you to ignore the flawed book entirely. It may be of some use to your readers in spite of its errors. Also, you wouldn't want to appear to be ignorant of the existence of that book.
As the occasion arises to point to the work of others, credit the original sources. However, if the original sources may be difficult to obtain, you could also mention the later book (along with a brief comment in
passing about any mistakes on the specific topic under discussion).
You might also mention the later book if it has any value added:
translations from other languages, explanatory figures, discussions
of connections with other results, historical perspectives, and so on).
If the later book is in your bibliography and you mention it a few
times, you have at least given it due credit and shown you are aware of its existence. If you gently point out
a couple of specific relevant errors, your alert readers will get the idea that
the book has some flaws.
It is always best to point out errors in gentle, non-judgmental, matter-or-fact language. In spite of your best efforts and those of referees and editors, your own paper will likely have some mistakes. You will see some of them immediately upon publication, even though they stealthily avoided earlier detection.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Just saying that [1] contains errors is not terribly helpful: it would be better to be more specific. For example your article could have an appendix where you would list the errors that you found, ideally with some justification. (Such as: "inconsistent with equation X or reference Y".)
On the other hand, it would be unprofessional for the authors of [1] to take offense of justified criticism, or for you to mislead your readers about [1] out of fear of being offensive.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/15
| 463
| 1,964
|
<issue_start>username_0: After a first round of revision, I have a paper whose status on Elsevier is "Accept, after minor Revision". Indeed, referees pointed out some revisions (very minor ones) which are relatively easy to be fulfilled. I made the necessary modifications in one day.
My question, is really a bad signal to resubmit very quickly a paper? What can be pros and cons of that?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't overthink it, nobody is going to notice, and if someone notices, they won't care.
The paper is the only thing that matters, if all the reviewers' remarks were addressed (either by changing stuff or by providing a reasonable argument not to change), then it's done, better sooner than later.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As long as you don't exceed the deadline, I don't think it really matters - it won't get "more accepted" for being resubmitted quickly. Of course, sometimes it can help getting it into production faster.
However, if you have spare time I'd suggest not rushing the resubmission. While you could get away with taking a day, consider taking closer to a week. Forget about the paper for a couple of days, and carefully proofread it again - both the revisions, and the unchanged parts.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: If it's not unreasonable that the edits could be made in a day, there's no reason to hide the fact that you addressed everything in only a day.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A one day turnaround is not unreasonable for minor revisions. Think about how documents are processed in the work world.
Also, note that minor revisions may even mean the paper does not go back to the reviewers but the editor just looks at it and signs off on it. He sees that you have made the changes. Also, good if your cover letter is clear for him. "I have implemented all changes except number 5 of reviewer 2, which is no longer relevant based on other changes". Or whatever the story is.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/15
| 881
| 3,584
|
<issue_start>username_0: I noticed that (most?) articles do not include the date of publishing/writing.
For example see [this paper (on researchgate.net)](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228897060_Characterization_of_Thermal_Response_Induced_by_HeadDisk_Interaction_in_Current_TGMR_Head).
If I click for a citation on that page, I see there the year listed as "2018". But in the article itself, there is no indication when it was written.
Why is that? Or did I miss something?
PS: To clarify, I am not asking about the duration of the work, but the information *when* the work was done (realizing that a single point in time can not be picked). For example if there is a paper about "Method for better battery capacity", then it is a substantial information whether it was written or published in 1899, 1989 or 2018.<issue_comment>username_1: For most purposes, the publication date is more important than the date the work was done. There are some exceptions, but they are few. The author doesn't know the publication date when the work is done.
The publication date is a kind of meta-data about the publication, not precisely relevant to the work itself (most cases). That meta-data is maintained by the publisher, of course.
Some work, of course, is time dependent and so the authors will, then, likely say when data was gathered, and so on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Most of the published papers have the publication date/month along with the year. Authors sometimes do not include this information when they upload pre-prints on sites such as researchgate.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Why Not Include Month/Day?
==========================
By convention, when we cite an article, we almost always just use the year, since that’s a short enough chunk of time that most reference lists will not have duplicate short citations. When there are duplicates, we often use letters (e.g.) “Smith et al. (2018a)” and “Smith et al. (2018b)”. There usually isn’t a *need* to know the date more precisely.
What Is Included
================
**Most (or all?) journals I’ve encountered *do* report this information: dates of initial submission, acceptance and publication.** As others have said, preprint manuscripts are not the published version of the paper and therefore have no need to include this information.
There are cases, less frequent in the past century, wherein manuscripts have been published decades after they were written, or even posthumously. Often this was because the author thought their writings would be unpopular or even dangerous, so they waited for a time when society would be more receptive. In such cases, I would expect this information to be mentioned *somewhere* near the paper — perhaps in a preface section, an editor’s or publisher’s note, or — if nowhere else, on Wikipedia.
When In Doubt...
================
In modern academia, papers tend to be published soon after they are written — usually within a year or two of the paper being submitted. Previous versions of the paper (e.g. submissions to journals that did not accept that manuscript) don’t really count because they do not represent the manuscript’s final form. This is in part because science is a competitive venture, and scientists want their findings to be available to those who would use them as soon as possible.
It’s usually a safe bet to assume that a paper was written within a year or two of the publication date — unless you have reason to suspect otherwise, in which case you can usually do some additional digging to find out.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/15
| 427
| 1,828
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I have a question about a paper which has multiple authors, who should I email? The professor whose lab the paper came out of maybe? The first author named on the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: It probably doesn't make a huge difference, but your two suggestions are fine. The one you correspond with may pass on your query to one of the others if that is appropriate. The first author may mean something or not, depending on the field. The one whose lab it came out of may know a lot about the specific paper or not, again depending on the field and how the lab works.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If I understand it correctly, you're a reader of the paper and want to contact the author(s)?
1. In most journals, one author is marked the corresponding author (and their email address is provided more prominently. It's a good first port of call, and the right thing to do on recent papers.
2. Otherwise, depending on the field, the first author is likely to be the principal author and most able to speak to the entire article.
3. If the paper is very old of course, you might have to do some research of your own to find out who is still active and which email address is still valid. In this case, if you can't find the first author's (who may have been a junior researcher and moved on) it might be ok to inquire with the lab director.
4. If you have all email addresses, you might want to send it to all three. Three is not that many addressees. Five or more would be different - you don't want to send a mass mail.
Also, the content of your letter would be slightly different based on which option you choose. You didn't tell us why you want to email them. (If it is to get a copy, first author is probably the one who is maintaining a personal file.)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/15
| 250
| 980
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been accepted for postdoc position. According the detail of postdoc
>
> the successful candidate will begin in January 2019
>
>
>
What does it mean? Can I start my work at any time of January? Am I right?<issue_comment>username_1: I would presume that you have to inquire with the lab/director/hiring manager/program manager to fix the actual start date by mutual agreement. You can't normally just choose unilaterally, and they may have a fixed date in mind. In general, the hiring entity decides on the employee's start date.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience (Western Europe), this means "on the first working day in January". You could try to discuss with the professor if you can start at a later day — this may or may not be possible. (In my experience, some professors also give you the first days "unofficially" off — for relocation, which is sadly often necessary for postdoc positions.)
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/16
| 1,459
| 6,134
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in an uncomfortable position. I am beginning to do research in a particular area within my field. The body of related works are mostly done by students of a single professor. And, nearly all of it makes a crucial mistake. The works are borrowing/applying concepts and techniques from other, more theoretical and mathematical fields, yet in a way that doesn't make logical sense. Specifically, they are conflating terms, utilizing them as good sounding buzzwords, and (through an incorrect interpretation) as a criterion for the design and value of their techniques.
My work heavily uses the same concepts, yet my arguments are completely contradictory to those of my peers. So I am trying to figure out the best course of action.
I could start by submitting a paper correcting their mistakes, but it would feel a little cruel, and would likely turn my peers against me. I could publish my works, and try to point out their flaws politely, but the flaws are so prevalent that it would still likely cause a lot of discomfort to them. I could send an email to them explaining the problems with their work, but I'm not sure how that would go. It's quite a problem, because it really invalidates the reasoning and conclusions of dozens of papers and even a text book. The professor is distinguished and well known in his field. I really don't want to be the one to stir things up, but the issue must be addressed in some way or another in order for me to publish my work.<issue_comment>username_1: This may seem like a cliched answer, but I believe good communication would be key. First off, you need to make absolute sure about whether or not their work represents flaws (preferably with your supervisor). The next step I believe you should take is to contact the Professor whose team you believe has made such critical mistakes. Discuss the issue with them and get their perspective. If, after all of these efforts, you are still absolutely sure that there is a mistake in their work, politely inform them that you disagree with their approach/methods/technique/etc. and that you will be publishing a paper representing a different point of view and approach that presents your argument on the matter. Mind you, don't ask their permission, it's merely a courtesy so as to show that you don't mean anything personal by it. After that, publish away.
Finally, I should mention that I feel that there isn't really any issue at all. If someone got mad at me for publishing a paper that disagreed with their research...that's not exactly a person I would care if they were mad at me or not. It not only seems excessively petty, but it's also the nature of scientific research. Great ideas and solid theories get overturned and refuted on a regular basis. If your counterpoint to their research is solid enough to be published in a good journal, then it's good enough for them to read and consider without getting unnecessarily angry.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I recently read a paper that I think does something quite similar to what you're thinking about. You can access it here: <https://physics.nyu.edu/sokal/complex_dynamics_final_clean.pdf> but here is a citation for posterity:
<NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>., (2013). The complex dynamics of wishful thinking: The critical positivity ratio. *American Psychologist*, *68*, 801-813.
This is a case in which a psychological theory was built upon some concepts taken from other fields and the authors here argue they were both wrong to do so and at any rate seem to have made key errors in their applications of those concepts. To be clear, this example is pretty much scorched Earth; the critics are not pulling any punches or trying to make anyone feel better. Of course, you have to remember that anything you say will be read against the literature that came before it, so you need to make a strong case.
What I think is done well here is:
* Make clear what exactly is wrong and what the implications are for the research area.
* Be absolutely certain about the correctness of the criticism and painstakingly explain it so non-experts have a chance to evaluate your new claim. Chances are, the error(s) has gone uncorrected due in part to others not knowing enough to notice it.
* Discussing a potentially correct use of the concept (this could be where your research comes in).
I should also note that the lead author of that paper was a graduate student in psychology who somehow connected with the second author, an eminent scholar in mathematics and physics. It's also clear from the author note that the author(s) reached out to several other highly-qualified researchers to solicit feedback. One lesson here is it is helpful to get powerful allies, who are often going to be people who don't have a dog in the fight (but could be people who always disbelieved the research you're criticizing). Another is that it pays to be really, really sure you're correct.
In this case, the lead researcher behind the criticized theory responded and gave substantial ground to the critics ([link to gated article](http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fa0033584)), saying she was not qualified to dispute the critics' claims and felt the gist of the theory was correct but clearly the mathematical side was not. I wouldn't be so optimistic about the original researcher conceding a whole lot in your case, but it's a good example of how an argument can be presented so convincingly that everyone involved finds a measure of agreement.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Can't you just explain why they are wrong in your own published work? Maybe just discuss it with them beforehand and explain your arguments so they don't see it as a personal attack when they see you criticising them and attacking their arguments.
There are some well-known [articles](https://webspace.science.uu.nl/%7Ehooft101/gthpub/Instantons_U1_1986.pdf) in physics which are entirely based around ''X has argued this, his arguments are completely wrong, here is why'', but it's done in a polite and rational way.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/16
| 1,483
| 6,146
|
<issue_start>username_0: ### Background
My professor assigned me a project as part of a course. [The project is part of another student's thesis](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120586/how-to-stop-working-for-other-peoples-thesis) and has several flaws. I explained the problems of the project to my professor. However, the professor seems to believe that I just don't understand the project and don't know how to code.
The professor now sent the other student on a work trip for seven or eight months, starting in 10 days.
In the meantime, the professor asked me to fix the project and produce the results.
Unfortunately, the project is so flawed that I can't produce results with it. I believe that it's the other student's responsibility to fix the project. S/he also knows the project and it's issues much better than I do.
The professor still doesn't consider my concerns and just pushes me to finish the project. He wants to grade the course based on a publishable paper from this flawed project. (My other classmates already have required information to design a controller, and assigning this flawed project and grading like this is not fair.) Meanwhile, the professor does not even want to talk about a topic for my own thesis. I feel taken advantage of and don't know what to do.
### Questions
What can I do to convince the professor that I should no longer waste time on another student's broken project but rather start my own? Would it be okay to refuse to work on this project?<issue_comment>username_1: This may seem like a cliched answer, but I believe good communication would be key. First off, you need to make absolute sure about whether or not their work represents flaws (preferably with your supervisor). The next step I believe you should take is to contact the Professor whose team you believe has made such critical mistakes. Discuss the issue with them and get their perspective. If, after all of these efforts, you are still absolutely sure that there is a mistake in their work, politely inform them that you disagree with their approach/methods/technique/etc. and that you will be publishing a paper representing a different point of view and approach that presents your argument on the matter. Mind you, don't ask their permission, it's merely a courtesy so as to show that you don't mean anything personal by it. After that, publish away.
Finally, I should mention that I feel that there isn't really any issue at all. If someone got mad at me for publishing a paper that disagreed with their research...that's not exactly a person I would care if they were mad at me or not. It not only seems excessively petty, but it's also the nature of scientific research. Great ideas and solid theories get overturned and refuted on a regular basis. If your counterpoint to their research is solid enough to be published in a good journal, then it's good enough for them to read and consider without getting unnecessarily angry.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I recently read a paper that I think does something quite similar to what you're thinking about. You can access it here: <https://physics.nyu.edu/sokal/complex_dynamics_final_clean.pdf> but here is a citation for posterity:
<NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>., (2013). The complex dynamics of wishful thinking: The critical positivity ratio. *American Psychologist*, *68*, 801-813.
This is a case in which a psychological theory was built upon some concepts taken from other fields and the authors here argue they were both wrong to do so and at any rate seem to have made key errors in their applications of those concepts. To be clear, this example is pretty much scorched Earth; the critics are not pulling any punches or trying to make anyone feel better. Of course, you have to remember that anything you say will be read against the literature that came before it, so you need to make a strong case.
What I think is done well here is:
* Make clear what exactly is wrong and what the implications are for the research area.
* Be absolutely certain about the correctness of the criticism and painstakingly explain it so non-experts have a chance to evaluate your new claim. Chances are, the error(s) has gone uncorrected due in part to others not knowing enough to notice it.
* Discussing a potentially correct use of the concept (this could be where your research comes in).
I should also note that the lead author of that paper was a graduate student in psychology who somehow connected with the second author, an eminent scholar in mathematics and physics. It's also clear from the author note that the author(s) reached out to several other highly-qualified researchers to solicit feedback. One lesson here is it is helpful to get powerful allies, who are often going to be people who don't have a dog in the fight (but could be people who always disbelieved the research you're criticizing). Another is that it pays to be really, really sure you're correct.
In this case, the lead researcher behind the criticized theory responded and gave substantial ground to the critics ([link to gated article](http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fa0033584)), saying she was not qualified to dispute the critics' claims and felt the gist of the theory was correct but clearly the mathematical side was not. I wouldn't be so optimistic about the original researcher conceding a whole lot in your case, but it's a good example of how an argument can be presented so convincingly that everyone involved finds a measure of agreement.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Can't you just explain why they are wrong in your own published work? Maybe just discuss it with them beforehand and explain your arguments so they don't see it as a personal attack when they see you criticising them and attacking their arguments.
There are some well-known [articles](https://webspace.science.uu.nl/%7Ehooft101/gthpub/Instantons_U1_1986.pdf) in physics which are entirely based around ''X has argued this, his arguments are completely wrong, here is why'', but it's done in a polite and rational way.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/16
| 1,744
| 7,465
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm almost going to start my PhD. Out of curiosity, I searched for several effective researchers in several fields over the internet. Most of the common property among almost of them are
1) Working under the supervision of another effective researcher.
2) Not doing PhD in my country.
The second rule fails if and only if his/her supervisor satisfies both rules.
I considered some other factors such as time of spending, passion on the subject. Although many people I saw in my colleagues, friends, seniors etc., have these qualities are not as successful as the people who have the above two points (country, supervisor).
In this context, even I have so much aspiration, the two factors are pushing me back due to this empirical evidence.
Thus, my question is, whether the country and the standard of the supervisor affects my PhD quality and hence my career?
Note: I was neither a child prodigy nor an exceptional person but an average student. Hence please answer realistically.<issue_comment>username_1: Unless you are much more self motivated with many more ideas than the average beginning doctoral student, you will depend on your advisor/supervisor for both research ideas and guidance. So, the "quality" (whatever that means) of your supervisor has quite a lot to do with your success initially. That, along with a supervisor who can connect you to other researchers via collaborations he/she has can be important. Collaboration and synergy are very important, especially when you get started.
I doubt that country has much to do with anything if you find a good supervisor. Most of the world is not where you are, of course. That is even true in China. Great research gets done most everywhere, though not all academics move to The US or EU which gets a lot of "press". Of course, you will find a lot of research in large universities, wherever they are.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The first point: working under the supervision of an effective researcher, is certainly one of the most important criteria, if not *the* most important criterion.
The second point, about the country where you work, is one that many people would like to discard. However, the following points need to be taken into consideration (especially since you have given the tag of "developing-countries"):
* The quality of research facilities available. This is more important for *some* areas of research, like experimental sciences. There is no doubt that the developed world has, on average, much better facilties.
* The quality of your co-students and general research atmosphere at the probable place of work in your country. This is actually *quite* important as you learn a lot from other young researchers, seniors and juniors. A good university will have a better atmosphere and such universities are most often in the developed world.
* The extent to which your research will get global visibility. Some areas of research are not "global" as they tackle local problems. However, many scientific areas are "global". In such a case, it is unfortunate, but true, that the country of origin of your research *does* make a difference to the visibility it gets.
Having made all these points, there *are* plus points about carrying out research in your own country.
* If you do well, it brings credit to the society which you are a part of and which had a big hand in making you who you are.
* Research is difficult enough without adding the burden of finding your feet in a different culture and society.
Ultimately, you will have to weigh all these factors against the quality of research positions that you have available once the application process is complete. All the best.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Both while I was doing my masters and, moreso, in my current, unrelated to my masters, job, I have been told to disregard research papers from China in particular. It produces a lot of research but there are certainly tales of data being manipulated or outright falsified to get it to publishing. So I am sorry to say that the country that you do research in does make a difference.
Afraid my answer is only word of mouth. I am not a scientist as such but I work with them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I think there are two perspectives on the choice of advisor and country.
1. **Machiavellian Perspective**: Being in science is sadly a career and, as such, not fully determined by quality and content of your research work. Instead good PR and smart career moves do make a big difference. Superstars will always appear effective as good students will join them and maintain their top standing (even if they have dwindled or are never around to even talk to these students). If you join a superstar **and** do good work on currently hot topics, you are more likely to be superstar yourself. If you go to a country which is great at PR (e.g., the USA), your results are more likely to be read even if someone in another country (frequently in Japan) has published them twenty years ago. If you know what you want (e.g., already know a topic that intrinsically motivates you and some good research questions), it makes complete sense to join the superstar of your field in the most famous place. If **not**, the long duration of US PhD programs and frequently high concentration of superstars in the top programs, would also make a choice clear. Thus, by this perspective you are badly advised to go anywhere but a few select top advisors at top universities with big PR departments in the USA.
2. **Idealistic Perspective**: When your core goal is idealistic, i.e., you want (A) to do great research and (B) learn how to develop your research skills, you need someone who (1) does great research but also (2) cares & has time for you and (3) with whom you will get along well. Clearly, a superstar rarely fulfills these points. Such advisors have little time due to their success payoff (the number of opportunities grows with your fame), too many students (superstars are a fatal attraction), will not help you grow at all nor find your path to research. They will discern a good idea and maintain a set of PhD students who are supporting their status while removing the ones who have not proposed great ideas to them (*survival of the fittest*; a friend of mine who is currently a superstar himself compare the lab of his superstar advisor at Stanford to a gulag). While that algorithm is good for them, it works against you. Thus, choose someone whose research and personality you like. As good research always is successful **on the long run**, he will be successful and so will you. You may even have a good feeling by having done it with more honest means.
When I was at your stage nearly twenty years ago, I had the choice between many advisors (both stars and nobodies), many schools (no names and two of the top three in my field) and many countries (CH, DE, JP and USA). I chose an advisor whom I really liked but had a suboptimal standing in the community (good researcher but not a star) but at a top 10 place in my field in the USA (but not one of the top two schools). All of my advisor's students and postdocs including me (I got tenure fours after my PhD) and him had the best careers which we ever expected. I recently looked at the students of all the advisors who had made me competing offers, and I can just say: I did the right choice for me.
I hope this helps?
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/17
| 616
| 2,712
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some authors have an ORCID ID in order to be identified and distinguished in case of authors with similar name, change of name, different name format, etc. However, some sources don’t provide the ORCID ID of the author (if any exists), which causes a lot of problems when someone tries to harvest papers from websites with scholarly resources.
I thought that a combination of some author features such as name, email, and affiliation could be enough to distinguish the authors, but I don’t think this is a robust solution.
Is there any way to uniquely identify every author?<issue_comment>username_1: Aside from ORCID (which by far not every paper and person has), there really is no sure-fire way to uniquely identify an author. Using the name becomes problematic with common names (not unusual anywhere in the world, but a particularly common issue in Asia) or name changes (for instance in case of marriage). Combining with affiliation and e-mail address will also only get you so far as most academics tend to change universities at least once or twice in their career, and both affiliation and e-mail address tend to change in these cases.
For bibliographic research, the most promising approach is probably to combine all of the above with field information (e.g., a Markus Huber publishing in medicine is not particularly likely to be the same as a Markus Huber publishing in philosophy), and train some sort of heuristic classifier. Clearly, false positives/negatives will happen, but if your goal is to holistically assess a larger field of research a few false categorizations are unlikely to impact the overall picture too much.
If your goal is to assess an individual researcher, really the most accurate information is usually to trust what information the researchers themselves maintain (e.g., a CV or publicly available publication list).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is exactly what ORCID tries to achieve:
>
> ORCID is a nonprofit organization helping create a world in which all who participate in research, scholarship and innovation are uniquely identified and connected to their contributions and affiliations, across disciplines, borders, and time. (from their website)
>
>
>
However, not everybody is aware of this initiative or cares enough to set up an ORCID for themselves. Some journals request ORCIDs upon submission, e.g. for [Nature Methods](https://www.nature.com/nmeth/for-authors/preparing-your-submission) each Corresponding authors needs to have an ORCID.
The problem with using other information to identify researcher, is that this information can change as opposed to a uniquely assigned number.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/17
| 2,271
| 9,691
|
<issue_start>username_0: While attending a graduate course on an engineering subject (reliability of complex systems) I had an idea about a different approach to a known problem. The application of this different method to a known topic would simply require to build a model of the physical system under study and to do a few simulations. I have already done a test to see if this approach makes sense at all on basic problems (the one you would see in an introductory course on subject). After a quick search, I found that there is no literature that covers this aspect in our field of application (electrical engineering).
I told my idea to a colleague student that has "real world experience" on the subject and he was very enthusiast. Our cooperation would involve him bringing his experience (to evaluate the process and the quality of the results) and I would bring the computational skills (set up the simulation etc...). The paper would be about 5-6 pages plus results (and scripts if they can be attached).
Now I'm asking you: what is the correct iter we could follow to see if this paper is worth publishing? And then, assuming it is, where do we submit the paper for publishing? I'd be happy to publish it on my blog anyway but I think there is some potential for "more than a blog work" (if you can allow me the use of this bad description) and would like to know what are the options.
Also, I would like to add that I came up with the idea of a publication of this work because I came across a lot of short papers in this format (new solution/method to old problem). While I think our idea is not revolutionary, it might add some useful perspective.
**TLDR:**
1. We are 2 graduate students that have an idea for a new approach to a relatively old problem.
2. We already did some tests and the idea seems sound.
3. The paper would be approx 5-6 pages plus results.
4. The subject is related to realiability calculation in electrical engineering applications.
Where do we go after having written the paper for "proper" validation and publishing request?<issue_comment>username_1: Your situation is just like that of any other researcher. Work out your ideas. Write them up with proper citations of past and related work and submit to a journal that might be interested. The journal may be one of those you have found in your work and have cited.
Your advisor will give you initial feedback on your idea I hope and the editor and referees of the journal will also provide some validation. Your advisors likely have more experience and perspective than either of you, so take their advice about originality and possible importance. But, basically, in order to publish, you *just do it* and wait for feedback from the journal. Expect, as a minimum to have to rewrite based on reviewer comments.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> While attending a graduate course
>
>
>
Does this mean that you are not a full time student? Normally, when I hear people talk about graduate courses, I assume they are a full time student with an advisor.
This is exactly why you should have an advisor at grad school. Hopefully an advisor can help you pick an appropriate publication.
Another thing to mention is costs. Some publications require a fee. Some publications require that at least one of the authors present at a conference. Between publication fees, conference fees, and travel expenses, these costs can be thousands of dollars. This is often paid by grants. (It is possible that your school has put aside some funds to help grad students deal with these costs.)
If you don't have an advisor, I would suggest you look for a professor in your school who works in this field and contact them. It may require you to put a third author on the paper, but that may not be a bad thing. Who knows, a third author my have insights that can improve your paper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. Write it up clearly and submit it. If you have never done this before, I recommend to do a little research (figure out what the most appropriate journal is, read some articles there, FOLLOW the notice to authors on formatting or other issues).
2. Also recommend to look at one or two simple books or articles on how to write a science paper. I quite like a couple of older references:
Katzoff Technical Writing (short and sweet)
<https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/media-arts-and-sciences/mas-111-introduction-to-doing-research-in-media-arts-and-sciences-spring-2011/readings/MITMAS_111S11_read_ses5.pdf>
And the relevant chapters of <NAME> An Introduction to Scientific Research (library will have it).
3. You do not need to have an "advisor" to submit a paper. After all lots of scientists in business or government work without professor advisors. Just submit paper.
4. Practical advice: try to get into a decent, but lower prestige journal. Not some [predatory](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2158/how-to-identify-predatory-publishers-journals) fly by night thing. But also not Science or Nature. In EE, it may be easier since there is such a fragment of journals. Probably pick the closest IEEE journal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm not sure what you mean by "validate" but a common pitfall of junior (or even senior) researchers is that they "rediscover" some known result. It is always a good exercise to write a manuscript but, to avoid this going to waste, you might want to talk to the instructor (or a specialist in the area) to see if she/he knows of literature on this topic: "a quick search" is hardly enough and you should make a *thorough* search if only to be sure your bibliography on this topic is up-to-date. Once you have convinced yourself that your calculation and idea is really new, you can send for submission.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: It sounds like you're not in too much of a hurry to publish your results. This is wonderful news for you, since this means you have a lot more options!
The main downside to submitting to a journal is that it may take a very long time before you hear anything, and much longer to get a final accepted work. If you have no experience submitting journal papers, then your work may be buried in the review process for well over a year (reviewers asking for corrections, extensions, extra citations...), or just rejected outright, which means you're a few months down the line having to look for an additional journal to submit to. The next journal you submit to has to be different from the first one, and would put you through the same process.
If you're looking for an painless way to get your publication out there and receive feedback before you submit it to a refereed venue, why not put it up on a free online repository (e.g. ArXiv)? This carries several benefits:
1. You get some practice in writing an actual paper: while ArXiv is not refereed, it would be a bad idea to upload something completely embarrassing.
2. You can 'safely' disseminate your work and elicit feedback from experts, without worrying about them using your work without any credit.
Another option is submitting your work to a workshop. In CS at least (engineering too I would imagine), workshops tend to be more forgiving than conferences/journals, and would plausibly accept a 5-6 page paper (which sounds more like a note than a complete journal paper unless there's something very profound in your results) that contains some nice ideas that would lead to a discussion. Most decent workshops are at least lightly refereed, which means you'll get some meaningful feedback on your work, and much sooner than you would if you submit to a journal right away. Papers that are accepted to workshops are not excluded from being published in journals, which means that if you have written something amazing, then you can still definitely submit to a journal later on.
EDIT
In addition to the above, as others have mentioned: if you don't have a formal advisor then you need to be extra careful of predatory journals (ones who will publish anything for the right price), and of ensuring your results are original.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I published a paper as a second year undergraduate student as a result of a project course, at the end of the project the teacher figured we had enough to write a paper. We wrote this under his and a PhD student's guidance. I am positive that we could not have done it on our own, as we were only second year's students, and this was our first paper ever. In my opinion it would really benefit you to have a supervisor of some sort.
You mention you don't have an advisor, which makes me think you're a European student (?), like me. European graduate degrees don't involve advisors until you are writing a thesis. So my advice would be the following: approach professors you have worked with in the past, who are in the area of expertise as your paper's subject, and ask them to supervise you and your colleague in writing this paper. Helping you bring structure to your paper, reviewing your draft, and helping you select a good conference or journal to submit to (and just guiding you a bit through the process), greatly increases your chances of getting your work published. Moreover, you also build a connection with this professor, and considering it is likely you might want to do your thesis in their area of expertise, this can only help you in the future.
Let me also mention that our supervisor/teacher at the time helped us secure a grant (and even personally put in money) to cover a large portion of the conference attendance fees and travel costs, so we could travel there and present our work.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/17
| 607
| 2,469
|
<issue_start>username_0: I current have an 85% in his class but my final is pass or fail. I’m horrible at math and have really tried my hardest to get that b but my professors math final is either you pass it or if you fail it, you fail the course! Is allowed? I also asked around and it seems he’s the only professor that is doing this.<issue_comment>username_1: Why wouldn't it be allowed?
* Legally? You didn't say what country you are in, but I'm not aware of any country that regulates courses at this level.
* Your university's rules? You didn't say what university you are in, so it's impossible to say for sure. In general, though, the "instructor of record" has the authority to make decisions about how a course will be graded.
Broadly speaking, this does not seem like a bizarre policy that some wacko professor implemented; I've actually seen this in other math departments. I guess the philosophy is that most entry-level math courses are about skills: they do not want to pass you onto more advanced courses unless you know these foundational skills well enough to do them in a measurable way. (I realize that you may not personally plan to take more advanced courses, but the principle is the same).
Anyway: **yes**, unless your university has a policy that forbids it (e.g., a policy saying that all professors of a given course have to grade the same way), this policy is almost certainly allowed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you asked your question so general (without specifying a country), I can also answer: yes, they can. In my country, for example, lecture courses are to be graded by only one single final exam.
It may be that this is not the case in your institution and that your professor is not allowed to grade in this way.
Note, however, that many professors do weird things while nobidy cares. (I had a professor who openly annoced that women should not be allowed to study and all women failed his course, it was widely known, but nobody cared. This is of course an abosolutely horrible and extreme example - I also had other professors who went over the rules and nobody cared.)
So what I advise you is: Don't just ask "around", but ask specific people who know these kind of issues are are sympathethic to you. For example, your student's union or your academic advisor. Those people should know if this grading is allowed, and, if no, if it is possible in your institution to do something against it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/17
| 313
| 1,482
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper to a conference, but some one in lab help me after the paper has been submitted. Can I add them as a third author if the paper got approved to be appear in the conference ?<issue_comment>username_1: I think that in almost all cases this would be fine. But you should contact the conference (or program) committee chair immediately to get confirmation. Better to do it early than to be disappointed later.
This would especially be possible if the conference gives you a chance to revise the paper after review and comments by reviewers. Many do this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It really depends on the conference and their advertised submission rules in the Call For Papers. Some top conferences have strictly stated rules and it is impossible to change the authors after the paper submission. They state this clearly and in the submission online system editing the authors fields are disabled after the deadline. However, some conferences allow adding authors after submission. I think you can figure our this from the submission system. If it allows you to change the authors after submission, and there are no written rule about this in the Call For Papers, then you can change. Otherwise, you may try to contact the program chairs. But if it is a top conference, and they have announced their rules in the submission instruction with the Call For Papers, chances that you can add an author are very low.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/17
| 1,041
| 4,254
|
<issue_start>username_0: As students we have the right to choose our semester subjects (for the new semester beginning in 2019)
So we went send an email to the department chair indicating what subject we would like to take.
We received days later the notification about the courses to be open and my course was not there.
I went to talk to him and his justification in summary was this "He did not **read** my email and now it is too late to propose the course and he already did his plans".
But that's not true at all and I can prove it.
So he clearly has another reasons on why to not open the course for me.
So I think I have 2 options about how to deal with this:
1. To go and talk about this with the Academic Vice President.
2. To do nothing and to take one of the courses that are going to be open the new semester.
If I do 1. ' I'd win ' for sure and the course would be open thought the department chair would not be happy at all.. so I'd possible get into trouble with him because I know he is a vengeful person and I might not be the only one possible affected but my sister as well (she is a freshman) in the same institution.
If if do 2. I'll be an unhappy student the whole semester, studying something that I don't like at all **but** there won't be problems with
department chair.
Could someone tell me what should I do?
What would be the best to do in this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: This question looks a little bit opinion based, so it may actually be forbidden to ask it here, but I try my best..
I would advise you to really think again about your assumption "'I'd win' for sure". I don't know your situation, but I cannot believe it's so sure due to many reasons:
* Often, if it is too late, new courses can not be added even if there was some mistake before. This is due to many reasons: room booking systems, maximal amount of hours professors want/are allowed to teach, administrative reasons, reasons related to budget etc.
* Why should a new course be added if only you want to take it? If others want to take it too, why did it not have been added?
* The statement "I'll be an unhappy student" comes across a whining even if it's true and is probably not convincing.
* This chair seems to have a lot of influence and, if you are correct, acts in bad spirit against you. How do you know she/he will not continue to tell their version of the story to the Vice President? Normally, the voice of a student will not be heard in academia.
* The whole issue sounds to irrelevant for a Vice President to take on.
From your story, I do understand that you are in a small college (this chair knows you so well that they even act against you) and the chair would be willing to act against you and your sister. From this viewpoint, I would advise you against doing something.
Sadly, in my experience, professors often get away with bad behaviour and students are often not considered. (This may be different in other places.)
Try to get happy with the other courses and study your subject on your own. Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, your chair's answer is not helpful at all and if he really did not read the mail, it is quite unprofessional. Nonetheless, things may happen (and they happen to me, too, sometimes - but I would prefer to apologize instead of beeing rude).
When it *is* too late (which might be the case), there is nearly no chance in adding additional courses because of a usually very complex interaction of time budget of each professor, other obligations, minimum course attendance policies, administrative deadlines for setting up information systems, room bookings, etc.
Maybe there are requirements regarding minimum sutdent attendance (e.g. we are not allowed to teach courses with less then three people (unless we do it in our spare time)).
To make a long story short: There may be very good reasons for the answer, but I agree, the answer is rude and bad style. But because of this I would suggest to make the best out of the situation and accept the courses as they are.
Maybe my answer would be different if you could provide more information about the ruels under which you are usually allowed to choose your subjects.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/18
| 1,369
| 5,085
|
<issue_start>username_0: My question parallels that of <https://english.stackexchange.com/q/99886/117318>, which asks whether "Gamma et al." should be considered singular or plural for verb conjugation. The top and accepted answer says that it depends whether the verb refers to the researchers (since the translation of the Latin is "Gamma and others", which is plural), or if it refers to the publication/work.
**Which usage is conventional in academia?**
Is there significant variation across fields that anyone is aware of? Are there best practices to avoid confusion?<issue_comment>username_1: If you say "Gemma et al." to mean the paper, then it is singular. This is the usual case. If you say "Gemma et al." to mean all the authors of the paper, then it is plural.
>
> Gemma et al. describes the ants of Southeast Asia.
>
>
> But note: Gemma et al. have never actually been to Southeast Asia.
>
>
>
**added**
Comments show this varies by field. So look at some of the best recent papers in your own area, and see how they do it. In fact, some areas do not write "Gemma et al." but something like "[7]" or "[Gem 1995]" or whatever code is in the bibliography. Then of course we may write
>
> [Gem 1995] describes the exceptional Lie algebras
>
>
>
even if there are three authors. Or, if you claim papers cannot take any actions,
>
> [Gem 1995] contains a description of the exceptional Lie algebras
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm going out on a limb here and making a wild guess. "Academia" is too broad. Some fields may use one more often than another, but I really doubt that it goes much beyond a single author and how he/she is thinking at the moment. I think you will find wide variety of usage even in the same field.
However, I'll go out even further on the limb and suggest both a reason for this and what I consider a sensible way to write.
Sometimes you want to refer specifically to a particular paper and your phrasing or context makes that clear. Whether the paper has multiple authors or not isn't relevant. The paper is *it* and it is singular.
However, sometimes you want to refer more generally to the work of an author or a group of authors, of which a particular paper is only an instance. In such cases it is entirely natural to use singular or plural depending on the number of authors.
But it is a bit more complicated. You could, in fact, even refer to the work of a particular lab (in general) independent of its members, in which case, it is, again, singular (in the US, at least - see below), depending on your overall phrasing and context.
There is, I've noticed, a per-country convention in some of this. In the US, if I refer to the work of, for example, Google, I would use the singular (Google *has* produced...). But in the UK an organization is considered to be plural (Google *have* produced...). This same convention would naturally be applied to a lab considered as an organization.
So, my conclusion is, don't look for any consistency for *Academia*. But try to make clear in your writing whether you are referring to a particular paper (singular) or to the work, more generally, of its authors (varies).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I believe the opposite to a highly [upvoted answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/121772/22768):
I consider it *wrong* to write "Gemma et al. *describes* the ants of Southeast Asia" (emphasis added), because "Gemma et al." means people, not a paper, hence, it is plural. Thus, use *describe* (as opposed to *describes*) in the following
>
> Gemma et al. *describe* the ants of Southeast Asia.
>
>
>
I don't believe "Gemma et al." can refer to a paper, unless it is quantified as such, e.g.,
>
> Work by Gemma et al. *describes* the ants of Southeast Asia.
>
>
>
Returning to the question, **"Gamma et al." is plural**.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: When discussing citations in general, you can have a singular citation: when a paper has been cited only once (by another). However, use of *in text* citations themselves varies widely between disciplines. You should follow the conventions of your field. These should be evident from other publications in that field. Different fields refer to previous publications by findings of the authors, a study, or an observation that has been shown (in the passive voice).
Regarding use of the citation with respect to English grammar “Gamma *et al*” is Latin for “Gamma and others” so you use it just as you would fit referring to the findings of multiple authors in English:
>
> Gamma and colleagues have described the ants of South East Asia
>
>
>
If it is acceptable in your field, you can avoid this entirely with the passive voice:
>
> The ants of South East Asia have previously been described [Gamma *et al*., 1984]
>
>
>
Unless it is the convention in your field or you want to draw attention specifically to the authors (such as discuss multiple works from the same group), then it is not necessary to use the citation in a sentence.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/18
| 2,188
| 9,639
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a paper where I have many co-authors and most of them did not contribute much. As a PhD student I am in a weak position to reject such inquiries of senior faculty.
To address this, I want to add a section on author contributions. However, the journal where I have this paper under review does not have this section as a default.
Is it still OK to add this or how should I proceed to make it more clear that I did all the work on this paper?
**UPDATE**: thanks to all, I am overwhelmed with the feedback I got. Based on your advice, I decided to not take any actions and make this a lesson learned for future situations. As the paper is already under review it is also too late. In the future, I will try to convince "coauthors" to be mentioned in the acknowledgements instead.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you need to consider for a moment if this is in your own benefit.
Depending on how you go about it, adding such a section without your contributors knowing can come off as a backstab, and hurt your relationship with your contributors. Especially since the paper is already under review, and you seem quite adamant to have it included. If you do let them know (and review) beforehand, it might still come off to them as off-putting that you are adamant about discrediting their contribution (in your own words "I did all the work"). Sure they might not have written the paper, but is it really true that they contributed nothing of note? It is very common for supervisors who do reviewing or who only give advice to be listed, even if they have not written any original text. Other academics are aware of this, so what do you really gain by asserting yourself as the sole author?
If you do chose to include a contribution section, make sure that you go about it in a way that does not hurt your relationship with your colleagues, something which is far more important than the exact credits of one publication.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I'll take an even firmer stance than @ElectricToothpick: **Don't**
To put this another way, what's the cost-benefit analysis? The cost is that you could make a reputation for yourself as someone who looks to gain too much of the credit. This is a reputation that will hinder your ability to get on future papers. The benefit is that you get more credit for this paper.
In the papers that I have read, there is the tendency to assume that the order of authors is in decreasing contributions. I have seen *one* author contribution section; it was in a paper where the two authors wanted to make it clear that they were equal contributors. In that case, the response of the the folks with whom I was talking about was along the lines of "Oh, that's nice." Had the contribution section been more along the lines of "The first author contributed 90% of the data", it would have been very jarring to us. The only time that this sort of a thing wouldn't look bad would be if an advisor wants to make sure a student gets credit. But there are other ways to do this.
You can get more credit as the primary author in other ways. Principally, if you are the face that champions this paper; e.g. in conference presentations or future papers, the ideas from this paper will become tied to you without needing to intentionally draw attention to yourself.
Now, granted, my papers have been in a different realm than yours, so maybe there's a practice of this in Econ. I think the easiest way to answer this question is to ask you how many of the papers you have read include a section like this? If you can't point to a sizeable percent of papers that include contribution sections to denote primary contribution, the inclusion of the section is liable to draw more negative attention than positive.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with @L\_W's comment. Proofreading a manuscript is in general not a sufficient intellectual contribution for coauthorship, although it can certainly be recognized in an acknowledgments section. You may wish to consult the authorship guidelines promoted by an organization that's authoritative for your field and journal. In fact, a major reason such guidelines are written is to prevent exactly this sort of abuse, where senior academics can extend their CV by a few hundred feet by nominally contributing to dozens of papers.
As an example, the [International Committee of Medical Journal Editors says](http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html):
>
> The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:
>
>
> * Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
> * Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
> * Final approval of the version to be published; AND
> * Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
>
>
> […] All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged
>
>
>
Other answers have pointed out that by telling the "coauthors" that they aren't coauthors, you will rustle a lot of jimmies and obtain little to no personal career benefit. This is perfectly true, but would playing along with them be consistent with your own ethical sense? Would you feel good admitting that you did this to some hypothetical bright-eyed undergraduate who looks up to you? That's what I ask you to consider.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I am assuming that you are mostly concerned about getting full credit for this paper on the job market. I would offer three solutions.
First, if you have a supervisor who is sympathetic to your point (and who agrees to this strategy), you can make them the “bad guy.” Then you can say that your supervisor said that you cannot add any additional authors at this time. You might even be able to say that you have been advised that proofreading needs to be handled as a note in the Acknowledgment section/statement, rather than authorship.
If the supervisor is not willing to go this far, then you could ask them to emphasize your primary contribution to this article in all letters written on your behalf on the job market. This would be very standard and would do the same thing as a contribution statement, just in a more private manner.
Finally, you could purposely look for a health Econ journal where this type of statement/disclaimer is more standard. If it is a journal norm, then your colleagues can hardly object to your including it. You might even be able to use the fact that you have to write such a statement to remove people whose contribution would give a bad impression .
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm usually all in favor of contribution sections (I've been at the border between medical and natural sciences for a long time, and I've met this custom in medical papers). However, for the present situation I agree with @username_1 that for a paper already submitted and under review it is too late to take any such step. IMHO the starting of this paragraph should already be in the first draft of the paper that is sent around.
* I've found contribution sections a nice instrument in situations similar to yours: having coauthors where a substantial contribution to the paper is not clear or did not happen.
PhD students are often not in a position to question higher up faculty on whether they should not be coauthor without significant risk to their standing. The contribution section can hand over part of this to the editor who is not in any dependency situation with possibly gift coauthors.
While I've not yet seen any coauthors being thrown out of the author list by an editor, I've seen author order (1st authors) being changed on the basis of the contributions section.
* Even as the main author of a paper (in the sense of doing the major part of writing up and integrating the various coauthors' text contributions) I would *not* write up any but my own contribution to the paper. I usually start a "Contributions" paragraph and then `"CB did this, that and that."` plus a comment that everyone please fill in your contributions. That way, the "small" coauthors have to spell out that they did not do anything substantial - or they may spell out valid intellectual contributions that you didn't even suspect like being the source of the idea for solution your supervisor told you as a starting point.
* I also think (hope?) that everyone who truly did not contribute substantially will find it very embarrassing to spell this out - and may retract their wish to be a coauthor and say they'd rather be acknowledged.
But even if that doesn't happen, again the editor or worst case the reader will know that they didn't contribute.
---
I'd like to point out that I think contributions sections genuinely useful for readers as well - in case you have to argue for including one in the future:
* Particularly in interdisciplinary papers, readers may want to get into contact about a variety of things. Saying who did what allows them to directly contact the person they look for.
* And, of course, in any situation where it is important to judge the actual contribution (e.g. if someone wants to check expertise in an application).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/18
| 2,915
| 11,389
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm using a throwaway account for privacy. I know professors are human beings and "I can just ask", but, as this is the start of the relationship, I don't want to seem rude - or to seem that I am interviewing *them*. This potential advisor has published papers in top journals before, but nothing for the last 3 years.
I know this question is related: [PhD with a supervisor who has not published anymore since 2014](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96010/phd-with-a-supervisor-who-has-not-published-anymore-since-2014), but this professor is quite young, so the situation is different.
I think that if I ask them about "their current research interests" they will just talk about the current project that is about to begin - without addressing the issue I'm interested in.<issue_comment>username_1: Instead of a question that might be insulting, you should probably ask them what they've been working on for the past few years. You need to know that in any case and their answer might give you the reason that they haven't got anything out recently. There may be a lot of work in progress but not yet ready. That sort of thing can actually be an advantage to you and knowing what it is, certainly is.
But if their answer indicates not much research, then you might want to keep looking.
By the way, this is a topic for a sit down conversation, not just an email. The latter might work, but would require more work from the prof and so you might not get as complete an answer.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Given the *publish or perish* mentality, a (young) researcher that "has published...nothing for the last 3 years" is heading towards perishing, at least, they are in many disciplines.\*
Although I agree with [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/121808/22768) that "[they] may [have] a lot of work in progress but not yet ready" and that "sit down conversation, not just an email" is most appropriate, I feel that nothing for three years is simply too long and it doesn't give much confidence that they can help you churn out publications (to get a PhD).
I recommend rethinking their suitability as a supervisor.
\*As noted [in](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121807/how-should-i-ask-a-potential-advisor-why-they-havent-published-in-the-last-3-ye/121809?noredirect=1#comment324445_121809) [the](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121807/how-should-i-ask-a-potential-advisor-why-they-havent-published-in-the-last-3-ye/121809?noredirect=1#comment324448_121809) [comments](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121807/how-should-i-ask-a-potential-advisor-why-they-havent-published-in-the-last-3-ye/121809?noredirect=1#comment324449_121809), established researchers (or researchers with protected employment statuses) enjoy more freedom.
---
I'm not an advocate of the *publish or perish* mentality, but that's the world we live in.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think in a very real sense, you **are, in fact,** interviewing potential advisers. It would be rather disingenuous for a potential adviser to believe that he or she is beyond the bounds of accountability for his/her research record. I would say something such as the following:
>
> I am interested in participating in publishing papers. Would we be able to publish papers together?
>
>
> What types of projects/papers have you worked on in the last few years?
>
>
> What are some of the current papers or projects you are working on?
>
>
>
A quality adviser would have quality answers for these questions. Moreover, they would know that it would play in their favor to have at least some explanation as to why they have not published lately. These questions will open the door for them to provide an explanation of their research record. If they seem to dodge around that time period, I'm honestly not sure that they should be your number one choice for an adviser.
I would also verify that this is not just a matter of their CV being out of date. Perhaps they have published papers and just have not updated their CV in a while.
---
Aside: If I can give my personal thoughts on choosing a young, unproven adviser, I would recommend avoiding professors who have not established themselves somewhat. I have seen a number of PhD students who run into issues when they choose a professor who has not yet been given tenure and who is constrained by the "publish or perish" mentality.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Just to point out some possible reasons that may be entirely private and something they don't want to discuss with *anyone* :
* Were on national "military" service (which does not always require you to be in the military, BTW).
* Had or has an illness or a family member who was or is seriously ill. ( And this may itself make it impossible for them to be removed from their position depending on the nature of their contract and local laws).
* Suffered a bereavement - if you're young and have not lost anyone really close, you need to understand this can be *shattering* and take years to recover from.
* Likes to teach and is good enough at it to satisfy the institute's needs - teaching is a vocation and it's a pity it's not more respected at third level.
* Has a permanently tenured position they can't be removed from - rare but possible
* Was doing confidential work, e.g. for government or commercial, which can't be published.
* Took time off to wander the Earth (or whatever). By the time you complete a PhD you'll probably need/want to do that too, as it's emotionally, physically and mentally exhausting.
* May have been on some sort of parental leave, part time or full time. Note that in some places men get parental leave entitlement too, so gender may not be an issue.
* May be involved in a long term study or studies that requires a lot of work but generates no publishing opportunities.
I'd also caution against dismissing a non-publishing supervisor. Publishing may be the common goal nowadays but it doesn't mean it's a *good* idea. I'd honestly prefer fewer publications of higher quality and real depth than the rush to publish anything mentality we have now. Not being published does not mean they're not a good supervisor, or even that they don't know a great deal about the field(s) that interest you. A supervisor is someone who offers intellectual and administrative support and advice to you. You need a supportive mentor who can steer you through the difficult process of getting a PhD. Not all research publication orientated supervisors are good at this, IMO. Is *their* being published frequently relevant to *your* getting a PhD ? That's your decision.
You do need to sit down and discuss your issue with the potential supervisor. As someone suggested, it's best to think of this as *you* interviewing *them* just as much as they'll be interviewing you. Both parties need to know that the person on the other side of the table is someone who is going to do what they need.
Remember when talking to them that you may be hitting sensitive issues they're not comfortable with, so watch out for negative reactions.
@AlphaZero's comment was very relevant :
>
> Make the question sound as if it's your inability to look, not that there's nothing to see. "I've been trying to find some of your recent papers but I can't seem to locate anything, can you point me in the right direction please..."
>
>
>
Maybe add that you're interested in making sure you're both a good match.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Perelman practically didn't publish anything from 1995 to 2000.
Result: Proof of PC.
So maybe it's a good thing your potential advisor didn't publish in the last few years ;)
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: You should certainly ask a potential advisor about what they've been working on. To fully understand a publication gap, it may be important to learn something about their career goals and motivation. These kind of questions can seem a little impertinent if you ask them indelicately. A canned question is unlikely to serve you well here, but realize during the back and forth with this person that you want to understand their motivations. Having worked under someone who wanted to publish every little observation, and also someone who didn't want to publish until we had something earth shattering, it's good to learn these things up front. Both can be frustrating -- more so, if you didn't see it coming.
I'd add, you may be able to learn a fair amount in a sit-down discussion with this potential advisor, but you won't get the entire picture without talking to their students and staff. Ultimately, it is more important to know if this person will be supportive of *your* developing career and *your* publication goals.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Just straight up and ask him. Short direct question without fencing, apologies, or caveats. Then shut up and listen to what he says and let him speak at length. Sort of like how <NAME> does interviews. If you are skillful, you can even use silence from a quick response to compel a deeper explanation.
It's probable that the guy is not right guy to advise you, irrespective of his answer. But who knows, maybe you learn something to change your mind. Or just to know what he is up to.
If he says "I'm a p-chemist and have been building a laser for last 3 years", it's actually a good response. But don't believe him when he says it is about to start spitting out publications. It will need another 3 years.
If he gets upset, then that is one more learning why to avoid him. Don't mince around too much with these guys like a mouse.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I think that any real scientist can easily answer any of such questions.
If not, he is not real scientist. Doesn't matter how much he has in publication or any of so-called "scientological" metrics (I am making fun of any "metrics" because those are what bureacracy wants, any real scientist does NOT).
What you are essentially doing is asking the scientist: "Look dude, I'm having this stupid metrics of mine, and this metrics says you have low something. Tell me about this low something please".
Of cause any real scientist will understand and tell you that it is your metrics speaking, but not his works.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: **Frame challenge to your question**
>
> I don't want to seem rude - or to seem that I am interviewing them.
>
>
>
This is an abdication of your *responsibility* to simultaneously interview those who are interviewing you, and an unethical position which privileges those with institutional power to dictate the terms of a negotiation (implying that 'negotiation' should be coercive).
Second, professors live interesting lives with many demands. Were I asked by a prospective student, mentee, etc. "Out of curiosity I while I was reading up on your research, I noticed you haven't published on these topics recently. Are you still engaged with research in this area?" I would feel (1) this person took the time to learn about my interests and engage with me about them, (2) they are interested in knowing about my current research directions, and (3) they want to understand the work demands on a researcher in my area, *all* of which speak well of them from their side of the interview.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/18
| 605
| 2,554
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've noticed that there are very few Massive Online Open Course (MOOCs) that cover the core college math curriculum, for example
* Basic integral and differential calculus
* ODE
* PDE
* Linear Algebra
* Abstract Algebra
* Probability
* Statistics
* Combinatorics
* Symbolic logic
* Complex Variables
* Real Analysis
Anyone care to speculate what are the factors involved that make these bread-and-butter topics so much harder to MOOC-size or less easier to motivate professors to produce than Introduction to Water and Climate or Cybersecurity Fundamentals? I.e. it seems that specialized niche topics receive far more pedagogical energy than basic ones. But I know as a student that I would very much appreciate having the core fundamental topics available in MOOC form.<issue_comment>username_1: I feel that this is heavily driven by the job-market. Topics in academic mathematics do not possess the necessary buzzword status to make MOOCs profitable. Very few job postings ever ask for competency in abstract algebra, real and complex analysis, basic calculus, etc. Many job postings want machine learning, "big data," "artificial intelligence," virtual reality, etc.
When a MOOC advertises its wares, very few people are going to click on an ad that tells them they can learn abstract algebra and category theory. A MOOC teaching Python and "data science" intrigues a number of people who believe that if they can just learn a little Python, all of the sudden Facebook will pay them $150k a year to do data science.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: First, as @username_1 has already pointed out, the audience for relatively advanced math courses is much smaller than the audience for business and software courses, so why would somebody go to the effort?
Second, while having the lectures available for streaming is very nice, the real meat of any upper division math course is going to be the homework and exam problems. For more computational courses it's possible to set up sophisticated automated graders that essentially run a bunch of unit tests on the submitted code. I don't think grading proofs can be automated in the same way.
That means grading the homework is going to be a bottleneck. If you were to employ an army of TAs to grade a thousand real analysis homework assignments it would cost a fortune. MOOCS have tried to get around this for some subjects using a published rubric and grading by peers. I'm not convinced it works very well, and I've never seen it used for a math course.
Upvotes: 4
|
2018/12/18
| 1,480
| 6,041
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there a general rule about what a postdoc or graduate student can or cannot refuse to do because of personal convictions?
I assume that there must be institution-specific rules, but also maybe legally defined limits? I know that (fortunately!) in most countries, a supervisor cannot "force" a student or postdoc to do something that goes against their religious convictions, for example, but there can be grey areas that are not as protected as religious belief; what about personal opinions and life choices?
For example, I am wondering if personal convictions are a valid and protected reason to refuse:
* Experimenting on [animals](http://web.stanford.edu/group/hopes/cgi-bin/hopes_test/animal-research/#the-case-against-animal-experimentation)
* Applying for defense/military funding (e.g. [DARPA](https://www.darpa.mil/))
* Collaborating with companies with [discutable ethics](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/oct/07/monsanto-trial-cancer-appeal-glyphosate-chemical)
* Working on any type of [dual use research](https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/special-research-considerations/dual-use-research)
* Conducting experiments that generate significant amounts of pollution
Most of the time this kind of ethics dilemma can be avoided by carefully choosing a laboratory. But not always - money can be tight, reviewers can ask for animal validations after submission... So I am wondering if there is a rule of thumb for determining what is a "reasonable" reason to refuse an academic project based on moral arguments.<issue_comment>username_1: You can certainly refuse to do unethical things. But be prepared to argue the ethics and, if necessary, study up on the necessary background to do so.
However, there are coercive environments in which the pressure to conform can be very severe. But some of the topics you list may indicate that you are not in a field that is compatible with your beliefs and understanding. If, for example, animal research is common in your field, you might want to start looking for an exit route that will get you to a place with fewer conflicts, both personal and interpersonal.
But no one here can guarantee you that following an ethical path will always be the best path to professional advancement. But there are some things that need to be resisted.
On the other hand, some of your examples may not be as strong as you would like. For example, some people work trying to improve the ethics of the companies that they are in. The recent "revolt" at Google is an example. Also, DARPA doesn't *always* do bad things. In essence it produced the internet (or its predecessor did).
Also, different people may judge these cases differently. I suggest that you follow your own convictions and work, over the course of your career, to improve the situation you find in the world.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Standard IANAL disclaimer (I’m speaking from anecdotal experience and could be very wrong).
I had a student who recently refused to work on a political dataset because of her political views. I could’ve told her that this was a material part of our work and she has to do it or I can’t advise her. I don’t think there would’ve been any repercussions to me if I did. Generally speaking, if an advisor doesn’t want a student the reasons why aren’t very relevant, it’s best to part ways.
Eventually I chose not to and assigned her to another project. Did her academic progress suffer as a result? Sure. She made a choice and is paying some price for it.
For funding/collaboration, I can hardly see what legal protections could exist. If you choose not to apply for a DARPA grant or work with anyone there, you can’t reasonably argue any grievance as a result. Say, if you’re up for tenure, saying that you didn’t secure any funding but that’s only because you refuse to work with DARPA sounds preposterous.
A similar case goes for boycott movements (e.g. BDS). My field (computer science) has a very strong Israeli presence; if you’re a BDS supporter it may limit your future academic prospects. No one can force you to collaborate with Israelis, but in some cases, it may become very difficult.
In the end, nothing in life is free, and you need to decide how important are your personal convictions vs the price of following them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is there a general rule about what a postdoc or graduate student can or cannot refuse to do because of personal convictions?
>
>
>
I'm not a lawyer, but anyway I doubt many countries would have laws for this. If anything, I think this is more a matter of institution policy.
First, it's important for a person to be hired as postdoc or as a PhD student to do their due diligence: they are supposed to know what can reasonably be asked from them before signing the contract. If some of it challenges their personal convictions, they should discuss it beforehand with the PI and warn them about what they don't want to do. The PI might end up hiring somebody else instead, but this is a risk to accept.
In the case where the conflict between the personal ethics and the job was not foreseeable, the first thing to do is (again) to discuss it with the PI: they are likely to understand the objection and often find an alternative option.
But if there is no agreement at this level, then it has to be settled by the institution procedures. This would completely depend on the institution policy and the nature of the moral objection, obviously. In general I assume that the institution would try to find a compromise satisfying for everyone, for instance by assigning the person on another project. However it's worth mentioning that most academic institutions have ethics committees in place. My intuition would be that if the study requiring the task objected to was granted approval by the ethics committee (as it should have), then the institution would be entitled to ask the person to perform the task or quit the job.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/18
| 739
| 2,869
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm considering graduating from undergraduate school in 6 years in 2024 to build up my resume and pursue interests for graduate school admissions. I feel that I would not feel ready to attend graduate school if I graduate undergraduate school in 4 years. However, most successful people (past U.S. Presidents, successful scientists, people in high political offices, etc.) have graduated undergrad in 4 years. I've no idea what to do.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it partly depends on what your major is. But speaking generally...
I think this is a creative approach to tailoring college to your needs and wants, as well as being strategic. You sound like a smart and - observant person. Take it from someone who got a liberal arts degree in 6 years of school time, and 2 years out of school. It took me 8 years to graduate after starring my fist semester of college. I changed majors once which set me back only a semester. Three semesters before I was to graduate, I made the decision to move unexpectedly across the country with my family who I was living with while in college, rather than staying and paying more to go to school in my hometown while living in a dorm or bad apartment. Long story on why but I didn't enroll in a new college until almost 2 years after I moved to my new state. Then it took me 5 semesters to finish rather than the 3 I was told upon transfer of my credits. During the 2 years away from school I got a job at a sandwich shop, quickly became a manager, gained a couple skills in the process.
That job is the main thing that got me the job I have now - not my liberal arts degree.
Nobody cares how long it took you to get where you're going. It doesn't matter. What matters is why and what you did to make that time meaningful. Work through some semesters to gain some real life experience. Earn a promotion at that job. Make a change in that company, however small. THAT is what employers want to see.
You will hear every new graduate complain that they can't find a job because employers want experience but to get experience you need to get a job. So get a job. Or don't and volunteer if you want to keep more control over your time. Better yet - hold your own project completely.
Take the extra 2 years. And make it count.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: From the point of view of a graduate admissions committee\*, the undergraduate degree is just one step in the sequence:
* elementary school
* middle school
* high school
* **undergraduate**
* graduate
* postdoc
* tenure-track
* associate prof.
* prof.
* named professorship
* chair, dean, provost, chancellor, ...
\*although they'll realize that many applicants will want to stop going down this list after the graduate degree.
It's okay to take extra time in any of these, but it does delay moving on to the next one.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/19
| 1,507
| 6,352
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just started my PhD which is in Artificial Intelligence (AI).
My supervisor is specialized in Electrical Engineering with a hint of AI.
He knows that it is not his area of expertise and suggested if I can find a mentor who is more specialized.
I contacted many professors from other universities but no one accepted to become my mentor.
I'm not sure what to do now, especially because it is not easy to find another university.
Do you have any advice or suggestion for this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: Finding a co-supervisor is a responsibility of your primary supervisor. You should be guided on how to find a qualified mentor. Have you tried your own university? Can you ask help from your EE supervisor? What about asking your school to help (maybe someone else in your school has the connection)?
Sounds like you've just started the degree. If your supervisor and your school are unable to find a mentor for you, please consider suspend your PhD. No point for you doing an AI PhD unless you have someone mentoring you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You face a few options. Suppose that you insist that you must do your PhD in AI.
* You should do whatever it takes to find a new advisor or an appropriate co-advisor. This includes talking to other faculty, the department chair, and even the dean of the college and graduate school. When "whatever it takes" fails to be a suitable choice, you must take a different approach.
Suppose that you decide or determine that doing a PhD in AI is not as important as doing a PhD at the university where you currently reside.
* You should do whatever it takes to find an advisor + project that is of suitable interest to you for your work. This especially includes talking to other faculty as well as reading in other research areas. When "whatever it takes" fails to be a suitable choice, you must take a different approach.
Alternatively, suppose that you decide or determine that you will do the PhD in AI with only administrative support and no research support from a faculty advisor.
* You should do whatever it takes to complete the appropriate research on your own. This includes reading journals and other dissertations in the field and communicating directly with other researchers in the field. This can/should include bringing faculty on to your committee who have the appropriate background in your chosen topic.
Suppose that you decide or determine that you must do your PhD in a certain topic (AI or something else) but for whatever reason cannot do it where you currently are.
* You should do whatever it takes to find a new university + advisor + project that is of suitable interest to you. This includes researching where your topic is currently being done at other universities and contacting the faculty at that university directly to ask whether they have a potential opening for you to join the group. When "whatever it takes" fails to be a suitable choice, you must take a different approach.
At this point, you may likely realize that you will not be doing a PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It really depends on you. If you have good background, have done Masters and knows how to to do research, done some AI experiments, determined and motivated, yes you can do Phd. with your described circumstances. You can design an experiment and submit papers and from there you build your knowledge.
Many students do Phd. in almost totally independent way. Like anything in life, there is an existing ideal image drawn about what/how things should be done. But you find yourself in another circumstances that this ideal image can not be applied.
My rule is: "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are".
You can either:
1) Change the topic/area to something that your supervisor can provide expertise.
2) Continue in what you want, validate your results through conferences.
Start from what you know and keep going.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I would also consider if you can just swing the whole thing on your own. You should realize that many professors (even in areas where they share expertise) append their names routinely to papers where all the ideas, work, and even writing came from the grad student.
At the end of the day, you sort of sink or swim on your own. Now, it would be nice to have an expert in your field and some apprenticeship. But academia is drastically far from an apprenticeship model.
If you think you can handle it, just do it all on your own. Might even be easier since the old ma...person won't try to interfere with you. Just add his name to your papers and plunge ahead as a stealth PI!
Honestly even when the fellow is in your field, you may find more collegial interactions with other professors, older students, postdocs, people from adjacent fields and conferences, etc.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I would ask for clarification on this line:
>
> He knows that it is not his area of expertise and suggested if I can find a mentor who is more specialized.
>
>
>
What does he mean by this? Is he willing/eager to supervise you, or not?
* If not, then I agree with the other answers here, find a different supervisor at all costs
* But if he is willing to supervise you (and he said this just to warn you that he is not an AI expert), then you could try to make this work. You'll have to agree on a schedule.
+ I recommend that you spend the first year to teach yourself about AI (maybe check out pyimagesearch.com -- the paid materials are excellent, though overpriced...I assume you know how to code already, if not, that will be a problem), get your supervisor to send you to a conference like CVPR or NIPS, and take any courses your university offers. You should cover all the basics like CNNs, LSTMs, and GANs as well as non-DL techniques (e.g., random forest, hidden markov models, etc.). Not everyone has what it takes to keep motivated and teach themselves a new subject for a whole year; hopefully you do (if not, consider switching universities)
+ From there, your EE supervisor should be able to help you identify a research topic of mutual interest -- for example, running these under SWaP conditions, or proving information theoretic theorems, or whatever else EEs care about, I don't know.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/19
| 1,210
| 4,969
|
<issue_start>username_0: Let's say Alice is a PhD student who's well into the research phase of a PhD. She's got a nice exciting project she enjoys, a helpful supervisor, she's making good progress. And then there's a *big discovery*. She's excited about the new discovery, she wants to work on it, and her current project suddenly doesn't seem so interesting anymore. Real life example: suppose Alice is a Chemistry PhD student from the late 1980s working in condensed matter, and the big discovery is [cold fusion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion).
Can Alice ditch her project to work on the new discovery? What if the new discovery is in an area that is not her supervisor's specialization? I'm also curious whether Alice can make this switch if she's a professor (as opposed to PhD student).
My guess would be that it's hard for Alice to do this as a PhD student even if there's another supervisor available, because she would have to start over again and therefore take longer to graduate (running into funding issues). It'd also be an administrative hassle especially if she has to change departments (Chemistry to Physics in example above - the fields are related, but not that related). If Alice is a professor then she would presumably be stuck, because she's got to work on her grants. She could apply for new grants related to the big discovery, but it would be a while before she can work on it. Am I correct?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Can Alice ditch her project to work on the new discovery?
>
>
>
Alice has many responsibilities in her life, including satisfying her sponsor and producing her thesis. Whether she should ditch her project depends on those responsibilities. IMO, she perhaps doesn't have enough time to fulfil her obligations and ditch her project (PhDs are short), so she might need to delay working on the new discovery. There's perhaps an exception if Alice is in the early stages of her PhD.
>
> What if the new discovery is in an area that is not her supervisor's
> specialization?
>
>
>
That's not particularly relevant: Many students work under the supervision of advisors that aren't specialists in their research areas.
>
> if she's a professor (as opposed to PhD student).
>
>
>
Then, she isn't bound to the time constraints of a PhD, but still has other responsibilities.
>
> I'm also curious whether Alice can make this decision
>
>
>
Yes, she can. Who else would make it? Pressure may be applied by others, but, ultimately, the decision is Alice's. (That said, she may get sued for her decision, e.g., if she ditches her project without delivering upon contractual obligations, but that's perhaps unlikely in academia, even less-so for student-Alice, as opposed to professor-Alice.)
>
> I'm also curious whether Alice can [feasibly] make this switch if she's a professor (as opposed to PhD student).
>
>
>
If Alice truly wants to switch, then Alice can make it happen. There may be many barriers: personal, institutional, contractual (including funding obligations), ... But, they can be overcome. That said, should she switch? That's up to Alice. She perhaps has a relatively easy position right now, switching will be a massive upheaval.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: So basically there is someone who is "motivated" towards new project and "demotivated" towards old one. One should consider theories of motivation in psychology here. Considering Psychology always helps according to my experience because it predicts our own acts accurately. So in this case “EIV theory of motivation” can be considered in order to take right decision.
According to this theory you are motivated in current state because you see that "output" of the new project is very good as compared to your current project. Second thing is that you have presumed that you will get "more output" while putting "same efforts" in new project. Other thing is that, you consider everything in your favour so that you are fully "able" to discover something big. These thoughts are unconsciously in the back of our mind.
The thing that person should really think of is validity of these unconscious thoughts. First motivational factor will not change irrespective of any condition and situation. At this current situation, as idea is new he/she is very energetic. So he/she may ignore extra work that will really add up in order to do something entirely new. This is surroundings as well as situation related factor. For e.g. he/she may require to change his/her guide person or idea may be entirely off-field for him/her. Other thing is ability and it strongly depends on self-determination and other surrounding factors. For e.g. you may be self-determined but if you are unable to raise funds which are unexpectedly very high then you may fail. He/she should consider all these internal and external factors in detail, consciously in order to assure goal accomplishment.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/12/19
| 2,591
| 10,728
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question is the reverse of [Dealing with a PhD student reneging on an agreement to appear in social media](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/111498/dealing-with-a-phd-student-reneging-on-an-agreement-to-appear-in-social-media), in which the student had agreed during interviewing to participate in social media outreach but refused to do so when hired. The top answers in the linked question sided with the student.
Suppose I'm a prospective PhD student looking for potential supervisors. I'm attracted to one professor in particular for both academic (e.g. matching research interests) and non-academic reasons (e.g. solves my two-body problem). The only problem is, he wants me to make social media videos to boost the profile of his research group. I think this is unreasonable, since doing this isn't part of the requirements for a PhD. I know I'm unlikely to enjoy doing these things as well, and would rather concentrate on my PhD.
The professor wants me to confirm both verbally and in writing that I'm willing to make these promotional videos. It's likely that if I say no, he will decline to supervise me. Is it OK to say yes, and then try to get out of making the videos?<issue_comment>username_1: No, this is not okay.
=====================
If you lie your way into a position you are not suited for, you will almost certainly pay for it down the line.
That's a very general rule, and I think it applies here. If you say you are willing to do X while interviewing for a PhD position and, after getting the position, you refuse to do X, then you are going to have soured the relationship with your advisor. That is a very important relationship. If you say no in the interview and you don't get the position because of it, then it's probably for the best.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Compromise**
You aren't interested in social media (albeit, you should perhaps give it a try) and you don't want to devote time to it, because it will detract from other activities, such as writing papers. But, social media is a *formal* requirement of supervision (in this instance). So, compromise:
>
> *Agree to participate in the production of social media videos, on the basis that you'll provide background material, be interviewed, etc., rather than the production aspects. Perhaps suggest that these aspects can be delegated to an undergraduate student (who could be paid), maybe a student in media.*
>
>
>
Also, remember that *dissemination is part of research*, so perhaps also offer:
>
> *To keep an open mind and be willing to take a more active role in the future.*
>
>
>
Thereby keeping your future options open.
**Do not agree to something you won't do**
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: From an ethics standpoint, yes (but with caveats).
You have the premise:
The professor is asking me something unrelated to the work in order to give me the position.
If this is the case, surely it is ethical to answer with yes as it will not impact the job. I knew a superstar professor who firmly believed that scientists should never have relationships - in his interviews, he always asked "Do you want to marry at some point?" The whole faculty, of course, advised prospective students to answer with "no". This question is, in my opinion, not different then your question.
However, there are two things to consider:
(1) Probably you don't know if making videos is relevant to the position. This is very likely! So you cannot assume your premise and therefore, you would deceive the professor (in another answer, your unwillingness to make videos is described as "you are not suited for the position). In this case, a lie would be unethical.
(2) You would damage your relationship with the professor when they find out. This is very, very dangerous -- in Academia, you really need good connections, recommendation letters to survive. So from an interpersonal standpoint, it would not be okay to lie.
(For example, the superstar professor I mentioned before terminated his student's position immediately after for some bizarre reason he found out that the student was dating someone.)
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: **Hard No.**
This isn't only unethical, it's also a really bad idea in practice.
*Unethical:* *Every* PhD position I have ever heard of requires you to do things that aren't part of the requirements to get a PhD (teach, do project work, help your supervisor with reviews, and so on). This is why you get a stipend or salary. Your prospective supervisor communicates very clearly what they expect from this position. It is not your place to decide that you would rather interpret the position differently. You are of course free to disagree with the assessment that this is important or fruitful, but then you need to raise your concerns equally clearly and upfront. Lying about it isn't ethical.
*Really bad idea:* You have been around this forum for a while. You must have noticed how all the truly terrible PhD experiences that people have start with a student having, for one reason or another, a bad personal relationship with their supervisor. Your prospective supervisor clearly feels very strongly about these videos, and most people care about not being lied to their face. If you now provide, in writing nonetheless, that you will help with these videos and then refuse to do so, you are running a serious risk of fundamentally breaking your personal relationship to the supervisor before it even gets a chance to develop. A few videos are surely not worth this risk.
If you decide to take this position, I suggest doing so with the mindset that you *will* in fact work on these videos. You don't need to be excited about it, and nobody can force you to do the best job in the world on them. Further, there is always a chance that your supervisor changes their mind on the subject, but I strongly suggest you don't take the position now with the full intend to weasel out of this task.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: Ethically its borderline if its okay to say yes and then TRY to get out of it, but you'd have to be prepared to face the possibility that you can't change their mind and in that case you'd (ethically) have to do the videos.
More honest would be to make your misgivings clear to the professor, and hope you can find a compromise. Is there any reason why you can't do the videos, other than you think its a waste of time you wouldn't enjoy? Perhaps you have problems with anxiety or public speaking that would make it difficult for you from a mental health perspective. If you have a good reason, discuss it with the professor.
To echo what @username_4 there is much more to a PhD than just doing your research and writing your thesis, and you are not in a position to judge what the "requirements for a PhD" are, almost all PhD requirements say something about "demonstrating good scholarship" or acting in a way that "becomes a scholar", with the interpretation of that often left to the adviser or committee. For example, no where in the requirements for a PhD does it explicitly say that work must be well documented, data open access and code version controlled, but that is absolutely a requirement for working in my lab. Many people see public outreach as an integral part of what it means to be a good scholar. In fact out reach work is a condition of many grants, perhaps even one that might fund the PhD position you are discussing.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: This question is a classic [loaded question](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question). You obviously want to hear the answer that it is not okay for the student in [the question you linked to](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/111498/dealing-with-a-phd-student-reneging-on-an-agreement-to-appear-in-social-media) to behave the way they did (and by extension that the supervisor who asked the question is right to be upset about it), so you have phrased the question in a way that makes that answer the only reasonable one. As a main example, you say:
>
> I know I'm unlikely to enjoy doing these things as well, and would rather concentrate on my PhD.
>
>
>
This portrays the student as a spoiled and entitled student who only wants to do things they “enjoy” and think they can have the privilege of “concentrating” on their PhD. However, everybody agrees that PhD students sometimes need to do things they don’t enjoy, and that, unless they are self-funded, they may have to do things like teaching that prevent them from fully “concentrating” on their PhD. That is not at all what the debate in the question you linked to is about. I won’t rehash that whole debate, except to say that you completely ignore the significiant privacy issues (in fact you do not explain that the student will have to *appear* in a publicly available video with worldwide distribution), as well as the fact that it is the supervisor in that question who comes across as entitled and borderline-abusive in wanting to force their students to participate in activities that contribute nothing to their training or professional development in order to help the supervisor’s career.
In summary, this question is not at all the “reverse” of the question you linked to. It may be worth considering on its own merits, but I think it bears little connection to the situation described there. Also, while it’s possible that the student is behaving inappropriately, that would by no means imply that it is “okay” for the *supervisor* to act the way they do. Another way that your question is loaded is that it implicitly assumes the premise that the supervisor’s behavior is proper, whereas (as the voting on the question you linked to overwhelmingly suggests) it is not.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Yes. If there's one thing you learn about PI management in grad school, it's that 95% of them have the attention span of a chipmunk on methamphetamines. It's always best to just say yes to stuff (especially stuff unrelated to your work) and then only worry about it six months down the line if you're asked again and have to actually consider that it's a serious request which you are expected to fulfill. Then you are free to say no, explain why, and have the argument. Your prior agreement to an off-the-cuff request is not in any way binding (any more so than the PI's prior agreement to get around to reading your thesis proposal by Tuesday, which will never happen until the thing is actually due).
It's not just ethical, it's the established standard. I would expect all PIs to understand this, and I would severely judge any PI supervising students who did not.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/19
| 1,653
| 7,070
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm two and a half years into my PhD program. Recently, I finally worked up the courage to admit it — I've been slacking off for over a year and it's my fault. Now I'm determined to be productive in research again but realized that I forgot how to.
It was sweet in the beginning. I got a paper accepted at a top conference after my first semester, which was quite something for a first-year. I was enthusiastic about research back then, devouring papers in and outside my field and conceiving of new research projects even in my dreams.
Sadly, things changed quickly. At the beginning of my second semester, I took over a project left by a visiting scholar in my lab. That project was complicated and beyond my expertise. I poured hours and hours into it but barely got any useable data. Meanwhile, my own projects began to go nowhere. My advisor didn't offer any concrete help (e.g., giving advice on how to improve my experiment equipment or design, pointing me to people who might be able to help, etc.) but just asked me to keep going. After a streak of failed experiments, I felt disillusioned and started to spend less and less time on research. I spent what must have been 40 hours a week on my hobbies and social activities. I feel ashamed to admit it but even when I was in my office, I wasn't thinking about research — most of the time, I was just randomly browsing the Internet and waiting to go home. I only worked hard before major deadlines and managed to get some papers/posters accepted at major conferences. These achievements, however, paled by comparison in front of those of my cohort. My advisor noticed and mentioned several times that my research is going slowly.
This semester, I came to the realization that I've squandered half of my PhD career and decided not to continue on the path of self-destruction. I want to make the most of what I have left but feel disoriented about **where to begin and what to prioritize**. For instance, should I first catch up on basic research skills that I lack or come up with new ideas? Speaking of the latter, what are some good practices I can follow in order to regularly come up with research ideas? — I used to be good at this but have now lost touch with what good (or at least feasible) ideas look like. How mature should an idea be before it's a good time to talk to others about it? Should I ever share my concerns with people in my program? — They may look down upon me and I'm not sure what good it does, but it feels so painful to keep pretending that I'm right on track.
Any suggestions would be much appreciated!!<issue_comment>username_1: This may sound stupid, but a good place to start when confronted with a seemingly unsolvable problem is just to start doing something. There are always some simple experiment/simulation one can run, some related papers one can read, or some results that can be written up. The point is to get back to making consistent and incremental progress, no matter how trivial it may seem or how many mistakes you make. Once you get the ball rolling everything else should follow, given your background.
Don't worry too much about coming up with research questions. Good research problems are not dreamed up in a vacuum. You have to immerse yourself in the literature and your research problem to see the gaps that others have overlooked or come up with new methods to tackle old problems. So when you are still trying to get back to speed don't expect brilliant ideas to just pop into your head.
Another thing you should do is to set up weekly meetings with your advisor. Or if your advisor is not available, then write up regular progress report, both for yourself and send it to your advisor. The fact that you can slack off for years and get away with it means that there is a lack of structure and discipline.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Concentrate on something easy that will end up being an "LPU" (least publishable unit). It won't be groundbreaking, it won't be cover of Nature. But it will be progress. You just need to get back into the swing of things. Avoid anything requiring building apparatus or that might not work. You need to get a small win, a base run, "selling a used car, not a new Jaguar". I don't know your exact field but a chemical example might be to just replicating a system you have done before and been published on with some different element or compound.
Keep it simple, keep it small, get something done and published, even if very "datapoint" type learning. You won't get some huge attaboy from it, but at least you will be back in the game. If you try instead for some <NAME> (hard problem) to compensate for past issues, it will be too tough and you will sputter out.
Actually I even normally give the advice to grad students to start with (and maybe even stick with) easy stuff throughout their program. Picking the right problem is probably the key thing to having a decent grad school experience. [After that picking a decent advisor (that you get along with, not who is famous).] Chasing the Holy Grail, failing, and then not getting your Ph.D. is a bad feeling...or just sputtering around until they take pity on you and push you through. Once you have tenure, it is a different set of incentives and you can push the cutting edge projects (and/or even burn through grad students sending them after Holy Grails).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think that the other responses on here have been good, but I would also add that having the attitude of "Do it today, rather than tomorrow" can be surprisingly effective in boosting productivity. What I mean, is that there are always experiments or problems that don't have discreet time limits on them, meaning that it doesn't really matter in essence if you try the experiment today, tomorrow or sometime in the near future. However, you would be surprised how much more you can actually get done if you take the attitude that those types of experiments should be done as soon as possible, rather than delayed ("today" even). As scientists, we often learn more from our failures than we do from quick and easy successes. As a result, getting to those failures faster might seem like it's not worth it, but actually pays off in the long run.
With regards to sharing concerns, I would definitely reach out to your lab-mates and other people you know the program (but maybe not your advisor depending on that relationship). I think you will find more sympathy there than you would expect, especially with an attitude that you would like to improve. Also, in my experience almost everyone in research is happy to discuss potential project ideas, at almost any stage.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: * Make priority on the tutoring and lecturing parts of your schedule.
* Put all projects aside.
* After you regain strength from lecturing, go into new field.
* Do not turn back into old work. It will not work. You will get drowned again.
* Remember always: PUBLISH OR PERISH. Because you never go back.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/19
| 1,646
| 6,946
|
<issue_start>username_0: So the title explains why I'm posting. I'm a masters student in economics at a pretty prestigious university and one of the courses that you're required to take as a first year is called Math Methods for Economists. It covers topics from Calculus to Linear Algebra and Differential Equations. I really wanted an A in this class because I'm hoping to have the option of applying to a really good PhD program (although I'm not sure yet), but I got a B- in the class.
I'm pretty upset by this. I really thought I could get an A. I took Calc I and II as an undergrad and I got halfway through Linear Algebra- I dropped out because it was the last semester of my senior year and honestly I was just lazy (but I still remembered a lot of the concepts from the class).
In the class I did really quite poorly on the first exam and I do blame myself for not preparing enough for that one. I was going to drop the class and retake it in the Spring (because you have the option of taking it online with FULL internet access during the exams) but then the professor said that if you get an A on the final he'd just give you an A in the class. I was determined to use that loop hole and get that A on the final.
I spent the 5 days before the exam studying so hard- I mean every free second that I wasn't eating or sleeping- I was up until 3:00am every night studying. I don't think I've ever spent so much time preparing for an exam.
I kind of knew it was hopeless though. This professor gives insanely hard exam questions that he does almost nothing to prepare you for. As aforementioned, I have quite a bit of background in math and I have never seen math problems like the ones he puts on his exams.They're not conceptually hard to understand but he tries to trick you using the most obscure algebra techniques that even software has trouble finding a closed form solution for. I've tried plugging some of the problems into symbolab.com and multiple times I was told "can not be solved" - which I didn't even know was possible.
I ended up getting an 82 on the exam and I just think its so unfair that I have to have a B- on my transcript. I've never blamed a professor for my own grade but this is ridiculous. I know some students complained about the professor directly to the program advisor before and nothing resulted from it.
Is there anything I can do about this? Does the B- condemn me to eternal graduate school hell? I'm really just looking for some peace of mind.<issue_comment>username_1: This may sound stupid, but a good place to start when confronted with a seemingly unsolvable problem is just to start doing something. There are always some simple experiment/simulation one can run, some related papers one can read, or some results that can be written up. The point is to get back to making consistent and incremental progress, no matter how trivial it may seem or how many mistakes you make. Once you get the ball rolling everything else should follow, given your background.
Don't worry too much about coming up with research questions. Good research problems are not dreamed up in a vacuum. You have to immerse yourself in the literature and your research problem to see the gaps that others have overlooked or come up with new methods to tackle old problems. So when you are still trying to get back to speed don't expect brilliant ideas to just pop into your head.
Another thing you should do is to set up weekly meetings with your advisor. Or if your advisor is not available, then write up regular progress report, both for yourself and send it to your advisor. The fact that you can slack off for years and get away with it means that there is a lack of structure and discipline.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Concentrate on something easy that will end up being an "LPU" (least publishable unit). It won't be groundbreaking, it won't be cover of Nature. But it will be progress. You just need to get back into the swing of things. Avoid anything requiring building apparatus or that might not work. You need to get a small win, a base run, "selling a used car, not a new Jaguar". I don't know your exact field but a chemical example might be to just replicating a system you have done before and been published on with some different element or compound.
Keep it simple, keep it small, get something done and published, even if very "datapoint" type learning. You won't get some huge attaboy from it, but at least you will be back in the game. If you try instead for some <NAME> (hard problem) to compensate for past issues, it will be too tough and you will sputter out.
Actually I even normally give the advice to grad students to start with (and maybe even stick with) easy stuff throughout their program. Picking the right problem is probably the key thing to having a decent grad school experience. [After that picking a decent advisor (that you get along with, not who is famous).] Chasing the Holy Grail, failing, and then not getting your Ph.D. is a bad feeling...or just sputtering around until they take pity on you and push you through. Once you have tenure, it is a different set of incentives and you can push the cutting edge projects (and/or even burn through grad students sending them after Holy Grails).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think that the other responses on here have been good, but I would also add that having the attitude of "Do it today, rather than tomorrow" can be surprisingly effective in boosting productivity. What I mean, is that there are always experiments or problems that don't have discreet time limits on them, meaning that it doesn't really matter in essence if you try the experiment today, tomorrow or sometime in the near future. However, you would be surprised how much more you can actually get done if you take the attitude that those types of experiments should be done as soon as possible, rather than delayed ("today" even). As scientists, we often learn more from our failures than we do from quick and easy successes. As a result, getting to those failures faster might seem like it's not worth it, but actually pays off in the long run.
With regards to sharing concerns, I would definitely reach out to your lab-mates and other people you know the program (but maybe not your advisor depending on that relationship). I think you will find more sympathy there than you would expect, especially with an attitude that you would like to improve. Also, in my experience almost everyone in research is happy to discuss potential project ideas, at almost any stage.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: * Make priority on the tutoring and lecturing parts of your schedule.
* Put all projects aside.
* After you regain strength from lecturing, go into new field.
* Do not turn back into old work. It will not work. You will get drowned again.
* Remember always: PUBLISH OR PERISH. Because you never go back.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/19
| 1,305
| 5,707
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in the process of applying to junior faculty positions (e.g. Assistant Professor). This will be my first time I ever apply for an academic position.
My direct supervisor asked me to write a first draft for my own reference letter for this application. I know that this can be considered unethical but I cannot change it. I have never before written such a letter nor read one. The examples I found online are not very helpful.
What are the elements of a good reference letter?
What distinguishes an excellent reference letter from a good one?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. You can google and find plenty examples and tips:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=writing+recommendation+letter+faculty+position>
2. In general, a good recommendation letter, regardless whether it is academic position or postdoctoral fellowship, should be supported by evidence as much as possible. Not just a hand-waving, that he is excellent and brilliant. But he is excellent because he published in such and such journals, trained such and such username_1s, achieved such and such accomplishments etc etc. Try to support everything. Try to convince.
3. For academic position (your case) state explicitly why you fit for this position (e.g., your track record, mentoring / teaching experience).
4. Excellent vs. good is the difference of how enthusiastic the letter sounds. "He is one of the best in..." or "you will not find better candidate for this position" will likely make a letter excellent. But as I wrote in item 2, the letter should not be a mere hand-waving. But given that the letter does provide good factual information, the more enthusiastic the letter is the better. Put it simple: if the person who recommends you is of very high opinion of you and what he/she describes is supported by the facts (e.g., publication record, mentoring, teaching), then the letter will more likely be excellent.
Good luck!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: *Disclaimer: I have not served on a faculty hiring committee, so this answer is not based on first-hand experience. What is expected of a recommendation letter also greatly depends on the field, country, and whether the department is teaching-focused or research-focused and how "elite" it is.*
Academic recommendation letters are quite different from non-academic reference letters.
A good academic recommendation letter should be detailed. Simply saying "spore234 was my username_1 and they were the most smartest, and hardest working username_1 ever" is not going to cut it. In particular, it should discuss your research, its significance, and what you contributed to each project. This is particularly important if your research is collaborative -- recommendation letters can elucidate what you contributed relative to your coauthors. It should also discuss teaching and service if applicable.
That is probably why your supervisor is asking you for a draft -- you are more familiar with your work than she/he is and can thus provide more detail. Hopefully your supervisor will heavily edit your draft (please encourage her/him to do so), but you can help provide details to include in it. Don't underestimate how little your supervisor may remember about what exactly you contributed to this or that project, or even what the project was. By drafting the letter, you are providing a reminder.
Furthermore, recommendation letters sometimes include a comparison to other username_1s. E.g., "I have advised 10 PhD username_1s during my career and spore234's research contributions would place her in the top two. Spore234 is comparable to my former username_1 X, who has gone on to a successful career as a now-tenured faculty at the University of Y." This is still a subjective assessment, but it's a more precise way to express an opinion than simply spouting superlatives. (I would be hesitant to draft such a paragraph about myself, but perhaps you can let your supervisor fill in the blanks.)
Of course, a recommendation letter should also include the usual pleasantries, some detail about the recommender and how they know the subject, and some forward-looking discussion of future potential.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If this is in math I think you may have misunderstood your task. Math recommendation letters are weird. They start and end with a paragraph or two of a normal recommendation (comparisons, opinion) and in the middle there’s 1-2 pages of detailed description of the persons research. This will have a little bit of judgement (“I think this is their strongest paper” or “this one of the best papers in the subfield in the last five years”) but mostly about the papers not the candidate. This is kind of a problem because it means writing letters in math is more work, but a short letter from all but the most famous people will hurt the candidate (especially a short letter from an advisor).
What you should do is write the middle section with minimal judgement and let your advisor add the judgement. That is write a kind of annotated bibliography of your work, maybe grouped by research program starting with the work you think is the best. Include a little judgement comparing your own paper (“this is X’s most important work”). Then your advisor will add the first and last paragraphs and more judgement.
You can even ask your advisor (again, if it’s math) “I’d be more comfortable writing an annotated bibliography, would that be enough?”
At some level this even gets formalized. When I went up for tenure I was asked to write an annotated bibliography to be sent to my outside letter writers to decrease their workload and increase the number who will actually agree to write.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/19
| 623
| 2,725
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently applying for a PhD position and have emailed many professors. My emails often include a general introduction and my CV plus a research statement is attached.
I try to be brief in the email text, as I know professors get tons of emails like mine and don't have time to read a long one. That's why I just mention my interests in the body with the reference to my research statement for the detailed explanation.
Up until now, the replies were only about positions, funding, etc. But today I got an email expressing this about the email itself:
>
> I recommend that **you briefly describe the focus of your research interests in an e-mail (main body, not as an attachment)** when contacting a suitable member of staff in order for the staff member to assess their suitability as a potential supervisor in that area.
>
>
> [...] As a principle, **we do not encourage sending e-mail attachments in initial correspondence**, as a public institution we receive a lot spam and potentially harmful e-mails with attachments.
>
>
>
I was wondering, is this the prevalent routine that I should consider for my emailing other institutes/professors as well? Or is it just their principle and others' may differ?<issue_comment>username_1: The writer of that response has given you a valuable clue. If, having read the email body, the recipient does not already have an active interest in working with you, the recipient is very unlikely to look at the attachments.
Instead, include a *short* paragraph about your research interests and a *short* summary of your CV in the body of the email and offer to send details if requested.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The advice is good. The recipient wants to know *at a glance* whether it is worth following up. You can say at the bottom that CV and SOP are available on request - or even put them online somewhere so they can be directly accessed.
But a further bit of advice, though I realize that you didn't ask for it. Do your research first in to the potential interests of anyone you send such an email to. Some people blast out a huge number of "requests to join your research project" when the background of the sender has nothing whatever to do with the research of the recipient. These, of course get sent to the junk folder immediately and your future attempts will go there also. You don't suggest that you are doing this, of course, but I still suggest (to others reading this) that they don't do that. People with a background in "Waste Water Recovery Engineering" don't have a lot in common with Computer Science or Mathematics, but I still get such letters of interest - years after my retirement, actually.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/19
| 1,224
| 4,688
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an Italian student who is about to get his undergrad degree in Computer Science. As I look to further my education, I'm also looking at universities outside of my own country, also in the UK. In the past years, I always thought studying there would be a great opportunity, although expensive. But now, with the Brexit looming over, I wonder if it would still be worth it.
Preface: I want to apply to some of the major universities in England (for example UCL, Edimburgh Un., Bristol Un., so on...), and of course I need to be accepted first. It seems that universities will not be raising the tuition fee amount for EU students for the academic year 2019/2020 regardless of Brexit. I have some savings which would cover for most costs.
Assuming I get accepted to an university, what I'm looking at in the UK is: one year of studying, the average tuition fee is around 13.000€ (12.000£), the housing seems to hover around 7000€(6000£) for the period I would be studying. So far I can afford this without taking loans and such. I didn't take into account living costs yet for most cities (except London, I know it really expensive in any case), but I'm covered for another 10.000€ more or less. All of my savings gone (I'm "fine" with it, I saved because I wanted to study abroad after all)
In Italy: two years of studying, about 200€ (two-hundred) per year in tuition fees, an average of 3500€ for housing (if I can get a scholarship then I would get a room for free in most unis). Living costs would not be much a problem anywhere.
Is it worth it, spending so much money and moving away? I'm very worried about Brexit. Deal, no-deal, hard Brexit, whatever. How would it affect me as a student? I'm assuming that university-wise it would not change much, but as a person living abroad in the UK? And how would it affect me as soon as I graduate? If there is a hard Brexit, would working in the UK be worth it (assuming is would be possible).
Now I can't really talk about the quality of teaching, going by the ratings, Edinburgh, UCL, and Bristol are some of the top universties in the EU. Most universities in Italy rank as "average" in most ratings. Is it such a massive difference significant for finding a job after graduating? Of course by staying home I would be giving up the networking opportunities that I would have in a UK university (which a generally very diverse), and I think that would be that biggest loss maybe.
I would like to hear some opinions on the matter. Thank you guys, have a good day.<issue_comment>username_1: Brexit will not affect the quality of the education you receive from UK universities, at least in the short term. (Longer term things are not clear, as it may become harder for UK universities to recruit faculty.) That is the main factor you should consider.
Potentially the exchange rate will make it cheaper (measured in euros) to live in the UK. Potentially it will be harder and/or less desirable to get a job in the UK after graduation. However, I can only speculate about such other factors and this is not the right place to discuss them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Purely from the point of view of cost to teaching quality, I'd say MSc in the UK is not worth it. MSc degrees in the UK are a huge business partially targeted at extracting money from foreign people wishing to move to the UK or return home with a "prestigious" degree. That's why you're looking at a 1-year degree that will cost you 20k Euro.
Now, what a degree in the UK will give you is a higher chance of getting hired by a UK company. Not from the legal point of view (so far you have the right to live and work in the UK), but because you'll get connections with people, chances for internships, recommendations from your teachers who may be known in the industry, understanding of job market and hiring processes (and universities run workshops on that), good command of the English language and so on. If your goal is to move to the UK asap and you have 20k to spare then MSc may be a way to go.
This applies to other countries as well, like France of Germany, that have a good job market and much lower tuition fees. But there you may need to speak the local language (or may not, it depends), for which you also need to invest time and money.
Finally, another valid academic way to move abroad is to get the MSc degree in your home country and move abroad for a PhD. This takes more time and effort, but the intended way to do a PhD in STEM (not in humanities) is to be paid for it (not much), and you end up having better connections, better recommendations, more opportunities for internships, etc, etc.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/19
| 1,389
| 6,239
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have recently obtained an undergraduate degree in Computer Science with excellent performance and shortly afterwards got a research assistant post for a two-year industry-university collaboration project with the professors I worked with. The perks of this job are a modest salary for two years and an opportunity to get a postgraduate degree in a project-related area which will be partly covered by this post. I would be doing R&D work for the rest of my two years.
Upon joining, my professors and myself spent many days trying to formulate a research idea that makes sense in the project's context. We finally proposed an idea and loosely specified its details to our project partners and we got their approval. Work started immediately.
To our surprise, our industry partners revealed that they went ahead and implemented a massive chunk of work that was assigned to my team on their own accord. They were faster and produced higher quality work. It was later revealed to us that our partners had attempted similar endeavours in the past and had a lot of groundwork ready.
One may question the communication strategy of all involved stakeholders. We have been operating with regular meetings and on-site visits as frequent as once every week in which we exchange progress and ideas but we did not exchange any artefacts.
There is actually quite a small amount of work left from my team, but it seems that our partners did a lot of work overlapping with ours. Now that we are at the end of our project and we have to communicate with our funding agents, we must detail some results in a report and that would be the end of the project.
I feel useless and a fraud. I did a lot of R&D work on projects that are very niche and not likely to find any adoption in practice. Also, some work is incomplete. I did many sleepless nights and unpaid overtime hours on the essential parts of this project but industry partners finished the same work quickly and without my contribution, thus possibly invalidating my work in a sense. This also makes me wonder if it is justified that I feel an element of disrespect and mistrust. But worst of all, I feel scared. Many of our interactions are undocumented - it is time to produce reports for our funding agents and I can't help but wonder if my or my professor's reputation are at risk and whether funding will be questioned.
How can I act diplomatically in this context and defend funding? Everyone worked very hard. How can I maintain good relationships? Is this normal in research projects or is this form of research not for me? Is it time to quit?<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, your supervisor should be principally responsible for accounting for funding. The brunt of reporting the results for funding purposes is not on your shoulders. (This does not mean that you will not be asked to help in the reporting process).
Because it is hard for us to know what the parameters of your position and funding are, it is relatively difficult to gauge what types of results you were supposed to get and/or report on. Surely you documented the work that you did on the project? Can your own/your professor's actual work not be reported on? Simply report what you did to the funding agency. Joint ventures can be messy and academia and industry focus on different work strategies and outcomes. Report to the funding agency what your end did on the project. That is what they will be looking for. You either produced results and work or you did not. That is what the funding agency will likely care about.
Based on my topical understanding of your situation, it sounds like you participated in a joint venture with an industry partner and they developed a solution independently from you. Are they contesting that you helped? Are they part of your funding? Not knowing these aspects of the arrangement and outcomes, it is difficult for me to provide specific guidance on any issues that may arise from such an arrangement.
---
As a piece of holistic advise for future research with industry partners, make sure that there are actual detailed contracts produced before engaging in any joint research. (This may not be your duty as a research assistant, of course). If you professor does not have any sort of contract, communications, or documentation of your joint work with the industry partner then he muffed pretty badly here. (Although, again, as an RA, this in not your job and you should not really be blamed for possible failures on the part of your supervisor).
Ultimately, this situation sounds like it may be your professor's job to lead the way in handling legal and reporting outcomes. No quality professor will throw the legalities and finances of a joint venture project at the feet of a research assistant.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I've never been in quite this situation, but I'm pretty sure that it is common. As other here have noted, a well organized team can work a lot faster than two people, especially when those two have other commitments.
However, I wouldn't worry too much about it in general unless you get complaints, say from funders.
But you may have an opportunity, which is why I'm writing. Think of your situation as a crashing wave of progress. Maybe some of what the "team" did was inspired by something you did. Or maybe not. But, perhaps you can get ahead of that wave and ride it to a good place. To do that will require action on both your part and that of the prof to integrate with the team and to make sure that you can have some part to play in where the project goes. It is harder (much harder) if you need to work apart from the others, but if you can work on-site you might be able to get recognized. If nothing else, you will get some experience about how it really works "out there".
To do it will require, perhaps, that you think differently about your part. If you think of it as a "separate" piece then, just like working remotely, it will be less likely to be successful. Get in the scrum. Mix it up.
And, you aren't a fraud in any sense. This is pretty common if a team has good synergy. Things can go very fast with ideas flying about like mosquitoes on an August day.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/19
| 2,897
| 12,294
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have just completed a 13 week group project on an undergraduate Electronic Engineering degree at a UK university. I am already an Electronic Engineer by trade and have been for 5 years since finishing an apprenticeship.
Naturally, the project came easy to me and I worked very hard. Unfortunately, the rest of my team members were underperformers and showed little ability. I took on an uneven load early on, and this only worsened throughout the project.
I was also tasked with the Team Leader role, where I also had to plan the task, write reports & proposals, cover Health & Safety etc. I tried to assign complex tasks to the team members but they were unable/unwilling and I ended up completing most of them.
At the end of the project, all teams were asked to conduct a peer assessment where each member must sign a document stating their contribution. Teams ideally split the marks evenly.
My team members are friends from previous courses and all agree to split the grade. I disagreed as I have done more work. Now, the team has stormed off and left the assessment incomplete.
I have tried to argue the case for my extra marks, by listing all completed tasks throughout the weeks and dividing up the workload. I calculate 50.29% for myself conservatively. However, the team are non-native English speakers and since the argument, have abandoned discussions.
If I do nothing, the university will default to an even split.
Is this a legitimate method of marking the course? The built-in default seems to reward freeloaders and punish hard work. Should I pursue upper management's opinion? I feel utterly betrayed by the system here.
Kind regards,
MILSPEC
EDIT-
In response to the "it's your fault" answers, I would like to provide more context.
Tasks were assigned to all team members. I assigned myself less tasks than the others for the first 8 weeks, as I work full-time as a Design Engineer and the others are full time students. I used some of my time to review their work, give feedback and rework anything that needed it. I also investigated some separate hardware that could have worked (but didnt). This extra work and uneven split was agreed upon Week 1 when I agreed to be team leader (which I did not want to be).
At week 8 there was a formative assessment where the team had to stand up & present the prototype to the tutor - I was on holiday this week so the other 3 did this without any of my input. It was a tragic failure as the prototype did not work, they didn't fully understand the code and they weren't really sure how it was supposed to work. The tutor was shocked, as all the planning & proposal work had looked so good. After this, the tutor called a team meeting to discuss the problems and I was surprised to hear that the team members felt they did not have enough support from the University to keep up with the project. Basically, the students did not know how to code. All the coding tasks I had assigned to different students weeks before had been done by one of the students, and he did them poorly. This was hidden from me as the original assignee's handed the work back to me, unless they were a week late on the deadline and I would take the work back off them.
For the final 5 weeks, I took on a rapidly increasing workload as my tutor advised me to set the others simpler tasks and that I should take on the complex work. I made this clear to the team and it was agreed. The final 2 weeks I went full-throttle, took time off work and blitzed the project (and finished it).
In this dynamic, the tutor is fully aware that I have been a good team leader as she knows I assign tasks each week, provide a Google Drive for the finished tasks to be uploaded to, provide feedback to tasks and answer questions throughout the week - because we use a social media platform called Edmodo. It's like a facebook for teachers and students. Everything we have done is recorded on Edmodo, every update I post, every link, every comment. Each time I set work - it is recorded! She (tutor) has access to this aswell and sees the interactions. She has praised the team for good teamwork on Edmodo in the past.<issue_comment>username_1: 50.29% seems like an incredibly specific number. Are you sure it wasn't 50.28%?
If your teammates have left the assignment for you to handle, could you not inform them that you have done the bulk of the work and will be filing the signed grade sheet accordingly unless they return and help? If they are ignoring you, it would seem like you could simply finish the project, take the bulk of the credit, and submit the grade sheet stating what you feel their contributions were. Inform the professor why they never signed the paper (a submission on their behalf, *in absentia*). If you have email records of your attempts to contact them, it seems like it would be relatively hard for your team to dispute your account.
I am somewhat unfamiliar with the UK grading system here, but it would seem that as long as you received high marks on the project, credit for who exactly did what will be conclusively irrelevant. Get the win and get off the pitch (so to speak). Does it really matter who made the most goals and passes?
**If possible, I would show the professor what you have so far and seek his/her opinion. The sooner the better perhaps.**
---
I will add that life rarely will split exactly equitably in terms of work load and recognition. "That's life."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You may not like this answer, but I think you should settle for equal grades.
The situation you describe is very common and so are the disputes you have wound up with. The expectation was that all should share equally and you didn't, apparently do that. You basically, rather than being the team leader/manager, took it on yourself to do all of the work. That wasn't necessary, but it is too late now to correct it. What you *should* have done (sorry) is to work physically together as a team. I suspect that you tried to divide up the work, making the problem bigger since you add the integration task to the work of the parts. It is a formula that has been proven to fail since around 1960, or so.
The instructor may be partly to blame for this if you haven't learned about project management in any modern style (say, agile), but, again, it is too late to go back.
In the real world, this also happens. Someone does more, others do less, or nothing, but the work is the important thing. In the education world, the learning is more important, actually, but not all students or professors recognize that.
So, in building the thing you have been a success. In managing it you have been less of a success. If you have learned something it is worth it.
Yes, the built in system rewards freeloaders, but you should have recognized that from the start and acted so that it didn't work out that way. The milk has been spilt.
I don't, however, disagree with the conclusion here of [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/121886/75368). Talk to your professor and get an opinion. But you should have done that by mid-term at least.
Never mind that your "partners" may get something that they don't deserve. Think about your own actions and what you have learned as well as what you haven't.
In my view, this project was pretty typical and so the typical grading scheme should apply - same grades for all.
Had someone else been team leader and closed you out, not giving you anything to do, or a way to be a success as a team, then, I think, you'd have a more valid complaint.
Of course, in the peer assessment that you write you can describe the project life as you see it. But your "teammates" will also do so.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with everything written in the other answers and username_2 has given a particularly carefully worded response, however I wanted to add a UK perspective.
UK Engineering degrees are usually accredited by a professional body for admission to the Engineering Council to lead to Chartered Engineer status (this includes EE, CS, and other engineering disciplines). I am a member of such a professional body (as are most UK academics in the field) and am familiar with the accreditation processes from both the professional body and academic department side. During their undergraduate study my experience is that few students have made themselves familiar with the professional aspects of their degree and the requirements of the body that they will join in their later professional life as part of their practise. I am also familiar with the construction of syllabus content and degree programs that lead to appropriate accreditation and the assessment elements they must contain.
An engineering degree will be required to contain group work, not to make things easier for the assessor or to permit larger course cohorts to operate or for economic reasons of lowering the cost of delivering the course, but pedagogically to deliver certain learning outcomes. Achieving those learning outcomes and the degree to which they have been achieved is what determines (or contributes towards) the grade or mark for these courses. Experiencing group interactions is one of the learning outcomes; successful co-operation in a group is one of those learning outcomes. Learning and experiencing what can go wrong is often an implicit learning outcome. Interestingly, making the damn thing (the physical result of the engineering labour) is only a small part of the learning outcome.
Consequently, being the hero and doing the whole thing yourself is exactly NOT what a group project is about and can lead to reduced marks. I have even seen students given totally failing grades for sacking their team and doing it solo. Engineers with these qualities are not the ones that fellow professionals want to work with in their seriously large projects and hence the reasons for marking sanctions for group disputes over contribution. We need engineers that can work together and leave their egos behind.
Later in their degree students will learn more about project management, but it is often necessary for them to experience sink or swim to understand the need for such structured methods.
You would have got short shrift from me if you complained about your mark on one of my assessments!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I signed the paperwork today and claimed 40% of the group mark. Here is how I did it:
I generated a spreadsheet with every task the group did and assigned value to each task. There were around 380hours of task value. I assigned each member value for each task, some tasks were done by one person, who claimed all the value. Some were shared, and so all members claimed the value. Some tasks that I finished off or reworked, I claimed a half hour or an hour on as well as the original member claiming time.
Next, I withdrew access to every piece of work I did on the Google Drive I created for the team. 118 pieces of my work disappeared overnight. Now, the team members could not refer to anything I had done for their Logbook - which is 50% of the module grade.
This spreadsheet worked out a split of roughly 50 (me), 25, 13, 12 percent.
I sat and listened without saying a word to their arguments for 30minutes. They said I should help boost their grade, that it looked shameful that we would have such an unbalanced split, and that the tutors would think poorly of us all.
Once the spreadsheet was accepted as the truth (or close to) by the group, I agreed to come down from 50%. They offered me 30% but I said 40% and I will sign now. They agreed in exchange for access to my files again.
You might think I screwed my team over, but you would be wrong. They still take 20% home each, as opposed to 25%. If they knew all they had to do was stall for a week, the uni would have defaulted to 25% split. They would have screwed me over if they knew that. Luckily, they didn’t. Also, the Individual Mark (Logbook, 50% of grade) is a record of individual contribution and so the other team members should not be referencing any of my work. I know they need it, because otherwise their logbooks will be quite empty, but they will be claiming my work as their own!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/19
| 710
| 3,063
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my area of research (experimental psychology), publishing an empirical paper takes on average one year of work. It seems to me (I could be wrong) that those authors who appear to use every available opportunity to write commentaries on recent "big" papers have it easier (or so they think) than those who instead prioritise publishing their own research despite the increased required efforts.
My first question is to do with the "tactic" that some appear to have of writing a high number of such publications. While a commentary paper does not, of course, "weigh" as much in someone's CV as an empirical paper, it might still weigh more "per unit" [of time spent working at it]. That is, one could conceivably write such a paper in a month, whereas the "academic credit" you get for it, while lower, is certainly not lower by a factor of 12; and in any case the h-index is blind to the distinction. Do others also see this as wrong?
My second question: in what circumstances is such an offer (made to a relevant journal, to write a commentary to a "big" paper) likely to get accepted, and by whom is it typically made?
If an early-career researcher feels they have commentaries that the community/field might benefit from, should they pitch around their commentary-paper idea to journals?
I used to think such papers are something only established researchers write, and *at the invitation of* journal editors rather than at their own request. However, I am seeing more and more junior researchers who are writing (unsolicited) commentary papers with only a minimally-relevant publication record.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not from your area of research so my answer might be invalid, but in my field it happens that you are asked to list "original papers" and "derived papers" in different sections of your CV. So when you are applying, e.g. for a professorship, the original papers are the ones which are taken into account more heavily than the others.
Especially earlier in your career you should focus on your own scientific work. This qualifies you to write *good* commentaries, later ;-).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Again, this is from a different field and rife with personal opinions, but I would not read a commentary paper unless:
(1) I know the author(s) to be reputed in the field and have possibly read some of their work before.
(2) The commentary has been recommended by someone personally.
(3) The commentary comes from a rival group and has a decidedly different perspective from the original.
If these conditions are not met, why waste time gaining second-hand knowledge instead of reading the original? If one aims to use it in research, one would anyway visit the original to establish veracity.
If others in the community think similarly, such commentaries are unlikely to be cited, or even accepted for publication. So it seems like a wasted effort to try publishing it (preparing such a commentary might be an enriching experience in it's own right though).
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/19
| 909
| 3,732
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I took this online class and the professor didn't grade our exams till the end of the semester and I was surprised to learn that I got a 0 on the first one. Now I remember taking this test and while I may not have gotten a perfect score, I don't think I did bad enough to deserve that grade. So I talked to him about it and he said he has a couple of blank scantrons and can't figure out which is which so he gave a couple of us a 0 instead. The thing is, the testing center at my college won't let you turn in a test unless everything has been filled out and I'm 100% sure that I didn't knowingly take the test without putting my name on it.
What do you think I should do? He also mentioned in the middle of the semester about losing his laptop or something like that, do you think he's lying about the blank scantrons to cover up the fact that he may have lost them and won't take responsibility for it? I was talking to him through email yesterday and now he won't respond. It really hurt my grade and he won't do anything about it. I NEED HELP!<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt that he is lying. There is little, if anything, to gain. I think the best you can hope for is to ask him if he will let you take a retest - even if it is a quick oral exam on the "missed" material.
I'm not sure why you haven't learned of this before now. Is there something you neglected to do earlier. If so, it is harder to get any satisfaction at this point.
But is your professor who can help you, not the people here. Email isn't a good way to handle things like this. You need to go see him if it is at all possible.
If you don't get a quick reply from email the reason could be benign or not. If you can't go see him and you don't get a reply, ask his superior to have him contact you. Don't make an initial complaint, I think, until you have tried other avenues.
It is possible, of course, that a scoring sheet was lost, but also possible that it was lost by someone else in the system. Be careful about accusations, especially of those who have power over you. Investigate first.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my assessment, the professor acted somewhat negligently here. (Albeit maybe not lying).
I find it odd that he claims that he had a few blank scantrons without names, so he just gave people 0 points on the test. Really? He doesn't even have the presence of mind to email students and ask if there had been a mistake? This seems incredibly lazy. (Not to mention the fact that he waited until the end of the semester to grade the tests). I'm not sure it would be too far beyond the call of duty for him to have at least email students to verify if what he is seeing is correct. I would have done this for students I have, *especially if they were turning in the homework and completing other assignments.*
I do wonder how in the world your testing center would return blank scantrons to a professor. At every school I have ever taught at or attended, the testing center produced scantrons with student names computer printed on the top. *And the testing center always scored the scantrons.* Does this professor have his own scantron reader?
Moreover, every testing center I have ever interfaced with *kept records*. Surely your university keeps digital records of which students have taken the test, right? I'm pretty sure my undergrad institution kept computer-based testing center records even in 1996.
As username_1 says, I would stay away from accusing the professor of being a liar. But make this professor account for testing records recorded by the testing center. I'm of the opinion that this is actually part of his job description (implicit or otherwise).
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/20
| 1,185
| 4,482
|
<issue_start>username_0: Why is a professorship sometimes called a chair? Are chairs only the correct term when the professorship has been endowed? (I don't think so, because endowed professorships are rare in the UK, but people still speak about chairs).
What's the origin and correct usage of the term?
Edit: Thanks for the responses, I would like to slightly expand on the 'usage' part of the question by asking whether every professor at every university could correctly be said to hold a chair? If it varies, what determines who has a chair and who is just a professor? Perhaps the term is more common in the US because the term professor is used more widely than in the UK, for relatively junior faculty (who would be called lecturers in the UK).<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Professors hold a “chair” in a subject which can be either established or personal. Established chairs exist independently of the person who holds it, and if they leave the chair can be filled by someone else. A personal chair is awarded to a specific individual in recognition of high levels of achievement. If they leave, there is no guarantee the chair will be available for someone else.
>
>
>
Source: <https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/uk-academic-job-titles-explained>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: [etymonline.com](https://www.etymonline.com/word/chair#etymonline_v_8391):
>
> chair (n.)
> ----------
>
>
> "a seat with a back, intended for one person," early 13c., chaere, from Old French chaiere "chair, seat, throne" ... from Latin cathedra "seat" (see [cathedral](https://www.etymonline.com/word/cathedral?ref=etymonline_crossreference)).
>
>
> Figurative sense of "seat of office or authority" c. 1300 originally was of bishops and professors. Meaning "office of a professor" (1816) is extended from the seat from which a professor lectures (mid-15c.). ...
>
>
>
The etymology is much more obvious in Romance languages: see e.g. the Spanish word *catedrático*.
Note that there's a specific type of chair which is also used figuratively to refer to the authority of the person who is entitled to sit in it: *throne*. Usage is probably parallel, although digging out examples to demonstrate this would be a non-trivial research project.
---
I see from comments that there are two opinions about what the question meant by asking about usage. To address the other opinion, in as much as it's not already answered by username_1: *professor* in British English is reserved to those who hold a chair, which may be an endowed or a personal chair. In American English it is used far more widely. Cognate words in other languages may be used even more widely still: in Spanish, *profesor* is used for teachers from primary to tertiary education, although as mentioned above there's also a word *catedrático* which corresponds to the British *professor*. I would expect that most of the Commonwealth follows the British usage, with the possible exception of Canada, but I would not be surprised to be corrected on this in comments.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It's a figure of speech called metonymy. It's like referring to the UK government as "Whitehall", or to the monarch as "the Crown".
It makes a useful distinction between the job/office, and the current individual job holder.
I think that any professorship can be referred to as a chair.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: My mother (in the USA) is a full professor, but was only titled 'chair' once she became the 'chair' of the English department. In that context, it connoted her as the senior-most professor in her department, with official administrative duties, including hiring decisions for the department, being a part of tenure award decisions, etc.
Also, other professors I've known have held chairs with someone's name attached, and this was an honorific rather than an administrative position. I don't think it's accurate to say any given professor, even any full professor, is considered 'chaired' by default.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Being the chair of a university department and holding a named chair at a university are completely different. The first is an administrative position and, most holders would hope, a temporary one. A named chair is a permanent title, designating a level of achievement beyond the professor. Further, a named chair can be endowed or not endowed but, most holders would hope, it is the former.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/20
| 1,083
| 4,545
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've left academia for business some time ago. However, it occurred to me that I could publish some of my old final papers/ theses online as online books.
I have all the copyrights.
The theses are good and I could probably publish the most recent ones in "traditional" publishing houses, but with my new job, I don't really have time for several rounds of corrections and re-writing of old papers.
These are papers with implications for the practice and on topics "general public" may find interesting. What I mean in this post is, obviously, not "scientific publishing" online, but non-fiction publications directed at general public.
My goal is to earn a bit with the texts. I don't really need a list of publications for my current career, although it's never a bad thing to have some publications I guess, so if the publishing "channel" is not completely ridiculous it's even better.
Have you had any experience with self-publishing online? Does it make sense? Or is it useless work?
**Edit** I don't see much point in discussing whether the papers are interesting/ valuable/ up-to-date or not and I'm a bit surprised that this topic has been raised at all. (Because I would expect a bit more scepticism concerning making assumptions on details not mentioned in the initial post from academics). Instead, I would find it interesting to hear from someone who actually has had some experience with self-publishing their work/ academic work online. That's the point of my post.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> My goal is to earn a bit with the texts
>
>
>
My understanding of book publishing is that making money is really hard, and even harder if you do not have the backing of an established publisher. Established publishers often have contracts with university libraries that guarantee them a minimum number of sales. They generally like authors who will then teach off the book which gives them some more sales. When the author convinces colleagues at other schools to teach with the book also, profits can be made. You do not seem to have that type of network, so I doubt you will make any money.
The hit rate of established publishers to actually turn a profit is pretty low. With their network and approach, their costs are generally covered such that a couple of successful books is all they need. This means they scoop up anything that even remotely has a chance of being profitable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If your aim is to make money, you'll need to put effort into it. You can't just put your papers online and charge people money to read it - nobody will buy. You need to format it, make a book cover, get it indexed by e.g. the British Library, advertise it, etc. This isn't trivial and is a large part of why people engage publishers to publish books. It should be said though that even though the publisher will handle most of these things, there will still be things you need to do as an author. You can't just hand the manuscript to the publisher and collect the royalties; you must be prepared to invest some time.
If you're still interested in doing this, then I'd suggest contacting a publisher. You'll need to fill out a publication proposal form, where you give details about what your book is about, your qualifications, the intended market, why your book is relevant, and so on. If the publisher approves your proposal then you're gold, and they'll tell you what you need to do.
Finally: even if the publisher agrees to publish your book, unless you are famous, the chances of it selling more than ~1000 copies is very low. This is the case even though your target is the general public. As an order of magnitude, you might get ~10% of net sales receipts as royalties. It's up to you to decide if it's worth it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I had an experience with Glasstree: a company that describes itself as a publisher but that is little more than a printer. I used it for getting good quality copies of a text of 120 pages (in A4 format) at a cost of 7 dollars. That price was the minimum allowed and the money went to Glasstree, but I could have chosen a higher price and pocketed the difference. The text is for sale to the public, but I was the only one to buy it as far as I know. (I gave away the copies to students and colleagues.)
You may try to use Glasstree as a publisher and earn some money, but you would have to do the advertising work that real publishers do, and that Glasstree doesn't. I wonder whether that could work.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/20
| 1,212
| 4,915
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in chemistry and my funding is specific for a certain project. This funding also funds another PhD student, a biochemist, with a different advisor (both our advisors are very well-respected). We're both in the 3rd year of our PhDs.
The project is now in its sixth year. The distribution of work is as follows:
* Some post-docs had done the first 4 years of this work
* The other student provides the animal samples and some biochemical test
* I do the "novel test". This test is labour-intensive and time consuming. I very often work on holidays, while the other student doesn't even answer mail after hours, despite having a technician to help her.
The problem is the papers. We are now going to start our third sub-project on this work:
* Paper #1 [last year] was primarily the post-docs work, with authoring PostDoc\*, OtherStudent\* (where \* denotes equal contribution)
* Paper #2 [last year] was mostly my work, with authoring me\*, OtherStudent\*. I was extremely heart-broken and wanted to quit, but my advisor assured me that this would not happen again
* Paper #3 [this year] is the problem. The other student sent a new batch of samples in for a new paper. My advisor said that it is very likely that the other group will ask a paper co-first authored as: OtherStudent\*, Me\*, since the other student had not been in the first position of the co-first-authorship yet.
I believe it is unfair that I have fewer papers than this other student despite doing much more work. Indeed, this other student has time to work on other things and get still more papers published, where I am working flat-out on this effort.
My advisor and I argued and I told him that I want to switch to a different project, but he said I can't because my funding is specific to this project. I'm thinking to quit and apply for a new PhD somewhere else but I have spent 2 years and 2 months in my PhD and I believe I will also have problems in the new place (hopefully not as bad).
Am I right to be angry? How should I approach this situation?
How do people in academia actually look at co-first authorship? Is the order important?<issue_comment>username_1: Maybe a workaround would be to explicitly assign credit in the paper. This seems to be used in some disciplines and I think it makes a lot of sense, especially in an interdisciplinary project where customs about authors order might differ.
It simply consists in a footnote at the beginning of the paper or a section at the end where all the authors are listed and their contribution is summarized, e.g.:
* A conducted experiment X
* B collected Z for experiments X and Y, prepared Z and conducted experiment Y
* C proposed the approach and designed experiments X and Z
* D proofread the paper
...
In my domain I'm not very familiar with this usage, but I've seen it in a couple of papers (in medicine as far as I remember).
This could be a way for you to avoid a serious conflict in the project, while making clear to any reader which author did what.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As I see from the many questions regarding first-authorship, and also from what I have been through, this is one of the trickiest parts of the academia.
(1) Your advisor seems to make a promise which can't be kept.
(2) You are making a significant collaboration with another group but you are very distant to each other, so the relationship is adversarial. You should change that.
(3) If you care about the order of authorship, you already became first, so no need to worry much. If you don't care that much, then username_1's answer will mostly subside your angry feeling about your effort "to be overlooked".
(4) Please, don't make such dialogs with your advisors much. Try to be remembered about your productivity, and find more robust and faster schemes for securing your right, and look at (2) for this.
Overall, I suggest you continue your Ph.D., even though seems unsuccessful, your advisor considers your feelings. I have once in a discussion of authorship in a paper I have completely done the work and rather than feeling bad or something they simply removed my authorship. Additionally, more than 2 years is a significant amount of work, if you add more over it, you will get more benefit from your experience, just be patient.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, it matters. The sad fact is that some people are groomed for fast promotion from undergrad onwards and often assisted by unmerited co-authorships and suchlike.
Unfortunately, making a fuss will only serve to alert the organism to the "fact" that *you* are the problem.
Finish your PhD as best you can. Then leave. Suddenly your supervisor may turn around with a postdoc offer and promises that it will never happen again.
In that case, get out of there.
**When people show you who they are, believe them the fist time.**
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/20
| 450
| 1,882
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished half of my comps for an EdD program that I really have no interest in finishing. I would actually like to pursue a second masters in a different area, but I have no idea how to do so, and it's a sticky situation to ask these questions of the university advisor. Basically, I want to move in a different direction with my career, and a second masters will bolster that rather than completing the EdD track I'm currently on. I basically have 12 more comps before I can even write dissertation anyway. Rather than pay tuition another semester for a degree I will not finish, I'm interested in how to transition and if I will run into any issues because I leave this current program with admission to another.<issue_comment>username_1: Finish it off. Do it as fast and easy as possible. The doctorate is more impressive than a second masters. You are half way through.
Note I am extremely skeptical of academia and grad degrees and often tell people to do an MBA instead or just work. But once you are in it, finish, finish, finish.
And remember, it is pass fail. Just get through it with the minimum. ASAP.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are really interested in a different career, one that an EdD won't help you with, just make a clean break. However, make sure that you investigate the consequences thoroughly so that you don't wind up in a couple of years in a similar situation.
People change their minds all the time. As they learn more about a career they may discover that there as aspects of it that no longer interest them. There is nothing wrong, or even unusual, about that. Take care of yourself first.
You may need to change universities to do this, but I see no particular reason you shouldn't discuss it with a trusted professor. Your advisor is supposed to provide you with *good* advice, of course.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/20
| 1,407
| 5,824
|
<issue_start>username_0: About four months ago I graduated from a reputable university and received great feedback from the committee who judged my masters defense as well as my thesis. Prior to my defense, I was asked to prepare my paper — not my thesis — within 5 weeks of graduating. There were a few problems regarding the quality and quantity of the data and figuring out the appropriate analysis took considerable time. During this period I wrote and rewrote all the sections that are essential to a paper, keeping in mind that these exact sections would form my thesis as well. A colleague also edited my introduction, at times embellishing my sentences that went beyond what the cited authors stated. The time crunch resulted in lower quality work.
Once the paper was “approved” I was given the green light to work on my thesis, at just two weeks prior to graduating. All I had to do was copy and paste my paper into my thesis document, but I wanted to improve my literature review and make sure all the sections flowed well. In the end, even my thesis document did not turn out to be at the quality I hoped for. It was well received, but I believe that it is highly unlikely my supervisor even looked at my thesis, much less even read the first few pages.
I just re-read my thesis and upon scrutinizing it I have found that I have unintentionally plagiarized from other authors in different areas, including the literature review, methods and materials, and one line in the introduction, all which was likely due to negligence and carelessness (can I call it that given the time I had?) of finishing on time. I didn’t outright copy, but sentence structure and wording are strikingly similar.
My friends (many who are in academia), family, and therapist (psychologist) have all advised that I use this as a learning experience for the future, as the university nor my supervisor would be willing to give me a second chance as such rarely is offered for something of this magnitude.
At this point I’m looking for any sound advice... What do I do? How do I move past this? I worry about my future :(<issue_comment>username_1: While I don't know the policies of your university, nor anything about your advisor, I would suggest that you explore any possible option of submitting a corrected version of the thesis. Explain to your advisor what happened. Be very clear and honest about it. Perhaps they can make an accommodation. The paper, on which it is based can, perhaps, be used to show proper intent.
If you can't substitute a newer version, you will need to create and try to submit an addendum giving proper credit wherever needed.
I doubt that the paper is in any danger of being rejected, since the citations are correct there.
While many might consider this a serious breach, rather than panic and carelessness, I doubt that it would be career ending. Intent matters a lot in such things.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First off, not having actually seen the thesis, we have no way of objectively knowing what actually was plagiarized. From what I can deduce, it essentially sounds like your thesis is of mediocre quality and you wrote a literature review that borrows heavily in terms of sentence structure and word choice from other papers/publications. *Is this even plagiarism?* Maybe it is. And maybe it isn't. Writing a literature review that uses some of the same sentence structure and words as other works is perhaps poor writing, but may not even be plagiarism in the first place.
Has the university brought this to your attention? Have you spoken with your adviser about any of this? Ask your adviser what he/she would like you to do. I honestly doubt that they will strip you entirely of your degree and blacklist you for all eternity. That is not how academia works. If you fixed these plagiarism issues in the paper that is being submitted, this shows that your intent is to correct **inadvertent** plagiarism. Many universities would allow for this. You seem to have nothing to hide. I would be upfront and ask your adviser for an opportunity to correct the plagiarism. He/she likely will actually provide a path for you to correct the work. I would seek to do such for my students.
Overall, **calm down.** This is not the end of the world or your career. Seek to fix the inadvertent plagiarism and move on without worrying yourself (literally?) to death.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This strikes me a bit like [scrupulosity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrupulosity).
First, did you cite the authors whose sentence structure and wording you borrowed?
* If so, then I seriously doubt there is an issue. There are only so many ways to rehash the same information; see [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/108626/is-it-plagiarism-to-copy-the-form-and-structure-of-an-article) question for example.
* If you did not cite them, then it does seem more likely that there is an issue. Still, consider getting an "unbiased opinion" from a trusted academic before taking any action.
If, after this steps, you're still really convinced that you did something wrong, then I think you should approach your advisor and explain your concerns.
* If your advisor agrees with your concerns, I expect he will help you submit a revision (and I seriously doubt he will try to revoke your degree).
* If your advisor says "it's fine, don't worry about it", then things can get a little tricky:
+ As I said, it's difficult to judge ourselves -- you should consider the possibility that your advisor is correct. After all, your advisor knows your work and the conventions of your field better than anyone.
+ But it's also possible your advisor is just being lazy, in which case you may need to insist on submitting a revision, escalating if necessary.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/20
| 740
| 3,259
|
<issue_start>username_0: This might be more relevant to early career scholars since the CV isn't quite long enough to start filtering, but should departmental talks be included on a CV?
In my department we have weekly meetings where students and facility will give updates on their research, early findings, or talks based upon recent publications. I've heard some differing opinions as to their relevance on CVs since there is only a minor degree of filtering to do one of these talks. According to the [principle of peer review](https://theprofessorisin.com/2016/08/19/dr-karens-rules-of-the-academic-cv/) I get the impression that such talks are of minor value, but is there value to early career scholars included them, or are they perceived as padding?<issue_comment>username_1: As you suggest they likely have minor value, but not *no value*. If you include them, use a separate section. Of course, if the topics of the talks are interesting in themselves they might be useful to include, depending on the type of position you are interested it. Having done a lot of talks might be especially interesting to an undergraduate institution. Having done a lot of research talks, especially on different topics, would likely interest a more research oriented institution.
But if your CV is solid overall you needn't worry about padding. But you have what you have and you need to present yourself in the best light possible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can include those for completedness but any regular activity “internal” to the department will carry little to no value and may be seen as padding. At most include them in a separate sections with some low key heading, v.g. “Other presentations”.
Remember that any application to a position is likely to involve reference letters, and any referee from your institution would know the value of such presentations, so make sure the everyday is not overemphasized if faculty considers those to have minimal importance.
The situation changes if you gave a particularly memorable presentation, or if you get some sort of “best grad. student presentation” or any such recognition that distinghuishes your efforts compared to your colleagues.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: To add to username_1's good answer, although departmental talks don't add a lot of 'prestige points' to the CV, they serve other purposes. Departmental talks demonstrate you are engaged with your department and are able to adapt your research for a variety of audiences. Presenting papers on niche topics at big, impressive conferences is great for the sake of research dissemination and professional reputation, but being able to rework that research for, say, a graduate student seminar shows you can adapt your work to an appropriate teaching context.
This might be particularly useful if you're in a field that doesn't have a lot of obvious overlap between what you research and what you teach. Departmental talks illustrate that you are able to present ostensibly niche research to a more general audience.
Keep them under their own heading (I use 'Internal Talks' to contrast with 'Invited Talks') and there's no need to leave them off the CV unless you've got to cut something for length.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/20
| 461
| 1,827
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach at a university, and during lectures I would like to pose a question to all the students in which each student types their answer into their laptop, submits to me, and I can show all the answers on my screen at the front of the room. I will be able to see the names on my computer, but on the shared screen the students will not be able to. Is there any technology that does this?<issue_comment>username_1: We have the Moodle online teaching tool, another is Blackboard.
On moodle one of the possible activities is "feedback" where you set the questions and make it anonymous as you wish... This may meet what you are looking for.
This does mean that all the students must get a moodle account etc.
I have seen other sites that do this interactive survey type activity but can't think of their names off-hand, but they still need the students to log-in...
A quick google search gave this article : <https://www.educatorstechnology.com/2018/09/some-of-best-tools-for-creating-surveys.html>
The first 4 of their list (as links can fail) Google-forms, Plickers, Kahoot and Socrative...
I use the quiz activity on moodle a lot!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I use <http://www.arsnova.eu> in my lectures. It won't show the names of individual students, but otherwise I find it a useful way to keep students engaged in a large lecture.
I don't miss that I don't see the individual names, as I use it to encourage students to actively interact with the material during the lecture. So students making mistakes is not a problem; as long as they try, then I am happy. The fact that students know that any mistake they make cannot have a consequence is actually helpful in overcoming any inhibition they may have. But this obviously depends on how you intend to use this tool.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/21
| 1,306
| 5,530
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am going to start teaching next year in a university in the UK. One common question I get with students in one-to-one conversations is about my origin. I certainly have an accent, and they are naturally curious about it. **I was wondering if it is fine that, when I introduce myself during the first lecture, I tell them where I am originally from?** This is not an issue for me.
I understand that some lecturers get offended with the question "where are you originally from?", but I think sometimes students are genuinely interested on knowing this inconsequential information. I was, when I was a student, so I understand.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it is a good thing to do, actually. In fact, anything you can do or say to make connections with them is good. In this case it places you in a context. You can also ask, assuming that the scale is reasonable, if anyone else comes from an "interesting" place. Don't press it if no one volunteers, but many people are proud of their origins. Others may not want to seem different from their peers.
The basic idea is to make yourself seem more human to them rather than just someone who will need to judge them eventually. Students sometimes fear their professors, especially in early courses when they have little experience. When they see you as a person they will probably be more willing to accept what you say when you, inevitably, correct them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I usually introduce myself in my first lecture by giving a short overview about my background. Since I'm not very different from most students, there is nothing surprising in this, but if I would have a different background, I would mention it since it helps building a relationship to your students. If you are having an accent, they will recognize that you are not a native speaker anyway ;-).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You can certainly do so. Something like "I was born here. I did my undergraduate degree here, my masters degree here, and my PhD here. After my PhD ..." etc. It doesn't have to be very long and could also be part of your lecture slides.
One of my lecturers from my bachelor's degree did this, and I still remember she and my brother shared an alma mater.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: My Physics 1 teaching assistant had an uncommon accent, but instead of telling us, when someone brought it up she said we can try and guess, and she would tell us if we got it right. We didn't... but it contributed to a more jovial, humorous atmosphere. This will not work for just anyone though, only if you're generally an outgoing person, smile occasionally etc; also, it works in the group setting rather than in 1-on-1 conversations.
Maybe you can also think of "gamefying" this aspect of your interaction with students.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I teach in what is not my first language. I speak more or less correctly, but my accent is strong to the ear of a native speaker. On the first day of class I generally make some jokes about my accent, so that students know I am not oblivious to potential problems understanding me, and I ask them to stop me whenever they don't understand something because of my accent or grammatical errors (this occurs occasionally), but I don't usually explain where I am from unless (better said, until) asked. The class is not about me, it's about whatever I am teaching, and I prefer to spend lecture time talking about mathematics than about myself, since in any case there is no reason to enter into personal details. Moreover, many students can guess from where I come, and inevitably by the middle of the semester someone asks anyway.
In general, opinions differ about how much to personalize interactions with students, and different degrees of personalization can work well for different teachers. I try to maintain a certain distance and focus on subject matter, and my uninteresting life story is not relevant to the subject matter, but it would be entirely reasonable to spend two minutes the first day explaining from where one comes. This seems to me mainly a matter of personal taste and teaching style.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: To be honest, your birthplace, ethnicity, and nationality are irrelevant, and it is not appropriate for people to ask questions of that sort in a professional context. You may not mind the question, but others may. By introducing the information as a preliminary, you are setting a precedent that will pressurise your colleagues who may prefer not to discuss the matter.
Personally, I do not generally tell people about my birthplace, ethnicity, and nationality in the course of teaching, unless it had some connection to the subject-matter at hand (e.g.: if I were citing my own experience/background to illustrate an argument I am presenting in the lecture -- I am in a humanities subject, so that does occur in some instances).
However, when I used to work in Scotland, I was open in declaring that I am not local (but without specifying much more), since my accent (British-English Received Pronunciation) makes it fairly obvious (although, as an ostensibly "neutral" accent, it does not tell you much more). When I mispronounced the Scottish name of one of the students, I apologised and added
>
> "as you can tell, I am not Scottish -- in fact, I live south of the border"
>
>
>
(in the UK, it is quite common for academics to not live in the same city as their university).
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/21
| 767
| 3,082
|
<issue_start>username_0: When a paper appears in a science journal, why do not mention the names of the reviewers so that we, as readers can get an idea about the seriousness of the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Journals may run a list at the end of the year thanking by name all the reviewers.
But the main answer to your question: reviewers for a particular paper are anonymous. [It is a separate question why reviewers are anonymous.]
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Some journals do, such as the Frontiers journals; [here's an article I wrote that names the reviewers at the bottom](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00150/full). But the reason most journals don't is that this compromises the anonymity of reviewers, which is widely considered necessary to protect reviewers from reprisal from bad reviews. Personally, I think the benefits of transparency outweigh these dangers and hence reviews should be non-anonymous (I sign all my reviews, so long as journal policy permits me to), but I'm in the minority here.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There are at least two reasons that reviewing is anonymous.
The first, probably less important, reason is that we want reviews to be honest and immune from any pressure. Some junior academics in fact wind up reviewing papers by senior members of the profession. We don't want pressure applied before the review is complete, nor retaliation afterwards.
But, in my view, the more important reason is that a paper should *speak for itself*. It either says something significant or it does not. The opinions of others should weigh less than the statements in the paper itself in the final analysis. If a well respected academic wrongly promotes a paper, harm can be done. Mistakes can be made. Let the paper itself stand or fall on its own.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: 1. The general idea behind anonymity of a review is that the reviewer can write his/her opinion without being concerned that that the author is offended (and will potentially revenge in some way).
2. Having said that there are some journals that do publish reviewers names, for example Frontiers: <https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2018.00102/full> (see top left corner).
There are also journals that publish reviews and the rebuttal of the author, for example eLife: <https://elifesciences.org/articles/39865> (see decision letter and author response sections). But this is usually done without reviewers' names.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It's been tried. There's [no gain in the quality of the review, the speed of the review, or change in the recommendation, but there is a disadvantage of lots more people declining to review](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC27670/).
Given that then, plus the fact that knowing the name of the reviewer can lead to a potential backlash down the road (can you remain impartial if the same reviewer is consistently recommending rejection for your work?), this is not necessarily a good change to make.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/21
| 1,481
| 6,548
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been invited to give a 20 minute talk at a mathematics conference in a couple months. The audience members all work in my field, so they will be familiar with most of the terminology and background. I have plenty of material to pull from a preprint I've already submitted to journals, and it seems I have two reasonable options:
Option A. Present everything to communicate the over-arching theme of my research. I could provide several very minimal proof sketches along the way.
Option B. Present one very interesting result (with its lemmas), with more detailed proofs. I could then "sprint" through some related results at the end, or avoid them entirely.
Which will be most valuable to the audience members? Which will make me "look the best"?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm going to assume that you aren't an experienced teacher or you might already know the answer.
The tendency is to try to add too much and wind up being overly detailed and pedantic. If you want to give a detailed presentation, then use Option B. Don't depend on having any time to sprint, though. But you should have something to add if you finish early.
However, if you really want to give people insight into what you do, rather than detail, then you could use Option A, but leave out the detail. This one is harder to manage unless you have a lot of insight yourself and can speak in meaningful generalities.
Either of these would be meaningful to your audience. However, if you expect to be facing a number of doctoral students in your field, giving insights is probably more value to them. An exception would be if one or more of the proofs in your presentation is especially interesting in its own right. Interesting proofs are usually more important than the theorems they support as they can open bottlenecks in other research.
Which is easier, depends on you. Which makes you "look best" is impossible to say.
Try to save time for questions. Doing a bit less is probably better than trying to do too much. People can always follow up later if you give them contact information.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you have one very interesting result, then I would go with focussing the talk around that. The alternative of trying to cram multiple topics into a 20 minute would be very difficult because that's not a lot of time. Your talk is more likely to be remembered if you present one very interesting result.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The goal of such presentations should be to *interest the audience in your work*.
If you fail to do this, your interaction with them will be limited to the 20 minutes allotted.
But if you succeed, they will likely seek you out later, and you will have ample opportunity to expand on the work.
Both of your options are viable: journey highlights and ‘curio’ examination can both be enjoyable. Imagine yourself in the audience, at a time before you did your research. Then pick whichever option would make you want to invite the speaker for a coffee to discuss more.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: An important part of a talk is to introduce your topic and subfield. You need to convince them why what you’ve done is important. Even specialised conferences have broad audiences who may not be familiar with your techniques or application. Even if they are your interpretation of concepts and your assumptions should be stated clearly since people from different places may not follow the same conventions. You will need to explain them in more detail than you would to people familiar with your progress. No matter the conference, you should not assume that they’re already familiar with your topic: it’s your responsibility to explain it (of course can adjust your content to your audience).
You need to get them interested in your topic, tell them why it’s important, why you took the approach you did, and what was challenging or novel about it. A clear *structure* is essential for any talk. You need to allow time for this.
Considering this, 20 minutes is not a long time slot. You should focus on one or two key results and explain them well. We all do far more work than ends up in our papers or talks and it’s understandable that you want to show your work. However, it’s more important to communicate the key findings well. Especially, if you’re early in your career, you should aim to demonstrate that you know what you’re doing and have mastered particular techniques. If they’re from a related field, they probably have an overview of your area already so a key example to demonstrate why they should care about your area is going to be more interesting for them than yet another overview.
If you race through everything you’ve done, you won’t stand out and know one will understand what you’re talking about or why it’s important. You can of course mention the other research directions that you are working on to put it into context of what you’ve done and what you’re doing next but you need to *focus* on something. Every PhD student or postdoc has a mountain of data. What your future employers and collaborators are looking for is someone that understands what they’re doing and can communicate it well.
It’s also considerate to finish your talk on time. Allow plenty of time for questions and discussion afterwards. If you go overtime, you will have to rush and this will not help your nerves. You’ll be very unpopular if you cut into the time of the person after you and delay everyone’s coffee break. Keeping a conference on time is difficult and adhering to the schedule is important. It’s a lot easier to keep to time if you set achievable goals of a few key points. You need to identify the most important findings to present or emphasise: this is a skill you should develop in a career as an academic researcher.
Help yourself and your audience by preparing well. There’s only so much that people can remember for take home messages from a full day of talks anyway. Think about what you want them most to understand from it. If they want to know more, they can discuss it with you after your talk or read your papers. The purpose of a talk is really to introduce yourself and give people context and background.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Communicate the theme (A) sans the "several". Pick one or two of most interest. 20 minutes is not much time.
Remember people are deluged with different micro papers and talks. If you give them a general feel for an area that is more benefit (even for experts).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/22
| 2,363
| 10,109
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know some advantages and disadvantages of using absolute grading as well as curve grading. Next semester, I plan to combine both by first grading absolutely, and then use curve grading to add points to the students.
For example, if one gets 80% (usually an A) absolutely, but when curved he gets a B, then I will use only the absolute letter which is the A. However, if one gets 70% (B) absolutely but when curved he gets an A, then I will use the A.
My reasoning is just like those who support curve grading. I might prepare too difficult exam tests or some things might not go according to plan during my course. While I actually support absolute grading, I think this might be a good idea. (?) I don't like the idea of just purely using curve grading that can lower high grades, or purely using absolute grading which is not always appropriate as university students' and instructors' performance are not absolute.
Of course, evaluating each course will always be the top priority, but this grading I hope can provide some small "healing" to error-prone college courses each semester.
ADDED:
1. The curve I use is the usual bell curve for distributing A, B, C, D, and F..
2. I am teaching mathematics for undergraduate.
3. There are less than 30 students each batch.
4. This is a new program in this university..and there are only 2 batches..so "past grades" are not recorded just yet unless I take data from other universities..which might not be a good idea?
All the inputs are very helpful. I do not plan to strictly use curve grading as I mentioned. I also believe the longer this program goes the better we can get..<issue_comment>username_1: You have assumed that students' performance follows a normal distribution, with a grade of C in the middle of that bell curve and very few grades of A or F at the tails. My own experience, and that of my peers, is that a typical college class has a cohort of good students who will mainly earn grades of A or B, some number of poor students who will earn unsatisfactory grades, and a few "in the middle" students. That gives a bimodal distribution, with the valley just about where the peak is in that bell curve.
I urge you to look at past classes and check the grade distributions when you have used absolute grading. If you don't already have something very like a normal distribution, forcing one will distort the assessment results badly.
Your question says your goal is to help students, and the problem is that assessments may be too difficult or the course didn't go as planned.
I'd like to suggest a different approach that's a little more work than artificially distorting the grade distribution, but is *much* easier to explain to students. (*Um,* and to department chairs, if it comes to that.) You haven't mentioned your field, nor whether your students are undergraduates, but if your examinations can have a reasonable number of questions, measure the performance on *every question* and then exclude from the computed grade any where performance of the class as a whole is below some cutoff you establish heuristically. Almost everyone's grade will go up, and you can easily explain that you excluded those questions or problems that were "too hard." (In the rare case where a student gets only the "hard" problems right, you can make an independent adjustment; that never happened to me.) I do this with a spreadsheet that has student names in the left column, then one column for each question.
Once you've evaluated an assessment, you must look at the questions you excluded as "too hard" and If the difficulty was with the question, fix it. If you believe the question is reasonable, then you need to review the material with the class again. When that happened to me, I'd warn the students that they would see that question or problem again, and so they should prepare for it.
If you do this for every assessment, you will find that your exam questions and your coverage of the material converge, and after a very few semesters, you will no longer have questions that are "too hard" and you'll be comfortable with absolute grading.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Actually, I believe that *strict* curve grading is both immoral/unethical and a misuse of statistics. It is immoral since the grade a student gets isn't dependent on only their own efforts but the efforts of others and in some ways just the current composition of a class, which is partly determined by sheer luck.
It is a misuse of statistics, since a distribution, such as a normal distribution, is intended as a derived or emergent property of the characteristics of large population. But when use in strict curve grading, it is imposing a distribution on a small population for which you have little or no evidence of its appropriateness. See the answer of [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/121994/75368) for a further discussion of distributions that are likely, but not guaranteed to occur. Suppose your Physics class is composed of 30 Einstein clones, for example.
*Strict* Absolute Grading is also immoral/unethical (but perhaps less so) because it doesn't admit the fact that students are humans and humans make mistakes. Some of those mistakes are inconsequential, but absolute grading can make them very consequential. Also, in most uses, it doesn't reflect the fact that humans can learn from their mistakes. So, it turns the classroom into a *grading scheme* as opposed to a *learning environment*. The other problem with absolute grading, though not an ethical one, is the constant whining of students who have "just missed" the next mark. You would like to have a system in which that isn't necessary.
The other question that arises is what the grades are based on. I find that over reliance on exams, especially high risk exams is also counterproductive educationally. Among other things, they can force the students into harmful practices such as cramming. It is difficult, though not impossible, to create an exam for which cramming is completely ineffective, but such things can also be very difficult to evaluate. If an exam only evaluates objective facts, it has, in my view, little educational value and can be actively destructive.
I prefer, then, to base grading on projects and writings rather than exams and tend to favor group work, though that is an artifact of my field. I also try, as much as possible to think of myself as a teacher, not an evaluator. The educational process should dominate the whole system with evaluation being useful to learning, not just to classification into grade buckets.
One way to do this is to permit (and encourage) re-work by students after grading and feedback is given. The underlying scoring rubric is like that of absolute grading, but the first evaluation isn't necessarily the final one. I've even asked students to resubmit work after I've discussed proper solutions with the class. A re-submission can earn additional points/marks, but not up to full marks, so as to discourage too much dependence on re-work. There is no whining when students just fall a bit short. They can make corrections. Even correcting and resubmitting inconsequential mistakes is an advantage as it reinforces the learning in their minds.
This resubmission system need not be overly burdensome on the grader if students turn in the old work (along with the grader comments made there) along with the new, and marking (highlighting) the changes. A glance at the package can be enough to reassign grades for the new work.
Note that what happens when you do this is that you spend more time and effort with those students who most depend on your teaching, rather than those who nearly always turn in essentially perfect work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: **Please do not plan on using a curve.**
Combining absolute and curved grading makes no sense. Curves should be used when a test or assignment was surprisingly hard. You should avoid curves when possible.
>
> I might prepare too difficult exam tests or some things might not go according to plan during my course.
>
>
>
Based on previous exams, you should be able to calibrate future ones pretty well. I am now convinced that even if I posted the actual test with the answers beforehand, people would still fail it. Good students will study and make good grades, bad students won't, no matter how much hand-holding you give them.
Here are some alternatives to grading on a curve that will give students a chance to make a better grade.
**Allow students to redo problems they missed on the exam for 25%-50% of the points**
So a 10 point question is now worth 2.5 or 5. This makes students do some work on their own, but given others got the exam right, it should be pretty straightforward. This lets people possibly jump one letter grade (usually). For added security limit the change to say 15 or 20 points total.
**Assign "bonus-points" homework assignments**
Let students earn a set amount of extra credit that will be applied to their grade at the end. This has the advantage that students that may be working part/full time, or with a high course load can plan in extra time up front.
**Allow students to drop one test**
Drop every student's lowest test grade. Some professors don't allow people to drop the final, but I'd encourage you to allow students to drop the final if they have an A. Very few students change their end-of-course grade by the final, and most A and B student will generally do well on it.
This has the advantage that if one test is extremely difficult, it will just be the one most people drop. This is essentially a built-in curve but has two advantages
1) A curve pit students against each other - this doesn't. This allows every student 1 "do-over" if they had a bad schedule or an emergency. Great students are essentially rewarded by not having to study for the last test.
2) From a professors perspective, if one test is just super difficult, you've already built in a mechanism to fix it. The "super hard test" will get dropped.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/22
| 1,018
| 4,325
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm planning to apply to graduate school next year after working a year in industry (software engineering) but have received advice to get my letters of recommendation and other application parts sorted out asap.
I'm conflicted on who I should keep in contact with for letter-writing purposes-- a professor from a top-ranked school (I plan to apply to this school for PhD) that I did a summer REU with after my sophomore year but that I didn't see very often and where I don't think I made any real contributions even though he said I was doing a good job (my impression was that he says that to everybody who does research for him). Part of the reason I don't think this would be a good letter was because I did a lot of the work from home (he recommended I do this since I was far and I had a medical condition that made it difficult to commute) so he didn't really get to see my day-to-day work. The work that I was doing was also largely grunt work like running simulations and writing programs to handle data.
On the other hand, I have close relationships with 3 professors at my institution (I attend a small non-research-focused institution):
* 1 of which is my advisor and I have taken 2 courses with
* 1 I did an independent study with and did really well in his class, which is largely related what I want to study in grad school
* 1 of which is new and I'll begin doing research with him soon but hence won't have much time to do research with since I'll be graduating soon (though I do plan to ask if I can continue to collaborate with him on research after I graduate)
I also did an REU (not a well-known school or professor) after my freshman year where my supervisor said that I would do "stunning work" in graduate school, so I could get a strong letter from him, but this was a long time ago so it probably doesn't carry much weight.
So my question is-- should I take a probably not great recommendation from a well-known professor, or strong recommendations from not very well-known professors who know me well and I've formed strong connections with more recently (junior/senior year versus summer after sophomore year). Will it raise flags if I don't seek out a letter from the well-known professor?<issue_comment>username_1: **Always go for the recommendation from the professor who knows you better.** A letter from <NAME> that goes "mayradio0508 was never late to class and has nice handwriting" will not carry any weight.
Having said that, it sounds like you underestimate what this professor will be able to say about you. Running simulations and writing programs to handle data is something you do in research! The professor has also said you did a good job, which is a good sign. Besides, of the other three options you mention, it sounds like none of them can comment on your research ability (the third one can, but you've not started doing research with him).
If you're concerned he won't be able to say something good about you, you could always ask him: "Prof so-and-so, will you be able to write me a strong recommendation letter?"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **How about getting a great letter of recommendation from your well-known professor?**
Consider this the first of many challenges your will face in graduate school. It is not easy, however it will show your ability to abandon your conform zone and your willingness to meet your goals. **Be creative** and never forget the reason you decided to pursue your PhD.
All the best in the application process!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. This is a false "either/or". You can keep in touch with both of them.
2. Take the bull by the horns and ask each how positive a review they would write. I understand the culture is not to show you the letter (although some people will) but it is reasonable to ask them what sort of rec they can provide. If they still refuse to answer, don't use them for a letter. [You may even be surprised and find the opposite, that they WANT to do the letter and ask you for help in making it as strong as possible...in which case, just draft a glowing letter with a strong structure full of facts and numbers. Note, that this is also a good entree to have a conversation about areas of computer science that you are interested in.]
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/22
| 971
| 3,967
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student from India. English is my third language and I am not grammatically sound in it. How bad could it be for my career (in academia) and how can I improve on it.<issue_comment>username_1: Clearly it's a big advantage to be comfortable at writing in English to work in academia. If you really struggle with it, it's definitely worth investing your time to improve your level. The good news is that you're not the only one (the vast majority of people in academia are not native English speakers either). Don't worry, it will improve naturally by reading and writing papers.
you can find a few ideas how to improve [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10087/resources-for-english-speaking-students-with-poor-command-of-grammar-and-writing). My personal advice is to read multiple times the papers/authors that you like, and make note of the phrasings that you could reuse later.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Like anything that you need to learn, the key is practice. Reading alone won't make you a better writer. You need to write. Moreover, you need to get feedback on your writing. Of course, if you submit a paper and it is sound but uses poor English, the reviewers will often try to help, but their patience is limited. So, in some way, poor skills in the language of expression can hold you back until you improve.
I assume that you are also in a place in which it is easy to use your first and second languages, so English may not be in everyday use in your circle. But if you are in India, for example, there are plenty of competent English speakers around you. You can try to associate with them to improve your speaking skills. You can also, perhaps, find or create a small group of people to work together on improving your writing skills, giving feedback to one another. The writing needn't be scientific writing, actually. Anything will do to start. But in such a group you should all force yourselves to use English nearly always. The only exception would be to provide definitions of uncommon terms.
You can probably also find local classes in [English as a Second Language (ESL)](https://www.thoughtco.com/esl-4133095) which offers help both in speaking and writing. The local secondary school might be able to help, for example.
Practice, practice, practice. Get feedback. Practice some more. Getting feedback is probably the harder part of the problem.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **English importance:**
Poor English is tolerated a lot in science/engineering (compare for instance to marketing). I would argue too much but this becomes very touchy. In any case, you should just worry about YOU, not the system.
Bottom line in math/science, it will not be a major hurdle. Furthermore in general (in general, not every instance, caveat, caveat), Indians have better English than a certain other large population Asian country. So. You might have some protective cover.
All that said, English is the language of the world, of academia and of science/engineering. It's the lingua franca. (Now the French are mad at me.) Having a better facility in English will help you interact, attract grants, tell jokes, make connections, etc. It's not the end of the world. But it is helpful to want to get better. You have the right impulse here.
**How to get better:**
The key way to get better in a language is TO PUT YOURSELF OUT THERE. Talk, drink, ask gi...people out. Just converse. Readily and openly and making mistakes as you go. You will get way better, way faster, and have more fun along the way. DON'T hold back because of worries about grammar but just plunge along bravely. I have learned this in several foreign languages, including in intelligence work in country. GET INVOLVED. [None of this is to say not to study the language and do formal instruction...you can/should do that ALSO. But you must get involved, immersed, and bravely.]
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/22
| 1,966
| 8,369
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been asked by a well-established professor to review a regular paper submitted to IEEE Transactions, however, I am concerned as in the email, he titled me "Dr. Monkia" although I am still being a graduate student. Of course, I am interested in the paper's topic, but I don't consider myself an expert. He asked if I couldn't review, I can ask a qualified colleague to do so, or let him know immediately.
I had been asked many times to review for predatory conferences or journals, of course, I declined. As far as I know, IEEE transactions are reputed, however, this sounds a little bit weird.
The question: as a graduate student should I accept to review or decline in that case (given the fact I know the topic)?<issue_comment>username_1: It is probably a good thing to do, just for the experience. It will also get you on the good side of the professor.
However, make sure, in accepting, that the professor and others know that you haven't finished your degree yet. That might cause them to withdraw the invitation, of course, but it should be made clear.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Chances are the editor noticed you authored a paper on a similar topic and is inviting you based on that.
There's no harm doing this. You might feel you're not qualified, but you're being invited, therefore the editor thinks you're qualified. You shouldn't worry about writing a bad review either - full professors can write crappy reviews also, and if you read the paper in detail chances are you're already going to write a better-than-average review! If you're still concerned, you can always talk to your supervisor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The fact that they addressed you as "Dr." doesn't mean anything. In situations like a reviewer invitation, where the editor is sending an email to someone they don't know well, it's common that they will address the email with some generic title like "Dr." or "Professor" even though the title may not actually apply to the recipient. It's just too much trouble for them to look up each person's qualifications and tailor the message accordingly. So I wouldn't consider that by itself to be cause for concern.
The fact that you haven't finished your degree is not a factor, in and of itself, and I don't feel it's necessary to inform the editor of this.
However, like any other reviewer, you need to make an honest judgment as to whether you have the necessary expertise to review the paper. Keep in mind that as a reviewer, the research community is counting on you to decide if this paper belongs in the scientific record in this journal. Some questions to ask:
* Have you published in this area yourself?
* Are you familiar with other work in this area, so that you would likely know if there are significant related papers that the authors have not cited?
* Do you have a good sense of what most researchers in this field know, so that you can judge whether the article contains enough background information (or too much)?
* Have you read enough papers in this field to have a clear sense of what makes a paper good or bad? What sorts of results does the community find interesting? What are common errors? What level of detail is expected? Which parts of the paper will need the most careful attention, and which are uncontroversial?
* Have you read enough papers from this particular journal or conference to have a sense of the "quality" that they demand, or that their readers expect? Even if the paper is technically accurate and well-written, would you be able to judge if their results are significant enough to be worthy of publication in this particular journal / conference?
The average grad student is less likely to be able to answer "yes" to these, but you know your own background best. If you are not sure, you may wish to consult with your advisor or some other experienced research mentor.
It's true, as some other answerers mentioned, that the editor evidently thinks that you have the necessary expertise, probably based on your previous publication record or recommendations from other reviewers. But you still have to make the decision yourself, as you know yourself better than anyone else does. I don't mean to reinforce impostor syndrome here, but you can't say "the editor thinks I am qualified, therefore I am." I have certainly received papers to review where I knew I didn't know enough to do a good job, even if the editor thought I did. The editor is relying on you to evaluate your own qualifications, and to decline if you don't feel you can do the job properly.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: If you think you can do a decent job, do it. Even if you aren't a super expert, if you are a careful reader and thinker and willing to exert the effort, you may do a decent review. Sure, there is some possibility you may be too easy or strict (more likely the latter) but even in that case, realize editors get varying quality of reviews all the time.
Bottom line: graduate students are in many instances THE working researchers in science. I wouldn't be intimidated with doing a review, writing a paper, etc. Sure, you are not a PI, but that is more about grants, budgets, hiring people, legal position, etc. But a review? Just rock it out.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The way often editors pick reviewers is by looking at the cited references in the paper and calling on an author to review. The editor would probably go with the corresponding author, but if the author declines to review, the editor may go down the list of coauthors, some of whom might be graduate students. The "Dr" in the invitation is part of the form letter. It assumes that the reviewer has a PhD, which is why, as others have suggested, you should contact the editor and explain the situation. Chances are the editor will apologize and withdraw the invitation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I am not convinced this is a good thing to accept to do. The frequency of inexperienced / incompetent / overworked reviewers is too high already as it is in academia at this point. In worst case unsuitable reviewers can make other quite capable students drop out because they lose faith in peer review process of articles.
I've seen it happen.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: ### Consult your advisor
Regardless of the specifics of your message - an offer to review a paper which you have not previously discussed and arranged with its originator is something to consider carefully. Perhaps the best person to give advice is not random academics on this site, but someone who knows your field, (likely) knows the person involved, knows the journal etc.
Of course - don't tell your advisor any details which should be kept confidential, like an author name, title of the paper etc.
### In this specific case, consider rejecting.
>
> he titled me "Dr. Monkia" although I am still being a graduate student.
>
>
>
Indeed, this is a warning light. It means the sender doesn't know who you are, but more significantly, did not bother to check whether your background is appropriate to write the review. If they had bother, they'd have figured out you're not a PhD yet.
>
> He asked if I couldn't review, I can ask a qualified colleague to do so, or let him know immediately.
>
>
>
Did he now? That's cute. "Can you do my work for me? If you can't, won't you be so kind as to find some other sucker to do it and arrange for it to be done?"
This does not sound like something a serious editor would say. If I had no other information, I would probably reject merely because of this sentence.
>
> Of course, I am interested in the paper's topic, but I don't consider myself an expert.
>
>
>
So, this is not a good enough reason to reject review requests. On every specific subjects of a paper, only a handful of people in the world are experts (well, depending on the discipline I guess; it's like that a lot in Computer Science); and often none of them is available to review the paper. So people with related expertise have to do it. This also has some positive aspects, such as assessing applicability and relevance beyond the clique of those few people.
**Bottom line:** Unless your advisor, or people very familiar with that Professor or journal say otherwise, I'd be hesitant to accept.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/22
| 443
| 1,872
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have received a conditional offer from the University of Birmingham and an unconditional offer from the University of Leeds for a masters degree in marketing, both programs are great but I have a deadline to accept Birmingham's offer so I was wondering if I could accept both offers and then decline one of them.<issue_comment>username_1: If the programs you are interested in have a limitation regarding how many new students they take in each term, you should probably not accept both offers. It could mean that someone else interested in a slot would potentially not be accepted into a program. There might be the possibility of extending the deadline, and it won't hurt to ask them.
I understand it's hard to decide on a program, but you should save others' time and effort by *first* deciding, *then* accepting. There is no hard requirement that I know of, however, that explicitely prohibits you from doing otherwise.
Make sure to make an informed decision, e.g. check the curriculum for both programs.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Call AND email Birmingham and tell them that you have a firm offer from Leeds and conditional from Birmingham.
See if you can convert Birmingham to a firm offer or at least to extending the deadline. Hey...you're a marketing person. Negotiate. ;-) [Remember the scene in breaking bad where Walt tells Jesse "you're a drug dealer, negotiate".] Seriously, give it a shot and see how you do. Nothing changes when you are looking at job offers.
If they hold firm, I would just not respond (rather than decline) the Birmingham offer. I have learned in both academia and business that sometimes these deadlines get waived when they want the candidate and he doesn't answer. But you should be ready to let the conditional (i.e. not very good) offer from Birmingham expire if they are firm.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/22
| 350
| 1,526
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been working on a research paper for about a year now, and am the first author (a graduate student). I'm getting a lot of help from some faculty mentors, and they will be listed as 2nd and 3rd authors if the paper gets published.
Before submitting the article to publication, I'm planning to present the work at a conference. Should my faculty mentors also be listed as coauthors on the poster, or is there no need? I have no problem putting them on it, but do not have enough time to communicate with them about this before the poster is due. What should I do? Do all paper authors have to be poster authors as well?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, I think that you *do* need to communicate with them. They are the ones who can answer your question, not the people here. They may prefer that you do it alone and they may prefer to be included. If you just choose one without asking *them* you could wind up being wrong.
If you are concerned that they might not respond in time, you can make a proposal and ask for feedback by a certain time or you will go forward with it. The proposal could be either for sole or for joint authorship. Say what you propose to do and say that you will go forward unless you get a negative response by (some date/time).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you present joint work, you should list all the participants. But you should also let your co-authors know about the conference and get their feedback on your poster.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/22
| 891
| 3,280
|
<issue_start>username_0: So I have a bachelor's degree and am planning on applying to medical school this year (in the US). I've previously used [federal student aid](https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/) to cover the cost of my undergraduate degree.
My question is, what types of sources of funding are available to cover the cost of medical school? From what I'm reading, it seems like you can no longer get federal student aid after you have already attained a degree.
Note: I am not asking ("shopping") for specific sources, I am just wondering what types of sources (e.g., loans, stipends, savings) medical students in the US typically use to fund their studies.<issue_comment>username_1: *Not in medicine, but since no one else is answering, and I do know a bit about paying for grad school....*
>
> My question is, what types of sources of funding are available to cover the cost of medical school?
>
>
>
There is a good discussion of this [here](https://www.studentdoctor.net/2018/02/27/financing-medical-school/). In brief, you pay with:
1. Your own money (that you already have)
2. Scholarships and grants (which don't need paid back)
3. Loans
There are also service programs (e.g., in the military), in which they subsidize your education in exchange for a commitment to take a particular job for a few years after you're a doctor.
>
> From what I'm reading, it seems like you can no longer get federal student aid after you have already attained a degree.
>
>
>
This is incorrect; federal student aid and federally-guaranteed student loans are available for both graduate and undergraduate students. The Stafford, Perkins, and Grad PLUS are specifically designed for this situation, and can cover up to the full cost of attendance.
In practice, my (anecdotal) understanding is that loans are the most common source of funding, and most doctors graduate with six figures of debt.
Note, the situation may be different for international students, who would not be eligible for federal student aid, including federally guaranteed loans.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: By far, for professional medical education in the US, it is most common to pay for education with loans (or personal funds, if available). [Even low-cost schools are expensive relative to undergraduate education](https://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/the-short-list-grad-school/articles/2018-05-29/10-most-affordable-public-medical-schools-for-in-state-students). The [median educational debt for graduating students is >$190k in the USA](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2018/01/31/med-school-doesnt-have-to-lead-to-crushing-debt/?utm_term=.f07f89198c6a). Debts are worse if you consider [earning potential in other fields](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/1-million-mistake-becoming-a-doctor/).
It is simply uncommon for medical study in the US to be paid for government or other funds - these funds are limited to programs for underprivileged minorities and for those pursuing joint degrees in the sciences (and even then, loans predominate).
Being a medical doctor in the USA is lucrative, but becoming one entails major risk. Further discussion is probably beyond this stack but these discussions are constant in academic journals.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/23
| 434
| 2,049
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I solved a already solved recent problem with a totally different method, can I communicate my solution in a journal? How likely is the acceptance of my paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can (and you should!).
And you should compare the performance of your method with the existing one.
Even if your method performs worse, this is still a valid result.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Just to add to the above answer, make sure that you draw an explicit comparison between your method and the existing method in the paper and what are the advantages of your methods. You can write this as a separate section in the paper "Key Contributions". I am not sure that the paper will be accepted unless the new method has some distinct and sufficient advantage (because you have to answer the question of "why should anyone be bothered to use the new method").
Also, consider what are the shortcomings of the new approach and any approaches to mitigate them because reviewers will be interested in that too. If you don't have time to cover these shortcomings, you can justify how to mitigate them and write them as future works.
My advice is based on the fact that I recently submitted a paper (that got accepted) that proposed a new method to do something which had already been done by an existing method. But the advantage of my method was that it was more generic (the new method also works in scenarios where the old method doesn't). I basically showed this by referencing three prior works that had been unsuccessful in using the existing method in a new scenario that I was interested in and how the new method overcame the limitations of the old method. Some of the questions from reviewers focused on the applicability of the new method on future (yet unseen) scenarios.
Note: Take my answer with a grain of salt because my experience is only in engineering papers (specifically computer engineering/science). My advice may/may not be applicable to your area of research.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/23
| 508
| 2,115
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received a referee report on one of my articles. The report is amazing and gives me wonderful directions to improve my work however he rejected the article. Now I rewrote the article considering his comments and I am going to submit the article to a different journal. I would like to thank him or to say this version is thanks to this referee. Is this regular and how to say it?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it's certainly regular: acknowledgements to referees are not uncommon. I'd formulate the acknowledgement in the following way or similarly:
>
> The author would like to thank the anonymous referee who provided
> useful and detailed comments on a previous/earlier version of the manuscript.
>
>
>
The qualifier *earlier* should be enough to disambiguate. In addition, once the paper is published, you can also write an email to the editor of the journal where you had once submitted the manuscript, asking them to pass your acknowledgement to the referee.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't mention this at all in the acknowledgment. This is a more than usually convoluted history of a paper; most readers will be confused by it\*, and nearly all readers don't care about thanks to an anonymous referee. Also, this looks to me more like throwing a letter through a window and hoping that the wind will deliver it. Just ask the editor of the previous journal to pass you thanks to the reviewer, with a link to the published paper.
---
\*The proposition of [Massimo](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/122032/68958) isn't unambiguous to me: a reader may imagine there were two (or more) rounds of review for the journal that eventually published the manuscript, and two (or more) reviewers. The reviewer that's being acknowledged gave his comments only in the first round, and did not comment (did not feel it's necessary after seeing the revised version) in the next round. Personally, after seeing the sentence Massimo propose, I wouldn't even think it may about a reviewer in a previous submission to a *different* journal.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/23
| 301
| 1,358
|
<issue_start>username_0: As an undergraduate interested in Academia, is it worth posting your reproducibility study of a paper on arXiv and linking to it on Google scholar? Is it useful to future graduate schools? Specifically with regards Machine Learning and Computer Science..<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, publishing reproducibility studies is encouraged:
* It helps the research community determine whether the original study is valid and reliable.
* It helps other researchers or students reproduce the study themselves, in particular in order [to improve or build upon it](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants).
* It benefits your reputation: people might cite it, and it will be taken into account when you apply for a position or a grant later.
* Some conferences/journals in ML encourage submitting reproducibility studies, so you might even be able to get a peer-reviewed publication out if it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes it is definitely valuable and helps validate existing research to publish reproductions of existing results. In addition to publishing them on arXiv you might also want to consider submitting them to [ReScience](https://rescience.github.io/) (if they are computational studies).
ReScience reviews the reproductions through a very open and transparent review process.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/23
| 533
| 2,062
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did a summer internship in an industry for 9 week. It was a great experience and my supervisor was a very formal and professional lady. She rarely smiled but appreciated my work every now and then. On my last day, she asked about my graduation date and I told her it’s just 6 months away as it was my last semester.
She responded: "Send me your CV when you graduate.”
Now I want to write to her. How do I begin with that? It’s been 6 months and there’s no particular opening in that department. Should I send my CV in the first mail itself? If so should I also include a cover letter? What's the best way to introduce myself?<issue_comment>username_1: Something like : "Dear Dr. \_\_\_\_, I hope this email finds you well. You asked me to send you a copy of my CV when I graduated; please find it attached. I remain interested in \_\_\_\_\_ and working at \_\_\_\_\_ if possible.
Sincerely/Best regards (whichever sounds better),
NAME"
Simple and to the point.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You should thank her for the opportunity to work with her in the past and mention the project if it has a name. Tell her you've now graduated and are sending the CV as per her request.
Make the letter fairly broad. While she may not be able to hire you directly, she may want to promote you to others or aid you in some other way.
You could also mention your current/future plans, but don't make it too long or wordy. Include contact information.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Just send a note with 1 to 3 **short** paragraphs.
1. Remind her of the work you did together (you are colleagues, brothers in arms).
2. Give her an update on what you have done during the last 6 months (e.g. papers you published, your thesis, courses you took).
3. Let her know what job options you are looking at (even prospects). Ask her for any advice on your prospects and whether she knows of any opportunity at her place or elsewhere.
4. Thank her for the time together and how it benefited you.
And yes, include the CV.
Upvotes: 5
|
2018/12/23
| 429
| 1,837
|
<issue_start>username_0: My question is about sharing code in my thesis. I ran simulations using ready data in my field from a book. After that, I compared the results with those from the book. Do I need to share my code or is sharing it optional? Because I already explained the methodology that I used for my thesis.
Looking forward to your answer. I tried to find a proper answer but I couldn't find it.<issue_comment>username_1: If your advisor suggests not publishing your code then it would probably be a mistake to do so. How your thesis is handled is a matter for your advisor, your committee, and the university to handle. If they are satisfied then there is no danger of "cancellation" or other problem.
After your degree is granted you can make your own decisions in the future about what to publish and what not. I'll note that you can use your thesis as the basis of future publications and update it as you see fit, properly citing it, of course.
But it is the institute and no-one else who decides about your degree.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Your institute is the one who gives you your degree, revoking it is only going to happen if there is some sort of serious academic misconduct that they find out about much later. They know at the time you submit your thesis whether or not your code is included, so there is no reason that they would give you your degree knowing this, and then later deciding it is a reason to revoke your degree.
The most important thing is that your degree needs to be approved by your advisor and committee, so if your advisor says not to include it, don't. You could always put your code up on GitHub and include a reference to it in your thesis. (My thesis included my code at the end, as an appendix; I'm pretty sure no one ever looked at it).
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/23
| 1,242
| 4,922
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am confused about how course buyouts work in the United States and about how the incentives play out for professors and the university. I will use a constructed example to frame my confusion. Please let me know if my example is unrealistic.
>
> Say that a university pays an assistant professor $100,000 for his teaching during the academic year. He has received an external grant of $500,000 of which $150,000 goes to the university as overhead. The professor wants to lessen his teaching load, and he can do so by paying the university a part of his salary, also known as "buying-out". His university charges 20% of his full-year salary for each course he buys out. So he has to pay the university $20,000 to avoid teaching that one course. The university then hires a non-tenure track faculty or a graduate student to teach this course for $10,000.
>
>
>
Just to review: The university has received $150,000 from overhead, paid $100,000 as a salary, received $20,000 for a course buyout, and then paid $10,000 for someone else to teach the course. So the university has received $60,000 from this transaction. Doesn't this transaction greatly benefit the university. Ostensibly it also benefits the professor who gets to do research in the time saved from teaching, but if this research has the potential to bring in more grant dollars and hence more overhead to the university, isn't the ultimate benefit still to the university?
Is this how the process sometimes works? If so, do universities encourage professors to use course-buyouts as a way to do more research, in a way similar to how researchers are encouraged to apply to grants?
---
**tl;dr:** Course-buyouts can give junior professors more time to do research which is necessary for their professional advancement, but it seems that at the end of the course-buyout process, it is mostly administrators and the university that is advantaged, almost as if the researcher is giving the university money so that he or she can do the research which will bring yet again more money into the university.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, it is both better and worse than you describe. The substitute faculty member is unlikely to get $10K to teach the course. Probably closer to $2k.
Even if the professor doesn't teach as much and spends more time on research, he/she is also expected to advise and guide graduate students in their own research. This also benefits the university, of course.
But the overhead reimbursement is to reimburse real costs. When the professor/university get the grant it is up to the university to verify that the funds are properly used. This means that people are paid a salary to manage the grant and report to the funding agency periodically. It isn't just a "gift" as it entails real responsibilities (and potential liability).
But if you are thinking of the university as a profit center you are mistaken. The university benefits both from good teaching and from good research (and advising). But most universities are not-for-profit and whatever revenue comes in from whatever source goes back into the system, not to owners/shareholders. Some money is put aside for future needs and uncertainties.
If there is abuse in the system it is that there are probably too many administrators, but that is a different issue.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think your understanding is correct, but I would emphasize that it is a win-win. As you say, the university gets money. What does the professor get?
1. Better research results. More time often leads to a higher research output. Particularly pre-tenure, professors want to maximize the amount of interesting research to present in their tenure case. In R1 STEM departments, tenure decisions are 90+% based on research, so more time on research is very valuable.
2. Time. Presumably professors want to teach (this is one of the main advantages of academia over industry), but they don't necessarily want to teach every semester. If interesting things are happening off-campus (e.g., the CERN beam starting up, or an opportunity to take a leadership position that involves a lot of traveling), they may prefer to work 100% on research for a limited time.
(and, I agree with username_1 that $10K for an adjunct to teach one course is very optimistic...one adjunct in the US I worked with told me that his *best* year he got almost $30K, and he was teaching many large courses that year...though this was a decade ago).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Teaching large courses is something many professors dislike. Not because of the teaching itself but because of the huge administrational overhead, pressure on pass rates, student complaints etcetera which have increased dramatically over the past 10 years. Buyout not only saves time as mentioned in other answers but also reduces stress.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/24
| 846
| 3,608
|
<issue_start>username_0: There's a journal I read a paper in I wanted to respond to. The journal is open access, has no fee, and I have enough for a short paper (less than like 5 pages, there are no size limits). Writing this would take minimal time away from more important work. The journal is...not great. I don't think it's predatory (it's free to publish and is peer reviewed), though it might be.
I am a grad student. This response has nothing to do with my main research.
Would this come to hurt me later? Would people look down on me for having a short, goofy paper in a poor journal? What could they do that's dishonest? Even if they straight up steal what I write, I don't really care that much (though I would obviously not work with the journal again).<issue_comment>username_1: It probably won't hurt, but this is the sort of thing you should discuss with your adviser. Since the journal doesn't have fees, it is unlikely that it is an outright predatory journal but that doesn't mean it is worth responding to. Is this in a field where responses are a normal thing? Other relevant questions: And what do the other papers in the journal look like? Are they absolutely awful or are they just mediocre? That should tell you something about how worthwhile it would be to respond.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think there may be two queries here and I will address both.
The first is about the negative impacts of publishing in an honest, but low quality journal. Some fields may look poorly on lower quality publications as indicating your are publishing lots of poor work to get around the 'publish or perish paradigm'. If the rest of what you publish is in well recognised, peer-reviewed journals and is substantive in content it is unlikely to make much impact. If you don't have much on your CV, or you make it a habit, it might be seen negatively. Check in with mentors about publishing norms in your field. Be careful of how much time even a short paper takes away from your main focus.
The second question is about the negative impacts of publishing in what may be a scam journal. I would be very careful about ready fine print or signing anything to them in terms of rights if you have any doubts about their legitimacy. They may not ask you for payment but later scam others having built the appearance of legitamcy of your (and others) articles. I would tread carefully and follow FuzzyLeapfrog's advice above.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would consider doing it. For instance I have blown off conference journals and the like (low impact factor) but I could have given them something and upped my pub count. As long as you are not taking it out of somewhere better.
Of course if you can get it into a decent journal that is better. I'm not sure your field, but in chemistry, the ACS subspecialty journals below JACS are "decent" (they have equivalents outside of ACS also).
I guess one consideration is why you are considering this journal. Is it from a conference or a special edition (i.e. you were approached)? If not, I would lean towards getting it into a subspecialty journal.
If you are honest and don't make broad claims and write clearly (follow directions to authors like a hawk), you'd be surprised how easy it is to get papers through subspecialty journals. They aren't expecting breakthroughs like Science or Nature. And they get a lot of papers with unreadable English or with wild unproven claims. If you take a simple honest clear approach, often they will let you slide right through and not contest the noteworthy aspect.
Upvotes: -1
|
2018/12/24
| 420
| 1,813
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did bad on the midterm exam not because I did not understand the material well enough but I was anxious on the exam day and did not get enough sleep the night before.
I feel terrible about my grade. Is it professional to do extra work (maybe solve some problems) and ask him for a bonus?<issue_comment>username_1: What level class is this and what sort of school? Some colleges will have more of a culture of flexibility about these things. However, my starting point would be that unless there's something mentioned in the syllabus, the answer is very likely going to be no; most people have a general attitude of a) not making special exceptions and b) aren't inclined to give extra credit for what is likely going to be mediocre work. A more useful way of responding is probably to instead go to the professor's office hours and go over the test with them, and make sure you understand the material. This is especially important because in many circumstances, later material builds on earlier material so it is vital to have a good command of the early material before you go on to the later material.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It is not professional. Most professors are highly aggravated by these kinds of requests. Highly successful people are usually quite surprised to hear that other students ever thought it was possible or necessary to ask to bend the rules in this fashion.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Some professors will allow this, some will not, and some will get angry that you're even thinking they will allow extra credit.
[See this for examples of what replies you might get](https://chroniclevitae.com/news/989-dear-student-are-you-sure-you-want-extra-credit). You'll have to decide whether you want to risk asking the question.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/24
| 828
| 3,708
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student submitting a computational biology paper for peer review. It is intended to be a “methodology paper” for the journal. Our paper uses new methodology to analyze several public datasets and demonstrate the use and benefits of the new methodology. There were originally two authors (my advisor and I). We added a third author (Author C) for having shared one of the datasets (data #3) with us several years ago (and it became public recently). Author C had a few discussions with us about the results of our methodology applied to data #3 and provided a few interpretations. I recently asked Author C for how we should state author contributions and two of the sentences they added were along these lines:
*“Author C planned, designed, and conducted the experiment to identify results for data #3. All authors analyzed data #3.”*
I was a bit concerned by both sentences.
Data #3 is open/public. I believe Author C planned, designed, and conducted the experiment to generate data #3 for their own earlier paper, where they analyzed it using traditional methods. The current paper simply uses multiple public datasets (including theirs) to demonstrate the benefits of new computational tools. It is not about the collection of data #3. I feel they simply shared data #3 for the current paper and that we analyzed it with our own methods. If we state sentence #1, we may be expected to include a detailed methods section for the wet-lab collection process of data #3, which is really a part of their own previous paper and deflects from the focus of the current “methodology paper” (it would start to feel more like a “research paper”). At that point, it would be strange to not also include method sections for the collections of data #1, 2, 4, etc. (which are also public datasets).
Regarding sentence #2, I did not feel that Author C analyzed data #3 with us in the current paper, but simply provided interpretations based on their previous analyses of the data #3 for their own paper.
I do not plan to mention my concerns with sentence #2 as it is ambiguous, but I plan to propose to Author C that we remove sentence #1 or specify that it was for a *previous paper*. Is it reasonable for me to ask this? Or, when a wet-lab biologist like Author C generates data, can they add that they planned, designed, and conducted the experiment to generate that data as their contribution on multiple papers, without even including the details in the methods section of the papers themselves? Could this put them (or me as first author) at risk for appearing unethical?
I am mostly hoping to better ascertain what the “norm” and ethics are in this area, and how I can handle this situation respectfully and fairly.<issue_comment>username_1: The statement seems to be accurate, but it could be made a bit clearer since different methods were used in the various analyses. It may or may not give the impression that C helped in your experiment. Perhaps you could suggest a rephrasing of the second sentence:
"All authors analyzed data #3 using different methods."
That would make it clearer. You could also cite the paper of the third author there to make it even more clear.
It may be that C didn't intend to leave it a bit ambiguous.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: This seems like a totally reasonable statement which is perfectly clear. Unless you took raw bcl files or whichever image file comes direct off the scope the other author analyzed data. Clearly they collected the data. You don't have to do anything other than cite their work.
This is a normal statement and if you complain about it your collaborator will think you're weird.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/24
| 938
| 4,035
|
<issue_start>username_0: A recent SE Academia question asked about how best to implement a university's requirement that the [instructor must keep attendance records](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120218/my-university-requires-that-i-take-attendance-how-should-i-treat-students-who-a/) for all students. The top-voted answer there was to simply refuse to follow the university's policy, specifically, "Allow all students in class and do not monitor attendance." The justification and comments indicate that this is such an unusual and egregious demand at a university that it should be refused on its face.
Coincidentally, around the same time this topic independently came up at my own institution (large college in northeast U.S.), where mandatory attendance records, recorded by instructors and collected by the college, have been the process for many years, since before I arrived.
When this discussion came up in my department I cited the SE question linked above and its top-voted answer. However, it seems that almost all of my colleagues (~40 faculty members) simply disbelieved what I was saying. Their sense was that mandatory attendance-record-keeping was standard and customary at any academic institution in their experience. At least one comment was made asserting that other institutions forgoing attendance records would be a sign of lowering academic standards.
So: What is an evidence-based estimate for the proportion of U.S. college classes that have a mandatory attendance-record-keeping policy? A proper answer for this would require some kind of reference for the evidence of the estimate. The estimate could be at the level of the university, college, division, department, course, or something else, depending on available data. Additional points if a historical profile can be given, i.e., confirmation on whether attendance requirements have been growing more or less common in recent decades.<issue_comment>username_1: In the US there are actually some federal rules governing attendance keeping. Colleges must account *somehow* for students receiving federal aid, for example. That is a lot of students, as it likely includes those with government backed loans. While the rule doesn't seem to require that instructors keep a formal log, they are required to *know* who is attending and who is not.
For example, Here is a sample page from a large US state university: <https://uc.uiowa.edu/faculty/teaching-instructional-policies/student-attendance-absences>.
Some states will, themselves, impose additional rules, as will some individual privately funded colleges and universities.
There are a variety of reasons for such rules, including liability. If a student "disappears", especially one who is not technically an adult, the powers that be will want to know.
Beyond such rules, some instructors count attendance in the grading rubric, but I don't think that is especially common post-secondary. But non-attendance can be a symptom of other problems and so instructors are expected *in general* to know who is there and who is not - especially when missing class or other activities is repeated frequently.
So, while I don't know what percentage of colleges require this, my guess is that it is fairly high, based on the need to keep records. But it is also my guess that the rules aren't strictly honored in a lot of places.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The US military academies (granted they are "uncolleges") have mandatory attendance. Even regular schools often have mandatory attendance for sports or labs for safety reasons and to verify everyone does the work for the grade. I have seen some teachers in just regular classes at regular schools who also have mandatory attendance. It is unusual but not illegal or immoral.
I guess you could also consider other examples of schools with required attendances (job courses, high school, etc.). Again, you might not like it or think it is 19th century behavior. But it's not completely unknown for.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/24
| 724
| 3,055
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have seen a lot of information about the structure of an academic paper; and in summary the structure is as follows:
1. Title
2. Abstract
3. Introduction
4. State of the Art or Background
5. Methodology
6. Results
7. Conclusions
8. Future work or Recommendations
9. References
Nevertheless, I found (in rare ocassions) some articles that look more like opinions; and, I am not confused with the Letters to the Editor or other sections that would correspond to a magazine. So my question is how to structure an article, to being submitted to a peer-review conference, that is aimed to express an opinion like in an essay?
or said in other words, which are the parts of an opinion article?
I ask this because the Professors that initiate me in research activities had always stated that the opinion is pointless in a research article. Therefore, only facts that could be proven should be put in an article for a peer-review process.<issue_comment>username_1: In the US there are actually some federal rules governing attendance keeping. Colleges must account *somehow* for students receiving federal aid, for example. That is a lot of students, as it likely includes those with government backed loans. While the rule doesn't seem to require that instructors keep a formal log, they are required to *know* who is attending and who is not.
For example, Here is a sample page from a large US state university: <https://uc.uiowa.edu/faculty/teaching-instructional-policies/student-attendance-absences>.
Some states will, themselves, impose additional rules, as will some individual privately funded colleges and universities.
There are a variety of reasons for such rules, including liability. If a student "disappears", especially one who is not technically an adult, the powers that be will want to know.
Beyond such rules, some instructors count attendance in the grading rubric, but I don't think that is especially common post-secondary. But non-attendance can be a symptom of other problems and so instructors are expected *in general* to know who is there and who is not - especially when missing class or other activities is repeated frequently.
So, while I don't know what percentage of colleges require this, my guess is that it is fairly high, based on the need to keep records. But it is also my guess that the rules aren't strictly honored in a lot of places.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The US military academies (granted they are "uncolleges") have mandatory attendance. Even regular schools often have mandatory attendance for sports or labs for safety reasons and to verify everyone does the work for the grade. I have seen some teachers in just regular classes at regular schools who also have mandatory attendance. It is unusual but not illegal or immoral.
I guess you could also consider other examples of schools with required attendances (job courses, high school, etc.). Again, you might not like it or think it is 19th century behavior. But it's not completely unknown for.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/25
| 1,071
| 4,432
|
<issue_start>username_0: Next year I'm going to college and would like to do undergraduate research in the second semester under the supervision of a certain professor, who I'll call Prof. M.
There are three points against me and three in my favor. They are the following
1. <NAME>. works at another university, which is about 100 miles away from the one I'm going to. If he does accept to advise me, my plan is to travel to his university every week or every other week.
2. I am worse than terrible when it comes to social aspects: I talk too fast, lack common sense, and I feel horribly nervous when talking to other people (specially people I don't know), often leading to awkward behavior for not knowing how to act.
3. Prof. M. is a (local) bigshot. (I'm assuming he might be more selective because of this)
4. I have self-studied math and physics more or less to have approximately the technical understanding a second year graduate student would have. Of course, while I know about e.g. locally ringed spaces or bosonic string theory (or insert buzzword here), I lack most of the skills and experience a real graduate student would have, such as being able to critically read research papers or having research experience. Also, this is a self-assessment, thus possibly a faulty one;
5. The professor is welcoming and has a nice personality (I got this information from a friend that has a friend who was a phd student in the same university as Prof. M. and who talked to him personally);
6. He has supervised\* undergraduate students in the past (about five years ago);
So,
1. should I talk to Prof. M. personally or by email?
2. should I mention a paper he wrote that I find particularly
interesting and ask if he would accept advising me to do similar
research?
In short, **what is the best path to be taken here?**
---
\*Though all undergraduate students are from his university. See Professor Eldredge's comment below.<issue_comment>username_1: For reasons completely unrelated to your own skills and background, I think your chances here are slim. The professor has little external incentive to take you on and doing so will complicate his/her already too busy academic life. There might even be rules forbidding it, though the chance of that is small.
But, you ask how you can maximize your chances, so I'll give some hints.
This is the sort of thing you want to do in person, not by mail/email. You certainly won't get a positive answer via an email exchange. You might get an invitation to visit, but that puts you face-to-face in any case.
This is the sort of thing you want to do in conjunction with an advocate/intermediary. If you were already established in "your" college, one of your professors would be good for doing that. Especially since the prof once studied there. But if you have a current teacher who knows this person (or is known) they might be willing to intervene on your behalf, perhaps even accompanying you on a visit to the other university.
I'm not sure that waiting until you are established at university is a good thing or not. You won't have a lot of time to become recognized before you need to make the contact. But it would give you the potential for finding an intermediary.
You will need to convince the prof that you have unique skills and that it would be a missed opportunity not to work with you. That is a pretty steep climb. It would help if some of your research interests align. So you need to demonstrate that you know something of the research of the prof and how you might fit in.
But I also have a small wonder about why you chose the university you did, rather than the other one. You would maximize your chance by going there instead.
Don't worry about being/seeming awkward. Lots of people in academia are likewise.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Another potential solution I don't think anyone has mentioned is to have an official supervisor at your own institution, and a collaboration with Prof M at '100 mile University'. A more limited scope of direct supervision (say 1/month contact with more frequent meetings with your local super to handle the day-to-day stuff) might seem like less of an additional burden if they are hesitant to add you to their workload. You would then have access to both their specialist knowledge and a local super for the more general stuff and university admin side of things.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/25
| 953
| 3,995
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had submitted a manuscript to an ESCI journal.
It has been over 1 month since I submitted but the status shows "with editor".
I mailed the editor to check the status of my manuscript. The editor informed me that he had sent the manuscript to some referees but he has not received any reply from the reviewers.
He/She further said that if I want, I may consider submitting my paper elsewhere.
How long should I wait for the reviewers to give a decision whether they will review my manuscript or not?
Also my deadlines for submission are due in 2-3 months, i.e. I need to get my first submission within 2-3 months.
What time can be considered enough to withdraw my submission?<issue_comment>username_1: Given that you have a few months before you need to make a decision, it seems best to wait. Reviewing takes time and reviewers are often busy. As you get closer to other deadlines you can contact the editor again if you haven't already heard more and withdraw at that time if you wish.
But there seems to be little reason to panic now.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The review process often takes a long time. 2-3 months is typical. I’ve known instances of it taking 9-12 months. You need to *be patient*. This process is about the same for each journal (well most take a month or so at least. You must consider resubmitting to another journal carefully as you won’t save time by starting over, even if you don’t need to reformat it or write for a different audience (note that you **cannot** submit the paper to more than one journal at a time).
That it’s still with the editor (hasn’t been rejected) is a good sign. If they believe your manuscript does not have relevance to their journal or sufficient merit, they would have rejected it by now. They will now only do so if the reviewers raise serious concerns, it’s often accepted with revisions if it goes out for review.
The editorial process takes a long time. Many scientific or academic editors perform this role as a part-time job on top of their own academic responsibilities. The most time consuming part of the review process is finding the reviewers. They need to find reviewers with the right expertise who don’t have an existing relationship with the authors who are available to review. It can take a long time to get responses for requests to review.
Once they find reviewers, the review process should be quick. Reviewers are only given a couple of weeks to return their completed review (usually they submit them in this time or a few days late). They should decline to review if they cannot do in this timeframe. Once the reviews have been returned, an editor should give you a decision and the reviews within a few days.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The average time taken to handle a paper varies by field. In the one I'm most familiar with (physics), the timeline [looks like this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/88355/is-my-paper-under-review-or-similar-for-too-long-and-if-yes-how-should-i-reac/100881#100881).
In your case, your paper has gone one month with reviewers invited but none that have accepted. That's not good and it's unlikely any of the reviewers will agree to review the manuscript now. If I were handling your paper, I'd be inviting new reviewers already; however it depends on how active your editor is. If your editor is busy/on holiday/not very active etc, then he or she might decide to wait another month before inviting new reviewers. The fact that the editor responded to your query however is a good sign that they're inviting reviewers already.
So I would wait. I'd probably let the editor keep trying for another 2 months at least. As long as the editor is trying, he or she will eventually find reviewers. If you withdraw and submit elsewhere, the process starts from scratch, so you might have to wait even longer and there's no guarantee the new journal will find reviewers quickly, either.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/25
| 1,338
| 5,590
|
<issue_start>username_0: If a STEM PhD holder applies for a Master's in another STEM major, would this be an advantage or disadvantage in the eye of the admission committee?<issue_comment>username_1: [Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman!](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surely_You%27re_Joking,_Mr._Feynman!)
Sorry, but you walked into that joke. Actually, such an application would occur so infrequently that it might result in a few chuckles. But I don't think it would have a lot of effect. But certainly not a big advantage.
In fact, people, including myself, will wonder why a person would bother. After all, the applicant can study and learn effectively and evidenced by the doctorate, so what is the need of a formal program. It might be a disadvantage in some places where the available slots are limited and people would feel they should be given to someone who needs the training more.
On the other hand, if a lab needs particular skills that you have, they might be interested, just for that.
Thus, it is impossible to say in general as local needs/beliefs will dominate such a situation.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In terms of competency, I can't imagine why it would be seen as a disadvantage. If anything - it shows that you are capable of successfully completing an academic program.
The only scenario I could imagine where this may be an issue is if the Master's program is affiliated with some scholarship program, where the scholarship terms & conditions require that the applicant does not hold an advanced degree. If you're applying for a non-scholarship program then I can't imagine why they would reject your application - you are willing to pay good money **and** are likely to successfully graduate.
Another issue might be if you're applying to a STEM program that's very far from your PhD degree (say, from theoretical physics to zoology). If your bachelor's degree does not fit the prerequisites for the program you may have an issue, and the PhD won't help (but probably won't hurt).
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you ever want to leave academia, it could be seen as a disadvantage. It suggests you are a "perpetual student" rather than someone who actually wants to do some (real-world) work.
The main point of a PhD is not that you learned some (random) snippet of new information while doing it, but that you demonstrated *you can learn new stuff on your own with minimal supervision*.
That is what you should *expect* to be doing for the rest of your working life, either inside or outside academia, but expecting to keep getting more "awards" for doing that is rather like a kid in school expecting to get another gold star for every good piece of homework they turn in - most people grow out of it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Not a direct answer to your question, but a personal experience. I got a PhD in EE and am now one semester away from finishing my masters in CS. Three years after my PhD, I changed careers from EE research to a data science. My EE PhD provided me background in linear algebra, partial differential equations and numerical computations. The primary motivation for me going into MSCS was to develop intuition in certain areas which I wasn't exposed to, but became important in my new career: combinatorics, statistics, probabilistic modeling, optimization, operating/distributed systems, and computer networks to name a few. Following a masters curriculum guided me on what areas are (roughly) considered important and also brought a (forced) discipline to my studies.
If an application of MS followed by a PhD crossed my desk, I'd laud your discipline, but also probe on why you went that route. You need to have a good answer for that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Would not be any purpose of doing two different STEM MSc:s. After one you are supposed to be able to learn similar level stuff even faster on your own.
I could understand wanting to do an economy MSc to complement your STEM knowledge. Quite some people ending up as CEO or CTO of medium or large size firms seem to have double degrees: one in tech and one in econ.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: It's a plus on the side of competency to complete it, but a concern on the side of whether you would actually enroll and finish the degree if you are accepted. But the school, year and discipline of the PhD, the school and discipline of the Master's, and why you are switching play hugely into it. Also, frankly, your standardized test scores and ability to fund your own education, just like anybody else. I'd recommend talking to an admissions person at the school you are considering, as well as a hiring manager in the field you are considering. (BTW, I'm a PhD in Management Information Systems who was in academia for several years but have spent the last 12 years in industry.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: It really depends on the field of previous research but this is becoming more common due to more and more academics going into interdisciplinary research. It's not uncommon for folks from Biology to want to go into mathematical biology or even data science which requires more maths/computing. Therefore, if your previous PhD was in a different subject area to the masters you're applying to, that should be fine. Your research skills will definitely be valuable and may even help you get into a postdoc after completion of your masters. I've seen so many examples of academics with non-stats PhDs in the UK going back to study masters in statistics for example.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/26
| 992
| 3,967
|
<issue_start>username_0: It occurs sometimes that I am in possession of a factoid for which I know all of the standard terminology and can express the factoid in that terminology, and also know that the factoid is prior knowledge, but do not have a reference for the factoid. This is especially problematic in my field (machine learning) where the online resources for learning things are *very* good, and quite extensive. However, citations are sometimes sparse in these blog-style articles, and I find myself knowing the subject matter, but not knowing the appropriate citation for it. Note that the blog is *not* the appropriate citation, because they're just paraphrasing it from elsewhere. It would be nice to lean on the experience of the community, but "Does anybody know a citation for fact X?" is generally an inappropriate question on stack exchange sites.
Surely this is a problem in other disciplines as well. As such, I am mostly interested in general "citation reverse-search" skills, tips and tricks. However, field-specific answers are also welcome.
NOTE: This is specifically for situations where the problem is *known to be a prior one, and where the terminology is known*. Linking disparate fields with differing terminology of basically the same concept is a known Hard Problem™, and I am not trying to solve it here, except insomuch as those same skills relate to "reverse-search" of problems with known terminology.
To reiterate for clarity: What are handy tools, tricks tips etc for finding references for known facts?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, there are often many "facts" that really aren't. It is a fascinating research question to dive into the internet and libraries to verify the origin of something taken as a fact. This happens in every field and especially with pithy "quotations" that appear on calendars. Just for fun I like to look for the true source, in one instance I came up with five different supposed authors! This is also why you should reference your facts: So that others can verify that you are stating it correctly.
In the area of machine learning you can use the ACM or the IEEE digital library to dig around and look for a source. There are no shortcuts, this is research :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Wikipedia. Go to the bottom of an article to find references, open the first paper cited and then find the references on that paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I usually have this problem when the fact is not so obvious as to not need a citation (i.e. standard undergraduate coursework material) but not so difficult as to have been addressed in a seminal paper. Textbooks are a good way to fill in the gap, and I think this is how seminal textbooks work their way to so many citations. In ML, [ESL](http://Hastie,%20Trevor,%20et%20al.%20%22The%20elements%20of%20statistical%20learning:%20data%20mining,%20inference%20and%20prediction.%22%20The%20Mathematical%20Intelligencer%2027.2%20(2005):%2083-85.) is a good book to check against. [BDA3](http://Gelman,%20Andrew,%20et%20al.%20Bayesian%20data%20analysis.%20Chapman%20and%20Hall/CRC,%202013.) crops up in Bayesian stats papers a lot; a "fact" I might cite this book for would be the asymptotic normality of a posterior distribution under certain regularity conditions, which is about at the level we're talking about.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Since you indicate that the relevant terminology is known, you can search for this terminology online to find other academic sources that discuss the fact (and hopefully reference its origin). Of course, doing so using google would probably just lead you back to the educational blogs that you picked up the fact from in the first place. Instead use (something like) [google scholar](https://scholar.google.com/), or potentially better a subject specific abstract indexing service (I don't know which one are common in machine learning and computer science).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/26
| 1,065
| 4,039
|
<issue_start>username_0: Examples: [Newcastle University](https://www.newcastle.edu.au/current-staff/working-here/benefits-and-conditions/leave/christmas-closedown), [Queen's University](http://www.queensu.ca/humanresources/policies/time-away/observed-holidays/christmas-closing), [University of Florida](https://administrativememo.ufl.edu/2008/11/holiday-closing-period-3/).
It seems weird to give employees free leave. The Newcastle University page gives an explanation for why this happens:
>
> The Christmas closedown is important to reduce the leave accruals of all staff and it helps to ensure staff remain healthy and have a good work life balance.
>
>
>
But if this is their concern, they could simply give their employees more annual leave and keep operating the university during December. That's what the companies I've worked for do, and I'd even say it's preferable, since the employees get to choose when to use their leave. As for leave accruals, there are other ways to handle it, such as "use it or lose it" or "unused leave is converted to salary".
Also strange is that two of these universities are in the Northern hemisphere. December in the Northern hemisphere is a winter month, so there's less daylight. If I'm going to go on holiday I'd much rather do so during the summer. It could still be that Queen's University & University of Florida staff go on holiday *en masse* to the Southern hemisphere where it's summer in December, but that stretches belief.
What's the rationale behind the Christmas closedown? If the closedown is so important, why not have a summer closedown instead?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, there are often many "facts" that really aren't. It is a fascinating research question to dive into the internet and libraries to verify the origin of something taken as a fact. This happens in every field and especially with pithy "quotations" that appear on calendars. Just for fun I like to look for the true source, in one instance I came up with five different supposed authors! This is also why you should reference your facts: So that others can verify that you are stating it correctly.
In the area of machine learning you can use the ACM or the IEEE digital library to dig around and look for a source. There are no shortcuts, this is research :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Wikipedia. Go to the bottom of an article to find references, open the first paper cited and then find the references on that paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I usually have this problem when the fact is not so obvious as to not need a citation (i.e. standard undergraduate coursework material) but not so difficult as to have been addressed in a seminal paper. Textbooks are a good way to fill in the gap, and I think this is how seminal textbooks work their way to so many citations. In ML, [ESL](http://Hastie,%20Trevor,%20et%20al.%20%22The%20elements%20of%20statistical%20learning:%20data%20mining,%20inference%20and%20prediction.%22%20The%20Mathematical%20Intelligencer%2027.2%20(2005):%2083-85.) is a good book to check against. [BDA3](http://Gelman,%20Andrew,%20et%20al.%20Bayesian%20data%20analysis.%20Chapman%20and%20Hall/CRC,%202013.) crops up in Bayesian stats papers a lot; a "fact" I might cite this book for would be the asymptotic normality of a posterior distribution under certain regularity conditions, which is about at the level we're talking about.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Since you indicate that the relevant terminology is known, you can search for this terminology online to find other academic sources that discuss the fact (and hopefully reference its origin). Of course, doing so using google would probably just lead you back to the educational blogs that you picked up the fact from in the first place. Instead use (something like) [google scholar](https://scholar.google.com/), or potentially better a subject specific abstract indexing service (I don't know which one are common in machine learning and computer science).
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/27
| 2,586
| 10,958
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student works in theory of computer science. I am worried about the timing, I have taken in writing a one paper.In last semester, I have few ideas, I told those idea to my supervisor then he suggested me to write the paper. I have spent almost six months on writing this paper which involves correcting the solutions, idea's etc multiple times. In short I have spent one year on a problem( including identification and solving ). I am worried about the time it take to write a paper. I am wondering, Is it possible to write a research paper in a less time or it comes with experience. Please suggest some idea in order to save the time in the writing phase. I have asked my supervisor about this, he told me to be organised and plan the things in a better way. He also suggested me to write the things in flow means whenever start writing a paper write a page at one time.
I have tried few things on my own, whenever I write I keep a top researcher's paper infront of me and see how they phrase the sentence's.
Note that this was my first time, when i have written a paper completely.
**Question :** Advice on writing a research paper in a less time<issue_comment>username_1: I think this question is highly dependent on your personal writing and working style. I can give some suggestions, but some of them will not be a good fit for some people, and I may not list many suggestions that work well for others simply because they do not work for me (or have not occured to me).
1. You may not need to write one paper faster if you can work on multiple papers concurrently. If you start four projects and it takes you a year to write a paper for each project, then you are releasing a paper on average every three months even if in practice all four papers took a year. This works especially well when you have coauthors since there can be a lot of time spent waiting for feedback or work to be done by others, which you can spend working on another paper.
2. One of the smartest and most prolific people I know has been rumored to tell his graduate students "just write it". I take this to mean "get a rough draft on paper quickly even if it is an ugly rough draft." Even if you have a lot of editing to do, things will become easier going from a draft rather than a blank page.
3. Time off can be just as important as time on. The mind is a truly remarkable thing, and in my experience, it works on a multitude of problems subconsciously. After I write an outline or a rough draft of a section or a paper, I don't try to edit and polish it immediately. Instead, it can be better to set the project down for a few weeks and work on other things or get caught up in your every day life. If one returns to a paper with fresh eyes, they are going to do a lot more quality work in less time than if they try to think, write, and edit all in a short time span.
4. Find a place to work that works for you. Everyone is different here. Some people need absolute silence to the point where they wear earplugs in a quiet space. Personally, I thrive in relatively loud, chaotic places such as busy coffee shops. I can get into the groove much easier there than say a library or my office, so I use this when I am trying to write.
These are the only tips I can think of right now. If I think of any other tips, I may add to this list later.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think there is a strategy here:
>
> Please suggest some idea in order to save the time in the writing
> phase. I have asked my supervisor about this, he told me to be
> organised and plan the things in a better way. He also suggested me to
> write the things in flow means whenever start writing a paper write a
> page at one time.
>
>
>
Don't divide the project into a "do the work" phase and a "writing phase". While you are solving your problem, write about it a little bit every day. That will both clarify the work and provide a draft of the final paper.
Consider looking at the book *Writing Your Dissertation in Fifteen Minutes a Day*. It discusses that writing strategy and others and may help you figure out what works best for you.
(I know I'm not supposed to use this forum to advertise my wife's book, and this answer may be deleted by the moderators, but the book is inexpensive and it might be just what you need so I will take the chance.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: First, check how your fellow phd students are performing. Writing one paper per year is likely a decent pace. Second, don't work in isolation, share intermediate results. With your supervisor obviously, but also to people you work with or could potentially work with. Not everyone will give you feedback immediately, but research drafts don't go straight to the bin either. Third, you need to come up with some deadline, when you should send your paper for publication. If you're not sure how to do this yourself, your supervisor will help you, just let them know that you have something that you want to publish.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: In addition to the other advice offered, as far as organization, your advisor may have been talking about creating an [annotated bibliography](https://guides.library.cornell.edu/annotatedbibliography) and outlining.
For each of your sources and studies, list the citation reference at the top, a 1-2 sentence evaluation of whether the source is valuable or not and why, then, list all the quotes which you found relevant. (Quotes are not required, but they make copying, pasting, and citing source information very easy.)
From that, (after you have created your general idea for a thesis) you can create an outline based on your evidence and fill in opening, closing, and evaluative sentences around each of your findings/points/evidence.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Use your inbuilt and forgotten ability to explain your topic
============================================================
Most of us find it very easy to tell our colleagues about our work, *if* it is in an informal short-notice environment. Bump into someone getting coffee, and if they say,
"What are you up to?", and you will likely instantly respond with, "Oh, you know that X happens? Well, we've found out why. It's because Y!".
If they enquire, "What makes you so sure?", you will say, "We got some Z, and did A, B and C, and found D. This means E. So then we did ... etc."
Typically they will say, "OK I suppose I believe it, but couldn't it still be P or Q?" And you would reply, "Yes, but P isn't likely because ..., and Q probably contributes only in a small way because of ...".
I am a Professor of Cardiology, so this is how it goes in Medicine, but it is likely to be similar in all academic writing.
Somehow, though, when we come to writing it down we are paralysed
=================================================================
Beat this paralysis by actually doing the interaction described above. Or even just imagining it. That's the main thrust of the paper. Once you have that in your head, set about the paper like this:
1. Write the Abstract first
---------------------------
### In fact write the last line of the Abstract's Conclusion first
`In situation W, X is largely caused by Y.` Then precede this with whatever else your paper concludes.
### Then write the Abstract's Intro
`X, commonly found in W, is important because .... Its cause has been unclear. In this study we tested whether X is caused by Y, Y2, Y3 ..., using ....methods`.
### Then write the rest of the Abstract
All the key methods and results. Within the word limit (e.g. 250 words total for Abstract). You will come up with lots of stuff that doesn't fit. Don't worry: push them down to the end of the document because they will go into the main Results section.
2. Write the Results, and any associated Figures/Tables, next
-------------------------------------------------------------
Go through the Abstract's Results, and each statement you wrote there, write in fuller detail here, bringing in all the things that you didn't have space for.
3. Now write the Intro/Background of the paper
----------------------------------------------
Only start writing it now, not before, otherwise you will fill it with general stuff about your topic. If you only write it now, you will focus it much better on "Why we are bothering to do this research." You don't have to review the whole topic. Only talk about the problems that you will solve in this paper.
4. Now write the Discussion of the paper
----------------------------------------
Keep it short. It won't end up short, but if you always try to keep it short, you will help prevent bloat.
`In this study we found 1, 2, 3.`
Then a section on finding 1. If you differ from other workers in your results, speculate on why. Ditto for 2 and 3.
Then discuss any implications for practical use.
### Next, the Study Limitations section of the Discussion
What would people (puny ignorant fools!) immediately think was wrong with your reasoning? Put those ideas here, and then say why those doubts are unfounded. Then include any genuine weaknesses you can think of.
### Finally, the Discussion's Conclusion
Reiterate the Abstract's conclusion, perhaps allowing yourself more words. In the Abstract, your conclusion had to seem like a valid conclusion from the information you presented in the Abstract itself. In the Discussion Conclusion, you can now draw upon all the results and all the reasoning in the Discussion, so you might be able to be more specific.
Congratulations!
----------------
You now have your first draft.
Refine
======
Find someone who has 10 minutes to spare. I suggest reading out the paper to them, watching their expression on their face. When they look puzzled, make a note on the paper. *Do not* give an on-the-spot explanation. You won't be there to do that when Reviewers or ultimate Readers of the paper are going through this experience.
If they become totally confused and disinterested at any stage, abandon the reading at that point. Otherwise continue reading to the bitter end.
Now go away and edit the paper to avoid that person being puzzled at those points.
Come back and try on the same person or different people. You need to (start with!) a lot of friends. Don't worry, you can do the same favour for them in return.
When you have got the paper to a stage which allows it to be read without causing bemusement/crying on behalf of the listener, try giving it on paper to people. Again, don't ask them to send written comments back. Watch them while they read it.
Check their understanding by taking the paper away from them and asking them to describe what it said. Don't give them hints.
Success
=======
Once people seem to be able to read it and understand it, you are done! Time to submit, and let the Journal's Reviewers read it and send their thoughts.
Upvotes: 2
|
2018/12/27
| 610
| 2,495
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in the first half of my PhD (Pure Mathematics) in the U.S. In this period of time I've read all of my advisors papers (apart from the very early ones), discussed all of them with him, and improved on many of them. My advisor is great: he has been extremely helpful, he'd always read all my stuff, and I definitely learnt a lot from him. I think he also got something from me, since I was able to answer a conjecture and a couple of questions that he had formulated/thought about for quite some time.
However, I feel like I know all the stuff he does at this point: he has very little left to teach me, as I noticed in the last six months.
My current situation is not too bad, I am capable of finding my own projects and most of my publications are based on my own ideas (I have 10 preprints/publications), so I could just go on like this for 2-3 more years. However, I think it would be better for me to go somewhere else, to learn from some other mentor, maybe in some different but related field.
Indirect sentences make me believe that my advisor does not want me to leave, although I never asked him directly. Before I do so, I would like to hear your opinion (I understand that the information I gave is not exhaustive, but nevertheless...).<issue_comment>username_1: If your professor really doesn't want you to leave, he needs to offer you a permanent position. It may be that keeping your association going would be good for you. But you need to leave the nest eventually and fly on your own.
But it sounds like you are in a good position to finish your doctorate early. I suggest that you do that, at least. Accelerate anywhere you can.
There is no reason that you can't explore a position elsewhere as you get closer to the end, to see what is on offer. It is good to have options.
To maximize your future, stay as helpful and cooperative as possible.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Push on out of there. You are a capable, independent researcher now. This is normal in second half of Ph.D. but happens at different speed for different people (some never get there). Write up your thesis and dump it on the committee.
Of course advisor wants to keep you since you are so productive now. But you need to do what is right for you. You have already done enough for the old man with the 10 coauthorships--lot better than the unpublished slugs. Go find new mountains to climb. Don't dawdle in grad school, if you are a superstar.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/27
| 1,364
| 5,318
|
<issue_start>username_0: Related to my questions:
1. [How much knowledge is expected of a PhD applicant as compared to a postdoc or a research assistant?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/116498/how-much-knowledge-is-expected-of-a-phd-applicant-as-compared-to-a-postdoc-or-a)
2. [For the average pure math US PhD program, what are essential topics after basics topics of complex analysis, abstract algebra and topology?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121558/for-the-average-pure-math-us-phd-program-what-are-essential-topics-after-basics)
The question from quora [Why would a professor want a Ph.D student instead of a research staff? What are the advantages and disadvantages?](https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-professor-want-a-Ph-D-student-instead-of-a-research-staff-What-are-the-advantages-and-disadvantages) is answered mostly by US or US-style professors. I would like to know the European or European-style take on this.
My ultimate goal is to understand Country A (see [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121558/for-the-average-pure-math-us-phd-program-what-are-essential-topics-after-basics) or [here](https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3046327/for-the-average-pure-math-us-phd-program-what-are-essential-topics-after-basics)) which seems European-style. You can go on about [how academia varies](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1212/22511) and how I won't gain much understanding, but please answer the question also.<issue_comment>username_1: Because a particular source of funding may allow to only get a phd student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, I'm a German professor in CS - my answer is biased by those facts. Some might be generalized, though. Some answers are based on German employment rules in the public sector and those will most likely be specific to Germany.
Usually, contracts in the public sector are either permanent (hooray!) or temporary positions. We have a law stating (simplified version) that you are not allowed to be employed more than 12 years in temporary contracts (if you want to know more look for the "[Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz](https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wisszeitvg/BJNR050610007.html)" - we love those words!)
Another rule is, that for "permanent tasks" you should have a permanent position whilst for temporary / project-style jobs you can hire people in temporary positions.
To make things even more complicated: A university / department usually has both types of positions and can distribute them among researchers and central administration.
If the university does not have enough positions available, you have to acquire third party funding. This is by definition project related and therefore temporary.
This brings me to the following:
* In general, I would *love* to have research staff - but resources are limited and usually you don't have too many available.
* If I acquire third party funding, it is just available during the project duration - in good cases this is long enough for a PhD candidate to finish a PhD thesis (in the field of the project).
* If the project ends without the PhD candidate being finished, I usually try to apply for a follow-up project which helps funding the candidate. Since I want successful PhDs afterwards, this is a top priority - and induces some stress on professors.
* Yes, I could hire someone without intention to do a PhD or even a postdoc, but at least in CS industry is paying that much better, that the possible PhD is the only chance to motivate highly skilled people for this salary (which is ok, but less than in industry).
* This brings me to the last point: Motivation! A PhD candidate is not only interested in the project but in his/her PhD as well. So they are usually quite motivated and it is more fun to work with motivated people.
Things are a bit different if you are in a graduate program, but most of what I wrote above still applies.
To add a few words on the comment of Monika:
* At least in Germany you cannot fire a PhD student at any time since you are usually having a labour contract.
* I agree that there might be strong tensions when a permanent position becomes available and it is open who might get it. But permanent positions in research are quite rare nowadays in Germany so it does not happen that often.
**Added after OPs remark:**
In fact the situation for postdocs is or less the same: Usually you don't have the funding to support a postdoc for a longer period of time. With this, it is questionable why a postdoc would like to work in such an environment. Doing a habilitation / postdoc-phase and preparing for a full professorship could be a very good motivation as well. The tasks for a postdoc are usually different from the ones for PhD candidates: As postdoc, you want to demonstrate that you are capable of running a group - which involves writing grants, guiding PhD candidates, involvement in teaching, etc. Depending on your field it allows you to do original independent research for the first time (e.g. in medicine in Germany). So if you are looking for such a person in your group, a postdoc is great, but usually most funding schemes are more hands on and so it is difficult to get funding for a postdoc, unless you are having very large funding schemes.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/27
| 589
| 2,512
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postgraduate student at a research-oriented university. I had spent about 2 months to work on a project. I collaborated with another postgraduate student who is the first author.
In the project, I mainly contributed to the paper writing such as whole parts of introduction, background, related works, discussion, and conclusion. Also, I wrote some subsections in the main body and made most of the figures and tables in the paper.
So I think I put a decent amount of time and effort.
But my collaborator wants to discard this paper since he/she thinks the methodology of the paper is too outdated and thus it cannot be accepted for the top journal/conference.
It seems my 2 months of work is wasted. What do you think about this situation? and What should I do?
Thanks in advance for any thoughts and advice.<issue_comment>username_1: If your contribution is just to the writing and not to the underlying research then you don't have much invested. However, if it helped you improve your writing skill in any way then it isn't wasted.
But the best way to capitalize on it directly is to stay with the project if it continues but get more deeply into the research behind it.
But don't minimize the impact of the experience. Think of it as an investment that will only pay off longer term. I assume the first author also put a lot into the work and is a bit disappointed also.
But you should verify everything with your supervisor/advisor. Perhaps the other student is being overly pessimistic.
OTOH, discarding work partly done is common enough. Not the norm, perhaps, but sometimes you need to get fairly deep into it to learn that there is less there than first anticipated.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My advice is to try to put some pressure on the other researcher to get something out. Even offer to spearhead it (finish the writing) and maybe make any claims more modest, less controversial, and try for an "easy" journal. (IOW, make it more of a datapoint paper.) But get it over the goal line. If necessary, I would even go to other colleagues or his supervisor or the like. [Squeaky wheel theory.]
Oh...and don't work with this person in the future. And try to get better commitments for eventual publishing before offering help again. And of course if you are in reverse situation make SURE to get something, some least publishable unit, over the goal line when you have collaborators relying on you as first author.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/27
| 365
| 1,653
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to a Master's program using an online application where I must report my prior university education. The field to report my undergraduate GPA is not required and would anyways be verified by using my transcripts before admission. It would, however, be more convenient for the application committee to get a feel for my undergraduate record if I were to report it voluntarily since they would not have to immediately match my application with my transcript. It should be noted that other materials (like a statement of purpose) are separate documents.
How will reporting or not reporting affect my chances of admission? Are they more likely to reject an application where they can immediately see a lower GPA, or one where they are unsure of what it is at first? I feel that my GPA may be a potential weakness in my application and would prefer not to have it advertised.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm pretty sure that they have thought it all out. There is probably a clerical service that puts things together for the committee before they even look at it.
Report what is needed but there is no advantage in doing more. Spend your efforts on letting them know how you will be a good candidate. If your record is lacking, but you have improved in the last years, you can write about the improvement, of course. But a number is just a number and will be viewed along with a lot of other things.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you think it is better than average, volunteer it (if there is a convenient free text field). If average or worse than average, don't volunteer it.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2018/12/27
| 571
| 2,333
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently in the writing phase of my thesis. Factors related to and unrelated to academia are putting me under "nice" amount of pressure. it became much harder for me to concentrate on reading or writing and always end up procrastinating much of the time.
What are good strategies to get back on track in regards to managing my thesis work? When should one consider psychiatric counseling?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't try to limit procrastination. You have already tried that and it didn't work. Instead, limit the time that you spend writing, but during writing time, write and do nothing else.
The limitation of your permissible writing time should feel like a real constraint. Ideally, when the time is up, you should feel strongly inclined to write 'just one more sentence'. Don't. It's best to stop mid-sentence, as this makes it easy to get going on the next day.
The duration should also feel doable. Forget about 'making up for lost time'. If your are a heavy procrastinator with strong anxiety, start with half an hour or less. Three hours should be the maximum if you schedule daily writing sessions, which I recommend. Remember to take breaks during which you move away from the desk. The '[pomodoro technique](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomodoro_Technique)' can be useful to divide time into manageable chuncks of writing/working and rest/recovery.
Don't ever allow yourself to write once the allotted time period has expired, until the following day. You might waste scarce writing time by procrastinating once, perhaps twice, but probably not more.
This is how I finished my PhD thesis.
Regarding counseling: Consider counseling or therapy if you feel depressed, anxious, or have trouble sleeping for more than ten days in a row.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Start with why and determine the reasons behind doing a particular work!
The following three strategies have worked for me:
First, slice your project into several tasks.
Second, for each 45 minutes of working time, dedicate 15 minutes of rest time. (important: that 45 minute task must be completely focused task)
And last but not not least, plan for the time block. Exactly write down what you will do (step by step) during the time block you have dedicated for a task.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/27
| 2,206
| 9,366
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am starting my PhD in statistics program next year, and I have some concerns.
In my institution, there is a mandatory course that every PhD student has to take in lieu of taking one qualifying examination.
The course requires students to read five academic papers and write a report, which will be graded by faculty members.
I was browsing through the reading list for this course, and I often find myself pondering over one twenty-page paper for days and weeks because I want to make sure that I understand all the math, concepts, and other details of the paper.
I am supposed to make a report for one paper/month, and I am now quite worried about what I am expected to do as a PhD student because it feels like it takes me forever to comprehend a single paper.
I feel discouraged because I have done very well in my bachelor’s and master’s programs in statistics, but I am having such a hard time comprehending these academic papers.
Is it normal for beginning PhD students to have a hard time comprehending academic papers?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, yes it is. But it gets easier. What most people don't realize when starting out reading academic papers, is that not every paper is an island (to paraphrase...). Terminology and 'lingo' is something you learn over time, and suddenly you realize that you no longer have to look up every second concept you stumble upon in a paper - it simply references stuff that you already know.
This is of course also the reason that forcing new students to read papers, and even write a report about them to make sure that the papers have been properly digested, is a very good idea. The fact that members of faculty even take time out to grade these reports, tells me that you are probably in capable hands.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I am in my second year of a statistics PhD. I have by now examined many hundreds of papers. Some of them are, I now know, of only tangential relevance to my research. Others **are** relevant but when I first saw them I did not understand them enough to know even that. And some are so relevant that I have sought to reproduce their findings and in doing so I have re-read them many times, often finding something new in them that I had not previously noticed. In parallel with reading these papers I have been learning about branches of statistics that I knew nothing of before.
The most important thing to realise, as I now have, is that academic papers are not generally written with the aim of explaining something to a novice, but rather are there to tell someone who is already expert how wonderful the author's research in that field of expertise should be seen to be.The day will come when you too can write papers that only a few people will understand, and to get there you will have struggled through countless really difficult papers.
Now, given that academic papers in statistics are bound to be hard to understand and that you have been asked to summarise as many as five of them in a short time, you have to accept that your summary will not be based on a complete understanding of all the material in all the papers. Imagine that you are a journalist rather than a researcher. You need to be able to write down:
1. what question does this paper seek to answer?
2. what is the answer?
3. what reasons does the author give for that answer?
If you can do that you already have a good summary of the paper. To do it you do not need to understand all the author's reasons, still less agree with them all. Later in your research, maybe, you will recall one of these papers and realise that it is relevant to your own work: then you really do have to roll up your sleeves and understand in detail, but not now.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes. But it's a question of practice. More reading= More understanding. More understanding easier to understand a new paper.
But you do not need to understand every single phrase.
For instance, if it is not exactly your field, I would jump over the methods section.
I got a recommendation during my Ph.D. first read Abstract, second Intro, third Conclusion. Some cases 3rd Results, 4th Conclusion.
The more you read the more you'll understand.
Read, read, read. That's the key
Reviews on the field of study are excellent starting points
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Every person had that time of not comprehending some papers/ academic papers especially if it does have a lot of information. More pages to read we sometimes forget the ideas contained in some pages while reading the concurrent ones. So I think it is very normal if sometimes you did not understand a certain concept because everybody does. What I did if that time happens to me, I read it succeedingly 5 or more times to grasp the information contained in the article and then I can now write my own reflection or output.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Unfortunately, a paper is limited in length by money (lots of publications have a per page cost after their standard length) or guidelines. As such, authors have to sum up lots of dense information in a small space. They may take for granted lots of "known" papers. In a book, the authors would have more space to develop their ideas, add explanations that are only a citation in a paper.
It is hard indeed to start reading papers (it's even harder when it's not your mother tongue). I remember when I started that my understanding was very shallow. With time and experience, I'm now capable of understanding also the context, not just the paper itself. At the beginning, I had to look at the used terms and look them up online or read the cited papers/books to understand some of the mathematical basis for the paper I needed.
But it gets better, the curve in a specific domain may be similar close to 1-e^-t. Going from one domain to another gets easier, but there is always a learning curve to understand what everyone in a (new) domain takes for granted.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I agree with [@username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/122188/is-it-normal-to-have-a-hard-time-comprehending-academic-papers/122189#122189) that as you go further and read more and more papers, it gets easier for you and you don't have the difficulties in comprehending the terminologies. It is also very good that you think a lot on each individual paper and want to understand each bit of it. However, remember that you should know how to read a paper. Reading a paper is different from studying a mathematical textbook, which you do in order to prepare yourself for the exam. I suggest you the following steps:
1. First, consider yourself as a reviewer, who is employed to judge the paper and its novelties and then gives his/her opinion.
2. Try to scan the paper first. Read the abstract and conclusion and try to understand the framework of the paper.
3. After reading the abstract you will understand how far you are from the topic. Thus, try to search a little about the terminologies and methods that you are unfamiliar with (by simply googling them and checking Wikipedia).
4. Read the introduction carefully to see the state of art and the previous studies on the topic. People usually explain things in detail in the introduction, if no they refer to some general and review papers. Try to get those papers and read them.
5. Now read the whole paper. But remember nobody expects you to understand the mathematical model that the author is presenting in details. Try to have an idea about it. You are not going to write about the detailed mathematics in your report. Don't waste your time on that. If you are personally interested in details then that is another story.
6. After finishing the paper, ask the following questions from yourself:
6.1. What was the main idea of the paper?
6.2 What was the method that the author implemented?
6.3 how satisfactory were the results?
and so on...
7. Try to write your report according to the above information.
Good Luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I'd like to provide a theoretical explanation:
>
> The novice learner must be cognizant of these labels and symbols and
> learn the generally accepted referents that are attached to them. As the expert must communicate with these terms, so must those learning the discipline have a knowledge of the terms and their referents as they attempt to comprehend or think about the phenomena of the discipline.
>
>
> Here, to a greater extent than in any other category of knowledge, experts find their own labels and symbols so useful and precise that they are likely to want the leamer to know more than the leamer really needs to know or can learn. This may be especially true in the sciences, where attempts are made to use labels and symbols with great precision. Scientists find it difficult to express ideas or discuss particular phenomena with the use of other symbols or with "popular" or "folk knowledge" terms more familiar to a lay population.
>
>
>
Those details and concepts are the first level of knowledge: factual knowledge in the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy.
References:
[A taxonomy for learning teaching and assessing](https://www.uky.edu/%7Ersand1/china2018/texts/Anderson-Krathwohl%20-%20A%20taxonomy%20for%20learning%20teaching%20and%20assessing.pdf)
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/28
| 906
| 4,117
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is commonly accepted within academia that if you submit and publish peer-reviewed papers, you should also do your share, and review your peers' papers.
Does the underlying principle apply **globally** or **per-venue**? Should you aim to do approximately as much review work as your own papers received, considering the total sum of all your contributions in your field? Or is there a social convention or moral obligation to do peer review work in the same venues that you submit or publish papers in?<issue_comment>username_1: First, I'd say that your obligation\* of peer review is to help your community of *peers*, not specific venues or publishers. It's the peers that do the reviewing mostly for free, and their work you're supposed to reciprocate. Hence the principle should apply globally.
However, spreading your efforts out a bit can be beneficial, leading to more diverse reviewer pools for a given journal. (And hence a higher chance they can find the ideal person to ask.) And of course, you're free to focus your efforts on reviewing for journals you particularly like, whether for their quality, (possibly also unpaid) editors you have a good relationship with, or other reasons.
Second, aiming for a close balance in reviewing efforts given and received seems misguided. Focus on writing useful reports, not on the amount of work (that of others is hard to estimate anyhow). You can't really review more than you're invited to review, and even then it's certainly better to decline if you can't produce a quality review in the expected standard time frame than accepting each invitation in a vain attempt to cancel out review work you've received already.
\*If obligation is the right word. I tend to think of 'obligation' as a requirement, whereas this reciprocity is more of an 'ought' in my opinion. But hey, different definitions exist.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think you are defining "reciprocity" too narrowly. And a definite answer to your direct question would be misleading.
In general, the people participating in an academic field form a community and as a community they contribute to it. But people contribute in different ways and in different ways at different times depending on their skills and circumstances. Note my underlying assumption that you don't work in a field solely to advance your own career, but to advance the state of knowledge for everyone.
Some people are, for example, good researchers, but poor reviewers. Perhaps they don't have the time or the temperament to be helpful. They best contribute to the community via their research. Other people are the opposite. I was once in a situation in which it was impossible to do much research but I still understood what was important and could still review. Yet other people have a more balanced approach.
One other issue is time. At different points in a career, people can contribute in different ways. A young researcher probably needs to focus more on production than on helping others, just to increase the chances of advancement. At other times, perhaps later in the career, a person has lower output, but still needs to keep abreast of what is happening in the field, and so reviews current work.
But there are other ways to contribute other than reviewing. Conference committee work, for example. Advising younger researchers (students) is an obvious contribution.
To come to a more definitive answer to your question, though, if you publish a lot of papers at a conference, you become more closely aligned with that community, so you are more likely to be asked to review there. Probably you will want to accept. I don't think you owe any allegiance to a commercial publisher, however, even if you publish with them frequently. But you might want to "help out" some particular editor who has been helpful to you in the past. But note that my examples here are more in the realm of personal, rather than professional, obligations. But I don't think that in most cases, other than the most extreme, that it is an ethical issue.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/28
| 977
| 4,033
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am the course lecturer of a large undergraduate course
with about 700 students in the course.
One of the challenges of teaching such a large course
is grading the assignments and giving students feedback.
Here is some information about the grading process:
* The students submit their assignments electronically,
using a learning management system
* The graders grade the assignment by filling in a spread
I would like to give the students two types of feedback:
* Students would receive their scores for each question part,
e.g., 1A: 10/10, 1B: 5/5, 1C: 2/5, etc.
* For each question part where marks were lost,
students would receive some comments about why they lost marks,
e.g., wrong units in 1B, did not round to an integer in 2A, etc.
Is there an **efficient** way to give a large class of students
such feedback about their assignments?
I considered asking the TA to email each student
their score for each question part and the mistakes that they made.
However, this seemed to me to be very time consuming and impractical.
### Response to questions in comments
**Question:**
How many students does each TA handle?
Is the group of a particular TA consistent throughout the course?
That is, does the TA handle the same students for the course?
Are the "graders" also the TAs?
**Answer:**
We have about 5 PhD students who take the role of *graders*,
i.e., their job is only to do grading.
We also have 1 TA who is a recently graduated BSc student,
whose job is primarily to do admin work,
although she also helps out with a little bit of grading.
**Question:**
What is the learning management system?
Do you know all of the available features on this system?
**Answer:**
We are using the Canvas learning management system.
It is possible to give comments for each student's assignment;
however, to the best of my knowledge,
this has to be done one assignment at a time,
which means that giving feedback this way would be fairly time-consuming.<issue_comment>username_1: I built a “set” of six spreadsheets (one for each grader) and a master that would take the grades and comments.
Then, using a template in the master, create a “report” for each student - a vba code would then run through producing a report for each student.
Never did tie it to email to make that bit automatic...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If the class has 700 students there should be a lot of students who are making the same mistakes. Therefore, I do not see much benefit in personalized feedback due to the impracticality of the context.
I would consider it wiser to determine what are the common mistakes that the majority of the students made and provide the same feedback to all students on how to address these common mistakes. This will help the majority of the students without having to commit to the time-intensive effort of personalization.
If there is someone who wants additional explanation they can speak with the TAs.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm not familiar with Canvas, but can your graders add markup to documents easily (the electronic equivalent of the old red pen)? If you provide a set of solutions just marking the errors should make it obvious what most of them are, but a one or two word note can be useful, especially in short-form problems or ones with fairly limited and obvious right or wrong answers.
Expansive written comments are more important in long-form written work, since the marking criteria are often a lot fuzzier and it is, IMO, important to be clear about why you think someone has demonstrated only a "good understanding…" instead of a "very good understanding of XYZ" and so on, and because there are often fewer points in the total grade. That takes longer, but those assignments tend to take longer to mark anyway, so the burden isn't too large.
If the errors are mostly "stupid" errors like the ones you described, which don't show any real conceptual problems, just reminding the class in a lecture can be enough feedback.
Upvotes: 1
|
2018/12/28
| 727
| 2,996
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a follow-up to [my previous question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97152/poor-academic-performance-should-can-i-apply-to-a-phd-program). I'm currently in the process of applying for PhD programs. I finished college with a poor GPA 10 years ago; since then, I have become a successful scientist in industry.
Some of the applications have an interesting question, on the lines of - "does your academic transcript properly represent your abilities" - which I assume is a space to explain why a poor GPA happened in one's past and how one has moved on.
My top choice program, however, has no such question. I did email a prospective guide and had a quick phone call with him about my interests, where he agreed we would be a good match and asked me to add his name in my essays so my application would be routed to him.
I've read several articles on how a statement of purpose should highlight only one's strengths and not gloss over poor performances (especially since they were 10+ years ago), but I'm concerned that without an explanation my application wouldn't be given a second glance. In the best case, I would be invited for an interview and at that point I could explain what went wrong and how I've moved on from it.
So what would be my best bet here?
* Mention nothing in my essays, focus only on the positives and hope that the other facets of my application would intrigue the adcom to a point where they'd ask me for an interview?
* Add a short blurb as to what went wrong, but without going into the gory details?
* Go all in and explain everything?<issue_comment>username_1: Explain poor grades in your statement of purpose/essay, which is where evaluators are going to look for it. These statements can be up to a couple of pages long, so you can (and should) spare a paragraph (or two, if necessary) to the topic. The explanation must be detailed enough to give a reader a picture of what happened, and the confidence that the underlying problems have since been addressed.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The linked questions and other answer give a good approach for most students, but your case is a little different. In your case, the relevant fact is that the poor GPA was 10+ years ago, and in the interim, you have become a successful scientist.
Given this, your poor academic performance 10 years ago is not a negative that needs to be smoothed over; it's more of a "fun fact" about yourself. You should broach it in your statement of purpose as such: mention it briefly without making excuses, and then go into detail on your success over the past decade.
The key challenge will be hitting the right tone. The SOP should be a professional, fact-based document; it is not a time for introspection, oversharing, or therapy; at the same time, you do want to introduce yourself to the committee and share this "fun fact" about yourself as you explain what your purpose is in applying to this program.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/29
| 765
| 3,443
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated this past year from an Ivy League university with a double major in a STEM field and Asian studies (with a focus in literature). Throughout university I felt the desire to eventually pursue a graduate degree in the humanities, but for various reasons ended up focusing much more on my STEM work. In my final year, I took some courses in religious studies that reignited my long-held interest in that field. Since graduating, I've been constantly reading books and papers on religion while working in tech. I think I'd like to pursue a master's in religious studies, both as a way to see if the field is really right for me and as a way to beef up my admittedly anemic experience in the area for the sake of a potential PhD.
But to be honest, I'm not sure of my prospects of getting into a good master's program. I feel like my lack of background will hurt my chances significantly. Although there is a little bit of overlap with my Asian studies degree (the language skills would help if I wanted to pursue Buddhist studies, for example), I'm not confident there's enough there to demonstrate adequate knowledge and interest. Furthermore, I took more than a few of my humanities classes in undergrad pass/fail since I was being pushed so heavily down the path of STEM. Should I be doing something else before applying to programs? Do I even have a shot of getting into a good program? What's the expectation for applicants coming out of undergrad? Any and all advice would be deeply appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: There is no reason not to try to do this and many reasons why you should. But the only valid advice will come from an admissions committee or a professor in the field who will look at your qualifications and goals.
Be sure to present yourself in the most positive light relative to the new field, of course.
There may even be advantages of your STEM background. Mathematics and CS, for example have applications in the humanities and the background can lead to many fruitful collaborations if you speak the language of both fields.
But until you apply somewhere you have no idea of the possible outcome.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: As with any Master's program, your chances of getting in are highly dependent on a variety of factors, which generally include GRE scores for schools in the US, undergraduate transcripts, a high quality writing sample, letters of recommendation, and a statement of purpose. The application requirements vary by school, but generally include these things.
Many PhD programs require a Master's in a similar field, but generally Master's do not require undergraduate experience. Again, the requirements will vary depending on the school. Most schools regard your statement of purpose as one of the most important factors in determining admissions, so you should use this opportunity to explain your background and why you feel you would be a good candidate in their program (because of your varied background, work ethic, interest in the topics, etc.).
The first thing to do is identify potential schools and look at their application requirements. If you meet the minimum requirements, I imagine your statement of purpose and letters of recommendation will be able to negate any weaknesses.
If you are passionate about learning in this area, I would not let the fear of not getting into a program prevent you from trying.
Upvotes: 0
|
2018/12/29
| 629
| 2,581
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have just started a post-doc. So far all of my papers have had small author lists (4-5 people). I have just been invited as a co-author on several papers with hundreds of authors. The papers are pitched as community-wide collaborations: some being white papers describing a future experiment that the community plans to engage in, others being the results from first data from such experiments. My contribution, and the contribution of 99% of the authors whose names are already there, have been negligible. What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?<issue_comment>username_1: This sort of thing is common in many fields and unheard of in others. I suspect that in your field there are many such papers and, among other things, they establish your connection to a group of researchers who will, in the future, become leaders in the field.
So, yes, do that. And, as your career progresses your contributions will improve and increase.
There is at least one example of a paper in which the list of authors is longer than the paper itself. Possibly in a field like biochemistry, but I don't remember the details.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?
>
>
>
Pros
====
* Your contributions to the collaboration are formally acknowledged, both incentivizing you to continue working on it as well as putting the candle under your butt to get up to speed on anything you should be getting good at.
* Leaders in the collaboration see you listed as a contributing member, allowing your candidacy for the next round of projects that need attention by working group members. Generally, people reach out to include you going forward.
* You will be put on mailings that automatically include all researchers on the paper, keeping you up to speed as developments happen in real time.
* Your association with the project is beneficial to both your career (i.e., *Look at this thing I worked on!*) and the project itself (i.e., *Look at this great contributor we have!*).
Cons
====
* None. Literally none.
There is a related problem in academia called [illegitimate co-authorship](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4253480/), or sometimes *authorship inflation*, but that is a problem to be tackled by policy. If this problem bothers you, find ways to contribute to the policies and incentives that systematically reinforce this behavior. Boycotting it personally will only serve to harm your career and be a drop in the bucket of the larger problem.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/29
| 1,855
| 7,792
|
<issue_start>username_0: It shames me to admit it, but I feel like I still haven’t figured out the right way to efficiently read papers and textbooks. I am a second year PhD student in pure mathematics, and I struggle a lot to balance the need to learn a lot new mathematics with the fact that I have a finite amount of time in which to do it.
I should have asked this question years ago: what is best (i.e. most efficient) way to read papers and textbooks in order to have a *working knowledge* of the subject?
Maybe I should be more precise.
I am working in both algebraic geometry and homotopy theory (think simplicial presheaves and K-Theory), and I have recently found myself overwhelmed by the amount that I need to learn. In an ideal world I would read background material by doing every exercise in every textbook, and by working carefully through every proof in every paper, but I worry that I just don’t have enough time. On the flip side, I often find myself “reading” mathematics without actually absorbing any working knowledge, so I basically don’t make any direct research progress.
I understand that reading in great volume is still constructive, and I have certainly learnt a lot about how mathematics *fits together*, but when I actually need to *do* new mathematics I consistently find myself lost.
To rephrase my question: can anyone offer an advice on their *workflow* when it comes to learning new mathematics?
Perhaps the way I feel is more or less how everyone feels, and it is confidence and organisation which is the problem. If that is the case, then I ask: can anyone offer advice on how to organise oneself day to day in a PhD to be productive? Moreover, can anyone offer advice on how to break out of a lack of self confidence when it comes to doing research mathematics?
I apologise in advance if this question has been asked many times before, but I haven’t been able to find the right thread. I apologise also if my questions are too multi-pronged, I just feel that they are all to interconnected to be split up.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm a second year student too.
I think that one have to study what really needs to know, for instance, if I need the Feit-Thompson Theorem (for some reason) I cite and use, if you need to use the tools and ideas that were used in that long proof, then you read the paper. Now, how to read it, in first instance, keep the central ideas and go deeper if you really need it for your work. There is a lot of mathematics, and nobody can learn everything, even if you only study algebraic geometry (it is a broad field). My tutor says that one will have a lot of years to study and go deep in topics that are of our interest, and in the moment, work hard for getting the PhD (it is not easy, we know it), and publish
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you already have a good sense of how the relevant fields fit together, and you know your way around the standard references, I personally find that the best approach is to just jump into a good paper. Really studying a paper related to your research is a much better way to learn specific techniques than grinding through textbook exercises. I think there's generally too much emphasis on "background" at the expense of working on new mathematics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I struggle a lot to balance the need to learn a lot new mathematics with the fact that I have a finite amount of time in which to do it.
>
>
>
This is something that almost everyone struggles with when they're starting out, and it is one of the reasons having a good advisor is important: to tell you what specifically you should be working on.
Roughly, the point undergraduate and Master's programs or the first year or two of a PhD program in the US is to give you a solid base in mathematics. But the main point of (the PhD part of) a PhD program is to train you to be able to do research. It is not meant to give you a comprehensive understanding of your area of interest (which in most cases is impossible anyway).
Ideally, over the course of a PhD, you learn enough of the general context to be able:
1. to formulate interesting questions,
2. determine (more or less) what is known about these questions in the literature;
and learn enough relevant technical abilities to:
3. make new progress on or solve specific problems.
Typically once you get to a point in the general context of having specific problems to work on, you should spend more time (maybe 80% of your research time?) on your specific problems than on trying understand the "big picture." As I also quoted in [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/48457/19607),
<NAME> says
>
> ...mathematics is so rich and infinite that it is impossible to learn it systematically, and if you wait to master one topic before moving on to the next, you'll never get anywhere. Instead, you'll have tendrils of knowledge extending far from your comfort zone. Then you can later backfill from these tendrils, and extend your comfort zone; this is much easier to do than learning "forwards".
>
>
>
As for specific advice:
1. Discuss this with your advisor. See if they have specific suggestions for things you should read, both for general understanding and for your specific problem.
2. Try to organize different tasks with a schedule. For instance, maybe work on your thesis problem 4 days a week, and read some general literature one day a week. Or you can split things up by times of day or weekdays/weekends. Some people work better with a strict schedule, I prefer a more flexible schedule. Maybe if I'm feeling stuck on my research one day, I'll do other tasks that day. Or one day something makes me curious about another topic, I learn about that.
3. Participate in activities to learn things outside of your thesis problem: seminars, conferences, workshops, summer schools, etc. If there's something you want to learn in depth, maybe organize a seminar with other students/postdocs.
4. To learn things a bit outside your thesis focus, you can also try reading survey papers, books, lecture notes and introductions of research papers. Also talk to people. When looking at papers, one often just reads the introduction and maybe skims relevant bits to see what the paper is about. Normally it is only if you need to know details for something you are doing that read the paper more carefully (and then sometimes just one specific section). One thing to help you absorb what the paper is about is to think about what the results say in special cases or how it compares with other results you know. If you're doing more than skimming, it's also helpful to "read actively" by writing out what is going on, together with maybe some examples, in a notebook as you are reading.
5. If you are going through books/notes with exercises, it is up to you how much time you want to spend on exercises. As long as you stick to your schedule, doing exercises won't take time away from your thesis problem, only slow down the rate at which you're going through other material.
6. Writing things down helps force you to understand them, and is useful to organize your thoughts when there's a lot of material. Try typing up notes for yourself about the topic you are learning. You can summarize the main results and ideas, work out various examples, etc.
7. Be patient. There is a lot to learn, and it takes time. Gradually you'll absorb more and more, and you do need to make an effort, but a lot of it will come naturally from working on specific problems.
Also, re: the lack of self-confidence, check out [How should I deal with discouragement as a graduate student?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/2219/19607) and maybe some other threads on the impostor syndrome.
Upvotes: 3
|
2018/12/29
| 1,752
| 7,228
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm an on-again-off-again academic, I guess you could say: I've switched positions in and out of academia several times over the past decade. When I write academic papers (or even Free Software in the context of academic work), I often face a dilemma regarding which email address to put down in my contact information. The dilemma is not always the same; I want to focus my question on two scenarios:
* Research work you pursue "on your own time" which is not a (direct) part of what you work on at your current employer; and when you know your employment is likely to end soon.
* Research work you pursue between periods of employment, or which your current employer is not interested in being associating with.
So, here are some options of what to use as your email in these scenarios, by no particular order:
1. An email account on the university you got your PhD from, which is guaranteed not to expire (as much as these things can be guaranteed), and does not indicate whether you are a student, or currently a faculty member etc.
**Example:** `<EMAIL>`
2. Your general-purpose personal email address at some large, free mail account provider.
**Example:** `<EMAIL>`
3. A professional-affairs-only custom email address at one of the large, free email account providers.
**Example:** `<EMAIL>`, or `<EMAIL>` or something better-sounding.
4. A personal email address at a smaller, academia-oriented mail account provider. (I don't know any of these but perhaps they exist - with free or paid accounts.)
**Example:** `<EMAIL>` or `<EMAIL>`
5. A professional-affairs-only email address at a smaller, for-pay mail account provider.
**Example:** `<EMAIL>`
Which do you believe is the best choice, and why?
A related question: [Which email address should a student use in a publication?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/12150/7319)<issue_comment>username_1: I would recommend an alumni address at the institution you graduated from. That hadsa clear academic imprimatur. However, anything that is clearly a permanent address (including Gmail) should be fine. I had a graduate student who preferred to use his Gmail address even while he was in graduate school, and he has continue to use it since then, through post-doctoral positions and even a faculty position in a third-world country.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: After some of my personal e-mail hopping (also as corresponding emails on papers), I'd recommend getting a domain name and linking it to one of your email accounts. That is, only if you do not get to retain your academic email indefinitely if you have one (the uni I used to be at has the regulation to delete the e-mail and do *no* forwarding...)
By having your own domain, you can move services but keep the actual email consistent over time. I.e., you can use <EMAIL> and where that points to just changes.
Any kind of service (and domain) that you cannot move around nor have any assurances for longevity on, are to be avoided IMO. I made that mistake with both my university and a corporate account so I learned the hard way...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My current policy is to maintain a professional webpage which provides my current professional email address. This webpage must be properly indexed by Google, so that anybody searching a reasonable combination of my name and domain would find it in the top results (in my experience it helps to host it under an academic institution website, since it's usually very well referenced).
Rationale: I tend to consider that using my employer-provided email address is a way to give them due credit for my academic production, this is why I use it even if I'm on a temporary position. As OP rightly suggests, somebody might try to contact me later with an obsolete email address. My assumption is that somebody with a relatively serious request would at least take the time to google me when their email bounces back, then they can find me and contact me easily. And to be completely honest, I don't mind missing the emails from those who wouldn't do this small effort.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You can get a domain name for less than 25 bucks per year maintenance. Google gmail will allow you to then create an email that looks like a corporate email. For example <EMAIL>. The cost of the gmail is ~50 USD per year. You can use the same domain for consulting work and even get an LLC if you need/want. This will serve you well in being more permanent, professional, and supporting you in moving around. If you publish at a university or company, I would try to stick with your "brand". But if they insist to have theirs, list yours as additional using a little footnote as "alternate email" or "permanent email".
P.s. Not advertising Google. They are just a default vendor. I'm sure there are alternates. But you get the concept.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Until recently I used my personal address as it should remain long term stable. However, due to spam, I decided to periodically rotate email addresses used for contact information. If the email address starts to get too much spam, I'll switch it to an autoresponder with a link to a web form someone can use to contact me.
The address format I'm using at the moment is:
[venue+year]@[researchdomainname]
As others have suggested, it can be useful to register your own domain name for long term stability. Right now these addresses just forward to my personal email address.
The use of the autoresponder hopefully will avoid the problem of old email addresses becoming invalid.
I've also considered not listing an email address and instead linking to a page in a paper, e.g., <https://trettelresearch.com/contact.html> (this page does not exist at present). The contact page will contain a web form to email me. I'm not sure how many journals will accept this arrangement, but it should be long term stable and avoid spam.
Personally, when I look to contact a researcher, I usually try to find the most recent contact information I can. I do not know how often people try to find more recent information vs. simply email the address in the paper, though if most people try to find the most recent contact information, it might not be worthwhile to worry about having stable contact information in papers.
My ideas on this are presently evolving, so I'd appreciate any feedback on this. If you think having a different email address for each venue is absurd, I'd like to hear from you.
Also see: [How can corresponding authors protect themselves from academic spam?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107962/how-can-corresponding-authors-protect-themselves-from-academic-spam)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: You may use an alias such as one provided by IEEE (<EMAIL>). You can map it to any email-account and since the mapping can be changed to any other email account, you don't have to write different email accounts in your research paper when you change organizations. Plus, they look very professional.
Upvotes: 1
|